What I Learned About Abortion & the Adventist Church

[Nic Samojluk]

Originally Posted By: Shane

John the Baptist was preaching repentance to the king. He was not telling the king to use the civil government to enforce religious laws.

Protecting the life and property of the human beings under its jurisdiction is the role of the government. Likewise, teaching the respect for human life is the responsibility of the church.

This means that there is an overlap of the church and the government interest in the protection of human life. Were this not true, it would have been wrong for the Adventist pioneers to advocate the freedom of the slaves a century and a half ago.

Our duty to advocate the protection of human life is greater than the advocacy of freedom from slavery. Most slaves were not being killed en mass. A mass genocide of slaves was not taking place; nevertheless we did cooperate with the civil government in its effort to free the slaves.

How can we remain silent when innocent human beings are being slaughted by the millions?

[Liz]

Since we are now just repeating ourselves in just slightly different words, and since up to now it has been mostly men who have been discussing something that concerns mostly the well-being of women and men only peripherally, let us invite the women to weigh in with their opinions and reasons for their position. So far I have not seen anything from your arguments to change my thinking. In the meantime, I'll start a new thread as to when we can call the product of pregnancy a human being.

What happens to my body, is between me, my doctor and God. I don't judge my doctor, my doctor doesn't judge me. I answer to God, as does my doctor. Should I find myself pregnant, then a fourth person enters into the discussion--my husband. However, if I were underaged, then hopefully my parents would also enter into the discussion.

No matter what the outcome of these discussions, whether it be to terminate the pregnancy or to carry it to full term; I would hope that there are qualified and trained doctors ready and willing to assist me at any time.

[Nic Samojluk]

Abortion in Latin America - Still Illegal, Still Killing, Despite Growing Awareness

[phkrause]

I wonder how the rabbis understood the text? PK, are you following this thread?

Gerry I'm assuming your asking me?

Yes I have been following this thread and have made a few posts.

Well I really don't know any Rabbi's but I do know a Jewish/Adventist pastor in Florida. Not to sound stupid but what text are you referring to, and I will try to find out about it. I know a professor here at AUC that has a Rabbi come to meet the kids and a professor that's really well versed in Hebrew.

The problem I have is that each of us has our opinions of what we believe about this subject. What bothers me is those that think there opinions are better than others.

pk

[Nic Samojluk]

I doubt it. Don't believe everything you hear and only half of what you see. Especially beware of folks telling you what they know you want to hear.

I have her testimony in black and white and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of what she stated.

[Nic Samojluk]

When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, RSV.

22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine.

23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, NRSV

When there’s a fight and in the fight a pregnant woman is hit so that she miscarries but is not otherwise hurt, the one responsible has to pay whatever the husband demands in compensation.

23 But if there is further damage, then you must give life for life. Message

If some men are fighting and hurt a pregnant woman so that she loses her child, but she is not injured in any other way, the one who hurt her is to be fined whatever amount the woman’s husband demands, subject to the approval of the judges.

23 But if the woman herself is injured, the punishment shall be life for life, GNT

Si rixati fuerint viri, et percusserit quis mulierem prægnantem, et abortivum quidem fecerit, sed ipsa vixerit : subjacebit damno quantum maritus mulieris expetierit, et arbitri judicaverint.

23 Sin autem mors ejus fuerit subsecuta, reddet animam pro anima, Clementine Vulgate

It looks like we have a tie! This means that we need to determine which interpetation more likely agrees with the rest of Scripture. I believe that: "premature buirth" makes more sense than "miscarriage."

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

I wonder how the rabbis understood the text? PK, are you following this thread?

Gerry I'm assuming your asking me?

Yes, the one and only. We are discussing Ex 21:22-23. I'm just curious what Jewish commentators have to say about this text.

I just remembered I have a copy of "The Torah," published by "The Jewish Publication Society of America," copyrighted in 1962. This is a translation of just the pentateuch.

"When men fight, and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and a miscarriage results, but no ther misfortune ensues, the one responsible shall be fined according as the woman's husband may exact from him, the payment to be based on reckoning. But if other misfortune ensues, the penalty shall be life for life..." Ex 21:22-23.

[Gerr]

Quote:

It looks like we have a tie! This means that we need to determine which interpetation more likely agrees with the rest of Scripture. I believe that: "premature buirth" makes more sense than "miscarriage."

Would Jewish understanding of their own Scriptures mean anything?

[Gerr]

Quote:

The other gray areas you mention: How to keep the Sabbath and the Biblical Tithe have nothing to do with abortion.

You might want to go back to your question. You asked for gray areas without specifying that they be all on abortion. So gave you a few examples.

[phkrause]

"When men fight, and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and a miscarriage results, but no ther misfortune ensues, the one responsible shall be fined according as the woman's husband may exact from him, the payment to be based on reckoning. But if other misfortune ensues, the penalty shall be life for life..." Ex 21:22-23.

Here is what I have right now, this comes from "The Complete Jewish Bible" with commentary from Rabbi Rashi.

22. And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders].

And should men quarrel: with one another, and [one] intended to strike his fellow, and [instead] struck a woman. [From Sanh. 79a]

and hit a pregnant woman: Heb. נְגִיפָה וְנָגְפוּ is only an expression of pushing and striking, as [in the following phrases:] “lest you strike ךְתִּגֹף your foot with a stone” (Ps. 91:12); “and before your feet are bruised (יִתְנְַָפוּ) ” (Jer. 13:16); “and a stone upon which to dash oneself (נֶגֶף) ” (Isa. 8:14).

but there is no fatality: with the woman. -[From Sanh. 79a, Jonathan]

he shall surely be punished: to pay the value of the fetuses to the husband. They assess her [for] how much she was valued to be sold in the market, increasing her value because of her pregnancy. -[From B.K. 49a] I. e., the court figures how much she would be worth if sold as a pregnant slave when customers would take into account the prospect of the slaves she would bear, and her value as a slave without the pregnancy. The assailant must pay the difference between these two amounts. -[b.K. 48b, 49a]

he shall surely be punished: Heb. יֵעָנֵשׁ עָנוֹשׁ. They shall collect monetary payment from him, like וְעָנְשׁוּ [in the verse] “And they shall fine (וְעָנְשׁוּ) him one hundred [shekels of] silver” (Deut. 22:19). [From Mechilta]

when the woman’s husband makes demands of him: When the husband sues him [the assailant] in court to levy upon him punishment for that.

and he shall give [restitution]: The assailant [shall give] the value of the fetuses.

according to the judges: Heb. בִּפְלִלִים, according to the verdict of the judges. -[From Mechilta]

23. But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life,

But if there is a fatality: with the woman.

you shall give a life for a life: Our Rabbis differ on this matter. Some say [that he must] actually [give up his] life, and some say [that he must pay] money, but not actually a life, and if one intends to kill one person and kills another, he is exempt from the death penalty and must pay his [the victim’s] heirs his value, as [it would be if] he were sold in the marketplace. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 79]

Here's the text and commentary from the Jewish Bible.

Here also Gerry is a link to the Jewish Bible and you can check it out for yourself.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm

Hope this helps.

pk

ps: obviously the Hebrew text doesn't translate, sorry.

[Gerr]

Thanks for the comment, Liz. I am curious though what your thoughts are as to what you would do if you or your daughter were to become pregnant as a result of rape, or if you have reliable scientific evidence that what you are carrying would become so severely handicapped that not only is it severely mentally retarded but will require your care 24/7. (Check Angelman Syndrome.)

[Gerr]

Thanks, PK. The Jewish understanding then, at least from these two publications, is that the passage means miscarriage.

[Liz]

Thanks for the comment, Liz. I am curious though what your thoughts are as to what you would do if you or your daughter were to become pregnant as a result of rape, or if you have reliable scientific evidence that what you are carrying would become so severely handicapped that not only is it severely mentally retarded but will require your care 24/7. (Check Angelman Syndrome.)

You know, this truely is one of those instances where we could discuss it until the cows came home, but until one is actually faced with that type of decision who knows what exactly one would do.

If I were raped and became pregnant, like I said my husband, my doctor and God-through lots of prayer, would be in the discussion. Especially due to my age, and the fact that I nearly died carrying my other two kids. I honestly don't know what I would do in that instance.

If my daughter were raped, she is 11 years old, I honestly would have no qualms at all, taking her down immediately and having a D&C done. I wouldn't even wait to see if the pregnancy test came back positive or not. Then we would deal with the rape. I would never guilt her, or even make her feel remotely bad about the possibility the we may have aborted a baby. Since we would never have had the test done, we would never know. Perhaps this is what I would do, in the fictional case of my rape too.

And as to your question, that if we found out the a baby that I "had wanted" was so terribly deformed or would be so mentally retarded that it wouldn't have any kind of life. Again after much prayer, and discussion with my husband, I could abort that baby, and still have hope that on resurrection morning I would get the healthy version back to raise in paradise.

[Gerr]

Thank you very much for the input.

[phkrause]

You know, this truely is one of those instances where we could discuss it until the cows came home, but until one is actually faced with that type of decision who knows what exactly one would do.

If I were raped and became pregnant, like I said my husband, my doctor and God-through lots of prayer, would be in the discussion. Especially due to my age, and the fact that I nearly died carrying my other two kids. I honestly don't know what I would do in that instance.

If my daughter were raped, she is 11 years old, I honestly would have no qualms at all, taking her down immediately and having a D&C done. I wouldn't even wait to see if the pregnancy test came back positive or not. Then we would deal with the rape. I would never guilt her, or even make her feel remotely bad about the possibility the we may have aborted a baby. Since we would never have had the test done, we would never know. Perhaps this is what I would do, in the fictional case of my rape too.

And as to your question, that if we found out the a baby that I "had wanted" was so terribly deformed or would be so mentally retarded that it wouldn't have any kind of life. Again after much prayer, and discussion with my husband, I could abort that baby, and still have hope that on resurrection morning I would get the healthy version back to raise in paradise.

Very excellent points Liz.

pk

[Nic Samojluk]

Originally Posted By: Shane

Exodus 21:22, 23 is a difficult passage to translate which is why different English versions translate it differently. After studying it exhaustively, I have concluded that it cannot honestly be used in the abortion debate either for or against. That said, I see both sides trying to use it to support their positions.

If we come to the passage honestly - not looking for the Bible to support our preconceived ideas - but looking for what the Bible actually says about the issue, I do not think we can draw a conclusion from this passage. The meaning is determined by the Hebrew word yatsa' in verse 22. Some versions translate this miscarriage and other translate it premature birth. The word literally means "to come out". The passage doesn't tell us if the baby comes out dead or alive.

I tend to believe that it means the baby is born premature. I believe that because of the context the word harm is used. The word harm is obviously referring to death. Verse 23 makes that clear. So it is saying if a woman tries to break up a fight between two men and her baby comes out, and yet no death follows, the one that hurt her shall be fined.

But if death follows he shall be killed. If the passage was talking about the death of the woman, the fact that she was pregnant or had a miscarriage would be irrelevant. If two men are fighting and a woman tries to break them apart and one of the men kills her, they would be put to death regardless if the woman was pregnant or not. The focus of the passage seems to focus on how to deal with the loss of the child. That is how it seems to read to me. [/quote']

Excellent comments and very logical reasoning. I am saving your comment in my own computer. It represents the best explanation I have read about this passage.

[Nic Samojluk]

We don't!!! All I know is that it is not included in the canon of scripture. Now, the Catholic church which you claim to have preserved what the Apostles handed down, also have several books included in their Bible that they believe to be inspired but which Protestants reject, should we accept them as inspired and use them for doctrine?

[Nic Samojluk]

If you were presented a fertilized ovum of a dog, monkey, & human, would you tell the difference?

[Nic Samojluk]

Oh, you want to save babies to keep you comfortable in your retirement?

Wrong guess! My retirement will not be affected. In a few days I will be 78. There is no way for my retirement to be affected if the current law is altered.

My investment in my mission for the unborn exceeds $100,000 by far if I were to compute the loss of income due to my dedication to this issue. If I had been concerned about my retirement security, I would have invested all this in the stock or else in real estate.

I did sacrifice the security of my old age for the sake of the unborn. Only God knows the price I am paying for this. In spite of my age, I am still forced to work to pay for my mortgage.

[Nic Samojluk]

Since we are now just repeating ourselves in just slightly different words, and since up to now it has been mostly men who have been discussing something that concerns mostly the well-being of women and men only peripherally, let us invite the women to weigh in with their opinions and reasons for their position. So far I have not seen anything from your arguments to change my thinking. In the meantime, I'll start a new thread as to when we can call the product of pregnancy a human being.

Good thinking. Perhaps, since you want to get input from women, then I would not qualify to participate. Good luck and may the good Lord bless your efforts!

[Dr. Shane]

When Neal Wilson was the GC president he stated that as far as organization is concerned, the Adventist Church is very much like Rome, minus the Pope.

[Dr. Shane]

If what you are saying is true, then how come you have failed so far in providing some references to the sources you are relying on so that readers can verify the reliability of those statistics.

I haven't failed. I have post some here. Such sources are so widely abundant, anyone can easily find them. They are quantifiable, measurable and verifiable. That means they are undeniable.

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: Shane

Doesn't look like that abortion ban is saving many lives in Argentina.

Sure, if you rely on undocumented, apparently inflated statistics of those pushing for the legalization of abortion in those countries.

I pulled my head out of the sand and quit denying reality. There isn't a giant conspiracy going on. Banning abortion simply doesn't work. I woke up and smelled that coffee some time ago. Restricting abortion is what works. I favor what works and resist what doesn't work.

[Dr. Shane]

I have her testimony in black and white and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of what she stated.

I do.

[Nic Samojluk]

Don't misinterpret the scriptures...Guilt is NOT sin.