Bible Discussion Thread

I am curious...

Is this talking about abortion? If the woman (from my understanding) had intercourse with another man and got pregnant, then the fetus would die... but if she was impregnated by her husband (thus not committing adultery) then she will continue to conceive the child. In my bible, instead of the word "thigh," the word "uterus" is used, implying an abortion.

I don't believe that this portion of Scripture speaks of an abortion. There is no indication at all that she conceived from an illicit relationship, rather, that if her husband suspected her of engaging in such relationship & then brought her to the priest for administering the Jealousy Offering, then the results of the consumption of the offering would determine what would happen to her.

If she didn't suffer as a result, then she was free to go, as the Lord showed the priest that she was guiltless & she would still be able to become pregnant. However, if she was found guilty, then what seems to be a swelling of the belly (uterus?) & rotting of the thigh (?) would be her punishment for the rest of her life. I would imagine that she would have suffered continually because this affliction coming upon her, & possibly her other internal organs also being affected as a result. And of course, the ignominy of being found unfaithful to her husband made her a curse & cause of gossip amongst the people.

Of course, we're not told of what happened, if at all, to the man with whom she committed adultery.

I continue to see the topic of abortion continue.

The text says the following:

"And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed." This line alone suggests that there was in fact a "seed" to conceive. The seed being a fetus of course. In my bible (New American Bible), the alternative line is "If, however, the woman has not defiled herself, but is still pure, she will be immune and will still be fertile." the single word "still" implies that she was fertile before the offering and that by consuming the offering after sleeping with another man, she would no longer be fertile (a forced miscarriage). I think it is also safe to say that protection (condoms at the least) were not an option back in the day and women who had intercourse (sex if we may) would presumably conceive.

This is merely the selective phrasing of the King James Bible. In other texts, I have found that the word "miscarry" is used directly.

Also if we were to look at the effects of a miscarriage, they are excessive bleeding from the uterus and discolored/odored discharge which would mean that the phrase "rotting of the thigh" would be a somewhat accurate description of the bodily response to a miscarriage. The smell and look of the thighs after a miscarriage would resemble rotting. This text was written based on the observation of man, who must have seen the effects of a miscarriage. And since this miscarriage was forced by drinking an offering, it would technically be an abortion.

Of course, I am looking into science and literature. Not just one. So I am welcome to more explanations. Now I am not justifying abortion in my text (my social views are private) but I would like to base my beliefs on the bible. And if the bible justifies abortions, well... no further comment needed.

Hi Jacklyn, I meant to say it shows no evidence of pregnancy, another one of my famous misprints. thanks

Hi jacklyn, If I. may add to what chris has stated. May I refer you to Deuteronomy 28:18 ( KJV )Cursed shall be the fruit of thy "body," and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep. Here is where body is used as womb in this verse in Hebrew-

Hebrew: Transliteration: been

Pronunciation: beh'-ten

Definition: From an unused root probably meaning to be hollow; the {belly} especially the womb; also the bosom or body of anything: - {belly} {body} + as they be {born} + {within} womb.

KJV Usage: belly(30x), womb(31x), body(8x), within(2x), born(1x).

Occurs: 72

In verses: 72. In Deuteronomy Ch 28 God list a bunch of curses that he would put on Israel if they disobedient, A curse on the womb was one. Woman able to bare children was a blessing, and when they couldn't they thought they were cursed, I believe Sarah thought she was cursed, the verse seems to state if she was guilty then she wouldn't be able to conceive seed as Chris said, It shows evidence of pregnancy. Thanks

Jackyln, I see it this way, if we want to see that an abortion being supported here, then we can, as we can do with other Scriptures that teach on matters of theology or on human living. We can take the many instructions by God to Israel to go to war & wipe out people, including women & children. Does this make God some type of vicious ogre keen on destruction? Or is there another reason for such an instruction? Does it then given us licence to kill another because we believe that in doing so we fulfil God's requirement to destroy all who oppose Him or us?

If murder is sin, & I believe you will concur, then it comes down to whether the seed (or, the life) in the womb can be subjected to murder or not. And this of course, is the core of the matter between the pro-life & pro-choice adherents. Govts. walk a fine line: if they are too harsh & strong on one issue, then their tenure is very short at the polls. So they try & appease both sides by setting a last date for the termination of the foetus, hoping that the one side will be convinced & the other side can proceed with removal of the foetus to their relief. So the question is: at which point does life begin?

With that in mind, that murder is sin, I understand Numbers 5:28 to read: "However, if the woman is innocent of the charge by not being affected by the 'potion' given her, then she is no longer to be condemned & her womb will be healthy to conceive." You're thinking in terms of a 'seed' already there to become a foetus, whereas I see that there is no seed, rather an instruction that the woman's womb will be healthy (unlike the guilty woman's) to be able to produce babies. If the word 'miscarry' is seen elsewhere, then of course, it's up to those translators. Looking at the Hebrew for this verse, "and shall conceive seed": 'she shall be free & may conceive children' - she may fructify (to bear fruit) or become pregnant.

The point of this passage is: the state of the womb, not whether she was carrying a seed.

Jacklyn maybe this will help when God gave Moses the law he knew man wouldn't keep them so he showed the consequences of actions committed by sin, even in the new testament apostle paul had to correct the corinthian church on acts of incest. It was still up to people whether to obey or not. When it came to noah God said He was the only righteous man on the planet i. e. the only person that loved God. So all other humans were absolutely lawless which is why God closed the arch not noah.

Hello, there's a lot of assumptions being made here and I don't believe this is talking about abortion.

And it would take even greater mental gymnastics to twist it in attempt to justify mass murdering babies. That would be pure evil. Innocent precious fetuses are made in God's image as it says in scripture, God knitted them together in the womb. Jeremiah 1:5. This verse says this baby lept for joy in the womb. Luke 1:44 Would you have tried to kill Him? Many more verses: Link What about their rights to life? Satan is behind all these attempts to dehumanize innocent cute babies, just like Nazis did to dehumanize the Jews. As Christians we will not tolerate such hate and will stand against this vile evil with all of our power. I will call out this lie every time I hear it and will never back down. There is no reason for abortion- a horrible mom can still get out of parental responsibility by letting a loving family adopt and love the child. Problem solved. But then you have totally evil moms who are deceived into these lies thinking murder is ok. Nice try.

The other logical fallacy is in claiming 'it says it in the Bible so it's ok'. The Bible talks about the many evils they have done through history, like murder, so according to that logic it justifies murder and committing all other sins? That's crazy to conclude that. There's an obvious difference between history and instruction. Luke 1:44

Finally, it's awful convenient how none of the people trying to justify murdering babies wants to be murdered themselves. They just want to kill others and not be subject to the same 'rights' they claim their own mom should have had over them. Total double standard. Basically, it's pure evil and wickedness to kill people. If it's illegal and wrong to kill unborn animals then obviously it's wrong to destroy God's creation of people. I don't believe a true Christian could support such evil.

It is better if you wasn't born....message to the betrayal

Excuse me?