As a citizen of the US… I need help to reframe the abortion is sin topic so that I can go and march around the world/my state for women’s reproductive choices. Emotionally I’m so attached to my body my choice – I can’t wrap an argument around the twenty words or so to refute the crazies. Many thanks in advance for suggestions.
JAS said
Several women I know seem to like “stay out of my womb” and “The Handmaid’s Tale was not meant as a guidebook.” More on topic, my understanding is that the word “abortion” never appears anywhere in the bible.
Thank you JAS. The Handmaid’s Tale was like a horror book in my opinion. I didn’t think the word abortion was in the bible. I’ve heard this morning that it is a sin because it is killing. Wtf ???
It’s an interesting question. I did a word search (NRSV and NIV) and came up with nothing on point for “abortion,” “unborn,” or “womb.”
An observation, for what it’s worth: It appears that, in the time of the Bible, Jewish people thought that a person was in the man’s seed and that the womb was just the vessel in which the person developed until birth. The best analogy is a seed planted in fertile soil. The plant comes from the seed and the soil provides nourishment for growth. (Other cultures in the area at the time of the Bible’s writing probably had very similar ideas.) There is indication that a distant ancestor contained the seed of all future descendants in his loins, and that somehow the seed was passed down from the father to his son ad infinitum until each separate seed was, so to speak, individually planted in a woman’s womb. Since we are descended from Noah, our seeds were in his loins however long ago that was (if you believe the story, which I don’t), so I have existed as a discreet person for a very long time, albeit just in seed form for almost all that time.
On the other hand, there was also the idea that it was only after taking the first breath that a child was a person. I don’t have the cite for it, but the idea exists in the Bible. I think the idea was based on the fact that Adam was just a clay figure until YHWH breathed life into him.
The closest you come to a direct comment on abortion in the Bible is in Numbers, where a husband could accuse a woman of adultery and she would be forced to drink something that sounds a lot like an abortion inducing liquid. If she had been unfaithful her uterus would discharge. Numbers 5:11-31.
In short, the Bible doesn’t contain a clear answer on when you become a person or on the precise issue of abortion.
I was hoping Dr. Ehrman might provide some perspective on this topic, though I suppose there is already a glut of commentary out there from various religious viewpoints. Still, I always enjoy hearing his expert commentary.
In addition to what’s already been said regarding God breathing the breath of life into Adam, and a reference to the “Ordeal of the Bitter Water,” (a liquid concoction that can induce miscarriage in cases of adultery mentioned in Numbers 5:11-31), here are some points from a ** you do not have permission to see this link ** on the topic published by the National Council of Jewish Women:
• Does Jewish law state that life begins at conception? No, life does not begin at conception under Jewish law. Sources in the Talmud note that the fetus is ‘mere water’ before 40 days of gestation. Following this period, the fetus is considered a physical part of the pregnant individual’s body, not yet having life of its own or independent rights. The fetus is not viewed as separate from the parent’s body until birth begins and the first breath of oxygen into the lungs allows the soul to enter the body.
• Does Jewish law assert that it is possible to murder a fetus? No, Jewish law does not consider a fetus to be alive. The Torah, Exodus 21:22-23, recounts a story of two men who are fighting and injure a pregnant woman, resulting in her subsequent miscarriage. The verse explains that if the only harm done is the miscarriage, then the perpetrator must pay a fine. However, if the pregnant person is gravely injured, the penalty shall be a life for a life as in other homicides. The common rabbinical interpretation of this verse is that the man did not commit murder and that the fetus is not a person. The primary concern is the well-being of the person who was injured.
• According to Jewish law, is abortion health care? Yes, Jewish sources explicitly state that abortion is not only permitted but is required should the pregnancy endanger the life or health of the pregnant individual. Furthermore, ‘health’ is commonly interpreted to encompass psychological health as well as physical health. NCJW advocates for abortion access as an essential component of comprehensive, affordable, confidential, and equitable family planning, reproductive, sexual health, and maternal health services.
• What does Jewish law say about the rights of the person who is pregnant and the rights of the fetus? Judaism values life and affirms that protecting existing life is paramount at all stages of pregnancy. A fetus is not considered a person under Jewish law and therefore does not have the same rights as one who is already alive. as such, the interests of the pregnant individual always come before that of the fetus.
• Do abortion bans unduly favor one religious viewpoint over another? Yes, different religions believe that human life begins at different stages of development. Science can explain developmental timelines, but philosophic and religious viewpoints largely determine what exactly defines ‘life’ or ‘personhood’ for each individual. NCJW believes, as the First Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees, that no one religion should be enshrined in law or dictate public policy on any issue — including abortion.
There always will be abortions. Do we want to return to a time when it meant risking lives to get them? As a believer, Jeremiah 1:4-5 and many other
Biblical scriptures have us known by God before we were born making it moot the question of when a fetus becomes a person. I believe abortion is
wrong but just as bad is having a child born unwanted, despised and abused.
jcalloway said
As a citizen of the US… I need help to reframe the abortion is sin topic so that I can go and march around the world/my state for women’s reproductive choices. Emotionally I’m so attached to my body my choice – I can’t wrap an argument around the twenty words or so to refute the crazies. Many thanks in advance for suggestions.
I don’t think you need to – it’s as simple as a woman having the right to control her own body. It’s not the place of the government to regulate anyone’s body.
CEJ said
I don’t believe the Bible ever directly addresses the issue.
According to the Bible (** you do not have permission to see this link **), if a man suspected his wife had cheated, a priest would give her an abortion-inducing drink. If the drink caused the abortion, she was guilty, but if it did not, she was innocent.
cstu said
CEJ said
I don’t believe the Bible ever directly addresses the issue.
According to the Bible (** you do not have permission to see this link **), if a man suspected his wife had cheated, a priest would give her an abortion-inducing drink. If the drink caused the abortion, she was guilty, but if it did not, she was innocent.
We had at least one thread where that passage was discussed. There is some flexibility in the interpretation, but it certainly does seem to indicate an abortion . . . unless that interpretation is inconvenient, in which case I presume it is not read that way but merely that she will no longer be able to bear children.
cstu said
CEJ said
I don’t believe the Bible ever directly addresses the issue.
According to the Bible (** you do not have permission to see this link **), if a man suspected his wife had cheated, a priest would give her an abortion-inducing drink. If the drink caused the abortion, she was guilty, but if it did not, she was innocent.
Really? The priest gave her an abortive?
You sure about that or are you just wishing?
Seems the part of my post you lopped off is particularly relevant about now:
CEJ said
I don’t believe the Bible ever directly addresses the issue.**But that doesn’t stop pro choice and pro life folks from relying on it for support.**
CEJ said
cstu said
CEJ said
I don’t believe the Bible ever directly addresses the issue.
According to the Bible (** you do not have permission to see this link **), if a man suspected his wife had cheated, a priest would give her an abortion-inducing drink. If the drink caused the abortion, she was guilty, but if it did not, she was innocent.
Really? The priest gave her an abortive?
You sure about that or are you just wishing?
It’s pretty clear to me:
“In his own hand the priest shall have the water of bitterness that brings the curse. 19 Then the priest shall make her take an oath, saying, ‘If no man has lain with you, if you have not turned aside to uncleanness while under your husband’s authority, be immune to this water of bitterness that brings the curse. 20 But if you have gone astray while under your husband’s authority, if you have defiled yourself and some man other than your husband has had intercourse with you,’ 21 —let the priest make the woman take the oath of the curse and say to the woman—‘the Lord make you an execration and an oath among your people, when the Lord makes your uterus drop, your womb discharge; 22 now may this water that brings the curse enter your bowels and make your womb discharge, your uterus drop!’”
“He shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse, and the water that brings the curse shall enter her and cause bitter pain.”
“When he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop,[c] and the woman shall become an execration among her people.”
cstu said
CEJ said
cstu said
CEJ said
I don’t believe the Bible ever directly addresses the issue.
According to the Bible (** you do not have permission to see this link **), if a man suspected his wife had cheated, a priest would give her an abortion-inducing drink. If the drink caused the abortion, she was guilty, but if it did not, she was innocent.
Really? The priest gave her an abortive?
You sure about that or are you just wishing?
It’s pretty clear to me:
“In his own hand the priest shall have the water of bitterness that brings the curse. 19 Then the priest shall make her take an oath, saying, ‘If no man has lain with you, if you have not turned aside to uncleanness while under your husband’s authority, be immune to this water of bitterness that brings the curse. 20 But if you have gone astray while under your husband’s authority, if you have defiled yourself and some man other than your husband has had intercourse with you,’ 21 —let the priest make the woman take the oath of the curse and say to the woman—‘the Lord make you an execration and an oath among your people, when the Lord makes your uterus drop, your womb discharge; 22 now may this water that brings the curse enter your bowels and make your womb discharge, your uterus drop!’”
“He shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse, and the water that brings the curse shall enter her and cause bitter pain.”
“When he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop,[c] and the woman shall become an execration among her people.”
Well, gee, you left out the most relevant part of the pericope for your claim that the priest would give the woman “an abortion-inducing drink” — the part that describes the drink’s composition. So let me help you out. Numbers 5:17: “And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water.”
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Dusty water is not an abortive, silly.
What we have here is dusty water being used in a religious ritual — an ordeal — to determine a woman’s innocence or guilt. This is not a priest inducing an abortion but asking God to pass judgement on the woman.
And the punishment for being guilty, which God imposes, not the priest, is a little fuzzy, as Robert’s link a few posts up describes. That fuzziness is also attested to by the various translations applied to it.
CEJ said
Well, gee, you left out the most relevant part of the pericope for your claim that the priest would give the woman “an abortion-inducing drink” — the part that describes the drink’s composition. So let me help you out. Numbers 5:17: “And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water.”
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Dusty water is not an abortive, silly.
What we have here is dusty water being used in a religious ritual — an ordeal — to determine a woman’s innocence or guilt. This is not a priest inducing an abortion but asking God to pass judgement on the woman.
And the punishment for being guilty, which God imposes, not the priest, is a little fuzzy, as Robert’s link a few posts up describes. That fuzziness is also attested to by the various translations applied to it.
The purpose of the story was to show that the priest was capable of making an actual abortion-inducing drink in order to terrify women so much that they wouldn’t even consider committing adultery. Whether the priest was actually able to do so did not matter, what mattered is that women believed they could (even with dusty water). These are not scientific people priests were trying to convince, but uneducated people who believed in magic.
JAS said
The question is chiefly whether “womb discharge” means that she is already pregnant, or if the curse just means that she will no longer be able to bear children. One may assume that the signs of pregnancy altered the husband to the adultery in the first place.
That’s my assumption.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert