 Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC) Posts: 544  Thanks: 4 times
|
I was observing an online discussion on the topic of Scripture and abortion on another forum and thought I'd ask for your Scripture Analysis. The overall topic is does Scriptuire speak on human initiated abortion a number of passages were advanced but the one in focus at the moment is Exodus 21-22-25: Quote:22 “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that she gives birth prematurely, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. One says: Quote:Verse 23 states that the offender is to pay even with his life if the child loses its life: "life for life". It is considered a murder. The context is the pregnant woman and baby, and the harm is to the baby, not the woman, for there are already laws stated to deal with physical injuries to the others involved. Exodus 21:18,19 If it was about the woman, what need is there to mention the fetus and premature birth? Does the offender only have to pay if the woman is pregnant? What if there is harm, but the woman isn't pregnant? Is there no punishment? It seems to me that the pregnancy is mentioned because the baby is the one in concern. The other (A Messianic Jew studying to become a Rabbi): Quote:actually no. That is not what 23 is saying.
The Talmudic interpretation of it is 21:22 [This is the law] when two men fight and [accidentally] harm a pregnant woman, causing her to miscarry. If there is no fatal injury [to the woman], then [the guilty party] must pay a [monetary] penalty. The woman's husband must sue for it, and [the amount] is then determined by the courts.
21:23 However, if there is a fatal injury [to the woman], then he must pay full compensation for her life.
21:24 Full compensation must be paid for the loss of an eye, a tooth, a hand or a foot.
21:25 Full compensation must [also] be paid for a burn, a wound, or a bruise. What do you think? Is this covered in TOM?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC) Posts: 544 Thanks: 4 times
|
I'm relieved to see we had the same conclusion Swalchy. As KP mentions. the senario seems rather odd, but the key to me was the fact the the passaage specifically mentions the woman being with child and her delivering early. Certainly a sword induced child delivery could be dangerous to the mother, as with the child, but if only mom's health is of concern, why mention the child at all? I did find a section in TOM that addresses this passage, but does not seem to specifically address this aspect: ( Quote:285) The Court shall pass sentence of death by decapitation with the sword. "If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:22-25) Also, "And if by these things [previously listed plagues sent upon a disobedient Israel] you are not reformed by Me, but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you, and I will punish you yet seven times for your sins. And I will bring a sword against you that will execute the vengeance of the covenant; when you are gathered together within your cities I will send pestilence among you; and you shall be delivered into the hand of the enemy." (Leviticus 26:23-25) Huh? The "proof texts" offered do not under any circumstances authorize "the Court to pass a sentence of death by decapitation with the sword." It’s another bald-faced rabbinical power grab--all the worse because the only wielding of the sword (and even there it is evidently symbolic of any weapon) in these verses is to be done by Yahweh. The Court, a.k.a. the Sanhedrin, has no such authority.
The circumstances under which the "Court" was to make decisions concerning retaliatory punishment are very clearly defined in the Exodus passage. Frankly, the circumstances described are so unlikely as to be laughable. (Two guys get into a fight; somehow a woman who happens to be late in her pregnancy gets in the way and gets hurt, resulting in her baby being born prematurely--c’mon: did that ever happen?) Yet the whole world latches onto the phrase "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" and jumps to the erroneous conclusion that since God is just itching for vengeance and retribution, we can feel free to dish it out as well, never mind what the Torah actually said.
As far as bringing a "sword" to bear on a situation, that is Yahweh’s prerogative, not the Sanhedrin’s. In fact, the very tampering with scripture evidenced in the mitzvah at hand would qualify as reason enough for the sword of Yahweh to be applied to Israel--and especially its rabbis. Rewriting God’s instructions is nothing if not "walking contrary to" Him. However, there is one instance (recorded in Exodus 32:27-28) where the swords of men were used to punish Israelites. The occasion? The golden calf debacle at the foot of Mount Sinai. But it wasn’t an execution; it was a small-scale civil war--the faithful men of Levi against the idolaters of Israel. The "Court" had nothing to do with it. In fact, since the Babylonian captivity, the Sanhedrin have been the ones promoting the bull. I'm open to consider others insights as I'd imagine the Talmud's rabinical masters are sometimes correct in their scripture analysis. It is odd to communicate with a Messianic Jewish soon to be Rabi, who regards the oral law and Talmud to be authoritative. I would think regarding the Talmud to be authoratative would preclude a Jewish person from being Messianic?
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 9/5/2007(UTC) Posts: 641 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
|
Whether there is harm or not, the clause "gives birth prematurely" is what is the context. So there is:
1. Gives birth prematurely, but no harm - fined by husband and pay as judges determine.
2. Gives birth prematurely, but there is harm - life for life, eye for eye, etc.
What seems odd to me though is the fact that one is paying "eye for eye", "tooth for tooth", because that is not typically how Yahuweh's system worked. There were times when one was to be put to death, but that was to keep the offender from contaminating the rest of the society, or from continuing to do what he was doing (i.e. murdering), but generally restitution was required. In this situation, there is no restitution, if there "is harm" then basically it calls for vengence, or retribution (and for an accident no less), which we know is contrary to what Yahuweh wants.
Also, as kp points out in TOM mitzvah 285, the circumstances for this to happen are highly unlikely: Two guys get in a fist fight, a pregnant woman is close by, she gets hit, and gives birth prematurly. How often would this happen? Maybe once. . . but that is probably a stretch. So, is there something else in view here that is more important and where "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" would apply?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC) Posts: 544 Thanks: 4 times
|
Icy, I realize that I still have much to learn of Yahuweh's torah, but agree there are aspects of this that seem unusual to me.
As for the circumstances being so odd, I wonder if it is to indeed showing the value Yahuweh places on children even the unborn. That is, this passage as we (Swalchy and I) understand it, acts to protect the safety of the unborn when endangered with a lesser penalty, or a proportionally more severe one if greater harm is done.
I hope KP will share his insights on this matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,030
Location: Palmyra, VA
|
Looks like I got so carried away answering Maimonides’ foolishness, I forgot to address the actual precept. Sorry about that. Let’s take a fresh look. “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” (Exodus 21:22-25) This is contained within a lengthy passage dedicated to measured restitution in matters of personal injury and property damage. The larger passage strikes a proper balance between getting off Scot free for wrongs done and overboard Muslim-style solutions like cutting off your hand for stealing a piece of penny candy. Yahweh’s justice always stresses restitution wherever possible, not retribution, and certainly not rehabilitation. American jurisprudence is completely out of whack in this regard. Where punishments are meted out in the Torah (in contrast to restitution), they are invariably both symbolic and designed to protect the community at large from spiritual harm (e.g. adultery, sorcery, false worship).
In the present case, I don’t believe abortion (as such) is in view. That would be covered quite nicely with passages that prohibit murder—the intentional taking of an innocent life—the penalty for which is death, for both the abortionist and the mother who employs his services, and the father if he consents. This passage clearly describes manslaughter—unintentional homicide. However, notice two things. (1) Because there was intent to harm someone, even if not the baby, the death penalty is still applied if the baby dies. And (2) the unborn fetus is considered a person who can be “murdered” under the law’s definition—not a “biological mass” to be “disposed of.” In other words, according to the Torah, abortion is murder, not a fetus-ectomy.
The “eye-for-eye” penalties seem to apply to the injuries done to the mother, not necessarily to the baby only (tooth for tooth?). Indeed, I would imagine that the injuries suffered by any innocent bystander who was hurt during such a fight between men would determine the penalty for the combatants. By the way, see Mitzvah #299, in Chapter 8 of TOM, for more insights on belligerence.
kp
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 9/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 735
Location: Penna
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
|
That's really enlightening. I was reading over that passage last night, and I was mulling over it and then I went to TOM and saw that there was indeed no concrete opinion on it given by kp. I am so glad that kp has taken the time to give us his valuable opinion. To a certain degree this could be tied to the issue of protecting the unborn, but as kp said, which I think he said based on my reading of his reply is that "Thou shalt not murder" is good enough. I think we have to look at how jaded and corrupt we have become as a society.(I don't mean that all societies in the scriptual era were infant/child loving peoples. I mean specifically where we have as westerners come from and to where we have devolved) I don't think the Abraham and Sarah were sitting in their tent debating on when a fetus becomes a baby. I think the Hebrews though some may have indulged in the heinous worship practices of the surrounding peoples had a Yahuweh instilled appreciation for the preciousness that is a human life. For all we can say about Christianity, one great thing that it did even if it rejected Torah was instilled the Torah/Hebrew mindset into a great proportion of the societies and civilizations on this earth. People know it's wrong but the justifications and constructs they offer are just morally pitiful and intellectually ridiculous. Think about how offensive to sensibility this is... A woman is pregnant. A robber comes into the house and kills her thus ending her baby's life as well. The perp is caught and is charged with a double homicide. Another scenario, a young woman gets pregnant, and she is in college and she knows her boyfriend wouldn't want her to keep it and she doesn't want to risk the relationship and besides she is on the volleyball team. She has an abortion....no harm no foul. So by the simple decision of the mother a precious, hoped for, wanted, loved, child full of human potential is changed into a fetus, a lump of tissue, not as important as an organ in the woman's body, a tumor that must be cut out, a specimin for a biology lab. This is a sick sick world, and I am so tired of it I cannot even tell you. As many of you know I was in China. They play ads on TV for abortion clinics with the same amount of gravity as you would for a commercial for spot remover. My only hope is Shiloh's speedy return, because truly I have no hope in man. I have finally come to the place where I need to be in regards to this world at large and specifically the society I live in. It's doomed, all we can do is assist in the rescue of as many as we can. I can't express to you what I am trying to convey. The way a husband who has any shred of decency touches his wife's swollen belly....how can it not be murder? |
YHWH's ordinances are true, and righteous altogether.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 11/6/2007(UTC) Posts: 114 Location: Hilo, Hawaii
|
I agree with you completely on this point, Shalom. I was just talking with a friend today about various evil political doctrines and abortion was the first one I thought of. It is murder, and it is offensive to me that there are people that believe otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,030
Location: Palmyra, VA
|
In Chapter 16 of The Owner's Manual, I found myself (under Mitzvah #602) discussing the crimes that caused the Canaanites to be "vomitted out of the land," behaviors that would later plague Israel as well, causing them to get thrown out in turn. There, sandwiched in among adultery, blasphemy, homosexuality, and bestiality, is this entry: Quote:Human sacrifice: How barbaric! I agree, but we do it all the time. There are about 1,300,000 reported legal abortions performed in the United States each year, some 22 million worldwide. Add to that the unreported legal abortions and clandestine illegal procedures, and the annual number climbs to somewhere between 36 and 53 million abortions each year. (They’re perfectly legal in 54 countries, whose populations represent about 61% of the world’s total.) And why are so many babies murdered in the womb? The number one reason given (in America, anyway) is that having the child would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities. Number two: financial stress. Number three: relationship issues with the child’s father. Let me put it bluntly, folks. Every year, 50 million children are sacrificed on the twin altars of convenience and irresponsibility. You tell me: how is that any different from Canaanites placing their infants into the red-hot arms of a bronze statue of Molech or Chemosh in return for a promise of bountiful crops? I submit to you that if we earthlings continue to tolerate abortion, our very planet will "vomit us out." As a matter of fact, if my observations are correct, it'll be all over but the dry heaves by 2033. kp
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 9/26/2007(UTC)
Posts: 258
Location: ohio
|
The occult/human sacrifice plays a big part in abortion and those in the RTL ministry who actually post abortuaries have been aware of this for many years. In Cleveland, Oh., it's not uncommon to observe lesbian wiccans, (they proudly admit it), conducting their ceremonies on the premises in full view of anybody walking on the sidewalk. This includes incense burning, incantations, animal/cat sacrifice, etc. inside the abortuary. Although this is a blatant violation of sanitary codes for a med facility, nobody cares as the authorities are bribed.
Btw Ken, would posting abortuaries be a violation of the Sabbath? Most are volunteers although some are pastors, (who serve the RTL ministry full time), who receive unsalaried compensation. Although I realise pastors are not to be paid, naturally these guys have to have some source of income for the 60-80 hours they put in each week. Hours being cussed at, assaulted, jailed, shot at, attempts to run over them with cars, and that's at the abortuaries. They also post the gay parades and the abuse is even worse. |
If not us, who? If not now, when? |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,030
Location: Palmyra, VA
|
A violation of the Sabbath? I wouldn't think so. Yahshua amply demonstrated that saving lives is always good, even (or should I say, especially) on the Sabbath. As far as pastors being paid, I have no problem with "taking the muzzle off the ox as it treads out the grain." Remember, Levites were the recipients of Yahweh's tithe because God's calling on their lives precluded them from earning a living in the normal fashion. Sadly, that's seldom the case with christian pastors, but it is on occassion.
kp
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 9/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 128
Location: Washington State
|
A B O R T I O N . . . spelled out = S E L F I S H N E S S (meaning: "I" am the only one "I" have to think about. It's all about "Me". "I" can't support this child. "I" want to live "My" life and not be tied down. But "I" wanted to go to college. "I" can't face "My" friends. "My" parents won't understand. "My" boyfriend doesn't want a child. "I" want to live "My" life. It's "My" body. "I" can do with it what "I" want. "Me, Me, Me". It's all about "Me".
There are thousands of people who can't have a children. They are waiting to take care of the "I"s and the "My"s children.
Yes, a rape victim who becomes pregnant should give birth to the child. Thirteen years old? Yes. The baby should be born. And yes, mom and dad of the thirteen year old should raise the child, or give it up for adoption. And the relatives and neighbors who stick their noses up in the air to let off their haughty steam can keep their noses there until Yah tells them it's time to bow their heads! Let ye without sin cast the first stone.
I ask your forgiveness my bothers and sisters for being outspoken. I have no toleration for abortion. It is murder.
CK
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/6/2007(UTC) Posts: 114 Location: Hilo, Hawaii
|
About a year ago, I had a thought. Would I be willing to go through all that hardship to give a child life? I'd like to think that I would, but would I really? As a man, it's impossible, but I thought that it would be wonderful if someone (especially a man) faked/simulated pregnancy to raise money for organizations that help women who want an alternative to abortion. Of course, it couldn't be perfect, but it sure wouldn't be easy. The least sadistic thing i could think of to replace giving birth was getting a tattoo. I seriously considered it, but a few things came up. I know it's just a lame excuse, but I had some health problems, I didn't (still don't) know much about pregnancy, and found out that I was moving to Hawaii.
Anyways, since it is marginally related, I was wondering if anyone has some insight on
Leviticus 19:28: “Do not cut your bodies for the dead, and do not mark your skin with tattoos. I am [YHWH]"
It comes right around the verse about not cutting beards, but that was apparently about specifically cutting beards to fit in with the pagans. Is there any reason to believe this is the same thing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 9/5/2007(UTC) Posts: 641 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
|
kp discussed tatoos and Levtitcus 19:28 in TOM Chapter 9, Mitzot 347 and 348: Quote:(347) Do not cut oneself or make incisions in one’s flesh in grief, like the idolaters. “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am Yahweh.” (Leviticus 19:28) “You are the children of Yahweh your God; you shall not cut yourselves nor shave the front of your head for the dead. For you are a holy people to Yahweh your God, and Yahweh has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.” (Deuteronomy 14:1-2) God is not talking about fashion here—earrings and the like. He’s warning against self mutilation done in the name of religion. The classic Biblical illustration is in I Kings 18, where Elijah challenged the priests of Ba’al to a “prophets’ duel” to demonstrate once and for all whose god was really God. “And so it was, at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, ‘Cry aloud, for he is a god; either he is meditating, or he is busy, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is sleeping and must be awakened.’ So they cried aloud, and cut themselves, as was their custom, with knives and lances, until the blood gushed out on them. And when midday was past, they prophesied until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice. But there was no voice; no one answered, no one paid attention.” (I Kings 18:27-29) Satan loves to see us bleeding and in pain, and if it’s self-inflicted, so much the better.
Yahweh, though—the inventor of life—tells us that our “life is in the blood.” And pain was something He built into our bodies to warn us when something’s wrong. The last thing He wants to see is for us to suffer pain and shed our blood in a misguided attempt to placate Him. So why do tens of thousands of Muslims cut their flesh in Ramadan rites at the Kaaba every year trying to gain the blessing of Allah—a false god who’s never blessed anybody? Why do twenty million pilgrims a year visit the shrine of the “Virgin of Guadalupe” in Mexico City, many walking for days and then crawling on bloodied knees the last few hundred meters of the journey to show their devotion to an apparition some guy named Juan says he saw back in 1531? Yahweh plainly said not to do such things.
(348) Do not tattoo the body like the idolaters. “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am Yahweh.” (Leviticus 19:28) Tattoos have grown quite popular of late. I have no idea why. I even have Christian friends who advertise their faith with Christian tattoos. The passage at hand, as Maimonides notes, is primarily a warning against emulating the idolaters in our midst. Does it apply to “faith-neutral” tattoos or Christian body art? I don’t know, but I’d be inclined to take Yahweh’s word for it and call it a day. Yahweh has issued these instructions for our benefit—we can either heed them or not—it’s our skin that’s at risk. Maybe it’s like eating pork and shellfish: if there are consequences, He didn’t enumerate them. He just said, “Don’t.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,030
Location: Palmyra, VA
|
CK, I am in hearty agreement with you, and share your righteous outrage. Some of us think children are a gift from God, not inconvenient impediments to our pursuit of pleasure.
My wife and I had the privilige of adopting nine of our eleven children, most or all of them "throw-aways," the kids nobody really wanted---abortion fodder that somehow slipped through the cracks. One of your "worst-case" hypotheticals really hit a nerve with me. Our Jill (number 7, I think) suffered trauma in the womb, was adopted at birth only to be given up because she was so messed up, and came to us when she was a little over a year old. She was cortically blind, quadriplegic, was missing her corpus collosum (so one side of her brain couldn't compensate for the other), and never got beyond the two-month old level. She couldn't eat by mouth without vomitting, suffered seizures---you get the picture. She wasn't expected to live until her second birthday, but somehow made it past her tenth, after giving us almost a decade of the sweetest company we have ever known. Jill oozed love from every pore. When she wasn't in pain, she truly enjoyed life---loved summer breezes, her canary's singing, christian children's music, and the sound of all the other kids making a joyful noise. She taught all of us lessons about life and love and how God must see us (in His eyes, we're all profoundly handicapped), and when she finally died, my wife lost (in her words) "the best job in the world."
Should Jill have been aborted? Not if I have anything to say about it!
kp
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/6/2007(UTC) Posts: 114 Location: Hilo, Hawaii
|
Thanks Icy, it didn't turn up on the YY/ToM google search.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 9/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 128
Location: Washington State
|
kp,
Your love for Jill brought tears to my eyes. May Yahuweh, our Elohim bless you and yours. And, yes, "we're all profoundly handicapped" in His eyes.
CK
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 9/26/2007(UTC)
Posts: 258
Location: ohio
|
Thx for the reply KP, and CK you certainly don't have to apologise for being outspoken in favor of pro life. |
If not us, who? If not now, when? |
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
