Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog
99% or 1% or even .1% it doesn't matter. All it takes for hypocrisy is one action that goes against your stated beliefs...
|
The problem with your premise is that all Christians will turn hypocrite on this issue.
It is nearly impossible for a woman's health to be threatened by a pregnancy during the period that abortion is legal in most states. Therefore this is an irrelevant instance.
In the instances of rape or incest, most of these do not produce children. It is legitimate to say that I have not yet had to face this possibility of making this decision as I am not married. However, I while I might not wish to have the child raised in my home (something that I would need to pray about), I can not justify abortion.
To kill the child who is the result of rape or incest is a violation of Scripture.
Deuteronomy 24:16 and
Ezekiel 18:20 both say that the children are not to be executed for the sins of the parents. Aborting a child because of the sin that the father committed is murder when these verses are taken into account. Thus a true Christian will oppose abortion in all circumstances.
The only reason that some of us allow the exception (I do not) is to move eliminate the concept of abortion on demand. After that goal is acheived, we will then be able to finish the job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoovie
I think it does just that, though.
It is speaking of the woman going into labor prematurely and a live birth - not miscarriage! The Hebrew word for miscarriage is not used in this text but the word for normal live child birth. Therefore, if the fighting only caused the woman to go into labor early, but there was no injury, they agree on a penalty. If the child or mother is hurt or dies it's limb for limb, and life for life.
http://www.abort73.com/abortion/exodus_2122_25/
The Premature live childbirth view of Exodus 21:22-25 does not allow for abortion but defines abortion as murder punishable by death. The text is interpreted to mean, if a woman is accidently struck when two men are fighting and she gives birth prematurely but no injury is sustained by either her or her baby, then the courts shall fine the man who injured the woman and payment shall be made to the husband. But if either the woman or the baby is injured or killed, the law of eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, and life for life will be enforced.
This view is the best view for reasons listed below.
-The normal Hebrew word for miscarriage is not used in this text but the word for normal live child birth, see Gen. 25:26; 38:28-30.
-Moses knew the normal word for miscarriage for he used it both before and after this text, but he did not use it here which tells us he did not have a miscarriage in mind but premature live birth (see Gen. 31:38; Ex. 23:26; Job 2:10).
-The word “injury” both in vss. 22-23 is indefinite in that it does not designate either the mother or the child but is left indefinite so that it applies to both mother and child.
-The fact that this is the only place in all of the Bible where the death penalty is required for accidental death is significant. It shows us the value God places on both mothers and their unborn children. The death of either the mother or her child by accident would bring with it the death penalty! |
I found this to be a very interesting. I will need to do some research myself, but I have often figured that this was something that like that. I also remember that judgment is promised against nations whose soldiers performed 'abortions' on pregnant women during times of war. This is repeated many times in the Prophets.
Threaded Mode
