Dr. Herbert Douglass On Abortion and "Planned Parenthood"

[Hansen]

Brethren, The Bible required abortions in case of adultery. In fact, a priest administered the abortifacient. The woman would also be sterilized in the process, preventing her from bearing more children of dubious origin.

You can read all about it in the fifth chapter of Numbers.

Y'all getting carried away by the nonsense of the pope and the Babylonian Sunday keepers.

Happy Sabbath!

[BobRyan]

That is an amazing imagination that you just mixed with the actual Bible!!

Numbers 5 says nothing at all about a woman being pregnant.

It says that if a "spirit of jealousy comes over the husband" that the woman is made to drink "the water of bitterness" to see if her abdomen swells and "her thigh wastes away". A result that seems unlikely from drinking water - but ok, after all they had the Urim and Thumim.

At no point does the text say that "if a woman is pregnant and it is proven to be by a man other than her husband the baby shall be killed".

So you read that into the text and then reported it as if the text said it.

That only works if you are careful not to quote the text while doing so.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

So far I have seen no direct statement from an Adventist source in this hospital debate that they offer abortions.

I don't expect to see it either. They seemed content to allow others to make the argument for them and then to reference the argument of the aforementioned others.

Some hospitals are owned by AHS, some are merely operated (as in business office) by AHS and it is unlcear that all AHS affiliated hospitals (of whatever level of affiliation) are following some "rule" on this subject.

Therefore in regard to the specific incident above - I don't know how you can say up or down about it for "all AHS hospitals".

in Christ,

Bob

[Hansen]

Nu 5: 27 ‘when he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her and cause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people.

28 ‘but if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive children.

Bob, the reference in the passage to the belly and thigh refers to the reproductive organs of the woman. Notice the structure of the text. If she is guilty, she will be a curse among her people. If she is innocent, she shall be free to conceive. To be a curse among her people was to be barren.

The bitter water would cause miscarriage/sterility if she was pregnant. If she wasn't pregnant but had committed adultery, she would be sterile.

Not really difficult to understand.

[miz3]

Nu 5: 27 ‘when he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her and cause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people.

28 ‘but if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive children.

Bob, the reference in the passage to the belly and thigh refers to the reproductive organs of the woman. Notice the structure of the text. If she is guilty, she will be a curse among her people. If she is innocent, she shall be free to conceive. To be a curse among her people was to be barren.

The bitter water would cause miscarriage/sterility if she was pregnant. If she wasn't pregnant but had committed adultery, she would be sterile.

Not really difficult to understand.

This text you cite is not talking about a priest performing an abortion. If you look carefully at the text cited and its context you will find that if the woman is guilty that it is the Lord who makes the woman barren and it is God who performs the abortion. Remember in this process the woman is standing before the Lord and it is the Lord who who causes the punishment and/or the innocence.

There is a huge difference between God performing abortions and humans performing them.

* * *

[Hansen]

Miz, The priest gave the woman the potion which would result in a miscarriage if she was pregnant. Neither the text nor I said that the priest performed" an abortion.

Those of you caught up in the anti-abortion hysteria fueled by the Roman papacy in America should recognize that Scripture "sanctified" what amounted to an abortion, in certain cases, i.e, adultery.

Regardless of my personal feelings about aborion, Scripture did allow "sanctified" abortions. Actually, it required them.

Scripture also required the stoning to death of [very] naughty children. Wouldn't it have been better to abort the fetus than to smash the head of a child with large stones?

[doug yowell]

Bob, the reference in the passage to the belly and thigh refers to the reproductive organs of the woman. Notice the structure of the text. If she is guilty, she will be a curse among her people. If she is innocent, she shall be free to conceive. To be a curse among her people was to be barren.

The bitter water would cause miscarriage/sterility if she was pregnant. If she wasn't pregnant but had committed adultery, she would be sterile.

Not really difficult to understand.

What's difficult to understand is why you chose to apply this particular text in a defense of abortion. The logical conclusion would be that you also favor accompanying sterilization with every abortion (two for one, a pretty good deal?) and public cursing of every woman who's been unfaithful to her husband. If, as PP advocates, abortion is such a wonderful exercise in women's choice, seems like they would oppose your defense of it from the OT.Of course, there was no equal test of faithfulness for the unmarried women so should SDA hospitals also provide the same curse on them as part of an overall health care package?

[doug yowell]

Those of you caught up in the anti-abortion hysteria fueled by the Roman papacy in America should recognize that Scripture "sanctified" what amounted to an abortion, in certain cases, i.e, adultery.

[tall73]

Originally Posted By: tall73

So far I have seen no direct statement from an Adventist source in this hospital debate that they offer abortions.

I don't expect to see it either. They seemed content to allow others to make the argument for them and then to reference the argument of the aforementioned others.

Some hospitals are owned by AHS, some are merely operated (as in business office) by AHS and it is unlcear that all AHS affiliated hospitals (of whatever level of affiliation) are following some "rule" on this subject.

Therefore in regard to the specific incident above - I don't know how you can say up or down about it for "all AHS hospitals".

in Christ,

Bob

A. I was talking about the specific instance.

B. Previous disclosures in the early and late 80s showed diversity among the hospitals in this practice. I assume that is still true.

C. Even one hospital doing this is too many.

[miz3]

Miz, The priest gave the woman the potion which would result in a miscarriage if she was pregnant. Neither the text nor I said that the priest performed" an abortion.

Those of you caught up in the anti-abortion hysteria fueled by the Roman papacy in America should recognize that Scripture "sanctified" what amounted to an abortion, in certain cases, i.e, adultery.

Regardless of my personal feelings about aborion, Scripture did allow "sanctified" abortions. Actually, it required them.

Scripture also required the stoning to death of [very] naughty children. Wouldn't it have been better to abort the fetus than to smash the head of a child with large stones?

If we are going to apply the principle of "sanctified abortions" then we must also follow the "sanctified procedure", that is the said woman must drink water mixed with the dirt of the Sanctuary. Then we must accept the verdict of God in the matter.

[Hansen]

Doug, The "trial by ordeal" found in Numbers 5 describes a ritual which, in some cases, would lead to miscarriage and sterility. The ritual was part of a priestly act, required by God. The consequences of that ritual could be an aborted fetus.

This indicates that abortion was not always wrong. In some cases, it was the right thing to do. Divine intervention was required to make it happen. Since God was involved, it is not something I would condemn.

If you object to your own family member having an abortion, I respect that. Beyond that, you are, more or less, a busybody.

[BobRyan]

So far I have seen no direct statement from an Adventist source in this hospital debate that they offer abortions.

I don't expect to see it either. They seemed content to allow others to make the argument for them and then to reference the argument of the aforementioned others.

[doug yowell]

Doug, The "trial by ordeal" found in Numbers 5 describes a ritual which, in some cases, would lead to miscarriage and sterility. The ritual was part of a priestly act, required by God. The consequences of that ritual could be an aborted fetus.

[doug yowell]

Even one hospital doing this is too many.

Particularly if the name of that hospital includes the word Adventist.

[doug yowell]

Nu 5: 27 ‘when he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her and cause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people.

28 ‘but if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive children.

Bob, the reference in the passage to the belly and thigh refers to the reproductive organs of the woman. Notice the structure of the text. If she is guilty, she will be a curse among her people. If she is innocent, she shall be free to conceive. To be a curse among her people was to be barren.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: tall73

Even one hospital doing this is too many.

Particularly if the name of that hospital includes the word Adventist.

Absolutely.

I could not agree more with both statements.

[Hansen]

Doug, I've offered my view of Numbers 5 and its implications for the present discussion. If we can't agree on what the Bible says in a simple passage such as the one in question, it's no wonder that the Christian world is full of confusion.

An acquaintance of mine described the pain and betrayal he experienced when he impregnated the wife of another man. Without telling him, she aborted his child and returned to her husband, the father of her other child.

I guess that my acquaintance is more aligned with you than with me on the subject.

[doug yowell]

Tall,I read all links you posted and found they all used the words Health Care as a kind of catch all that may or may not include elective abortions. Can anyone obtain a copy of the AHS proposal? Given the past history of some SDA hospitals and their expertise at playing the word game with "comprehensive health care services" the red flag goes immediately up.Yet,the case lacks a smoking gun. Given the support of every major pro-abortion group in the country is all the evidence I need but the die hard skeptics will need more than that.If conclusive evidence can be found one way or the other we can either put this issue to rest or we can begin to revisit the 1992 "guidelines" all over again.

[doug yowell]

An acquaintance of mine described the pain and betrayal he experienced when he impregnated the wife of another man. Without telling him, she aborted his child and returned to her husband, the father of her other child.

I guess that my acquaintance is more aligned with you than with me on the subject.

Sorry Hansen, I'm a little slow so I'm having a hard time following the connection. Sounds like your acquaintance has other issues to deal with.

[tall73]

Tall,I read all links you posted and found they all used the words Health Care as a kind of catch all that may or may not include elective abortions. Can anyone obtain a copy of the AHS proposal? Given the past history of some SDA hospitals and their expertise at playing the word game with "comprehensive health care services" the red flag goes immediately up.Yet,the case lacks a smoking gun. Given the support of every major pro-abortion group in the country is all the evidence I need but the die hard skeptics will need more than that.If conclusive evidence can be found one way or the other we can either put this issue to rest or we can begin to revisit the 1992 "guidelines" all over again.

The term is used in the quote from the Adventist Review site. However, I have noticed a trend throughout that it is used of what the Catholic hospital does not provide, and then they say Adventists provide a full range of services.

So yes, smoking guns are intentionally avoided.

[doug yowell]

So yes, smoking guns are intentionally avoided.

Like the word abortion!! Why can't the Holy Cross folks be asked what the SDA comprehensive plan includes that theirs doesn't? Maybe it's just contraception? Maybe it's more? Who's doing the detective work around here? PS.Why did this thread get banished from the general topics arena, anyone know? I had to search for it last night.

[doug yowell]

Just thought I'd drop by and say hi. Any news? Wanna start a new thread?

[Gustave]

Originally Posted By: Gustave

Officers of the SDA Church sat "on the board" of the Race Betterment Foundation...

...Which indeed became PP.

...SDA medical facilities suck thousands of babies out of Mothers.

Would you like for me to provide you with more documentation?

Sure.

Ok, you did ask.

http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/HR/HR19420601-V77-06__C/index.djvu

http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/LUH/LUH19411125-V33-45__B/index.djvu

[Raphael]

PP or Abortion is definitely turned into fanatical issues by its opponents, clearly stating their position of adamant illogical reason over and over again.

Grounds:

1. Israel the bearer of God's truth & direct guidance has been practicing PP for thousands of years and now the story is twisted to that Israel has changed and made their own human laws including PP practice. Can someone explain the difference of laws that Israel made and laws that were from Moses? What I can easily say is laws from God via Moses had Bible scriptures support, while man-made like additional Sabbath observance of not perspiring for instance has no scriptural support.

2. The founding of the Seventh Day Adventist Church that included the health message of hospitals & etc, was blessed with God's divine guidance through dreams, revelations and inspired messages, chiefly through EGW. The question is, has PP or elective abortions been practiced or held in principle by SDA hospitals during EGW's lifetime? Did the principle of elective abortion start after EGW's lifetime? I doubt it.. This PP principle didn't just grow out suddenly from know where..

But once again, retrieving from experience the unreasonable statements & attitude by passionate, fanatical or perhaps simply unfortunate brain-washed-since-childhood personalities.. it is without usefulness to discuss due to their continual & constant display of fanatical-like zeal with no room for reason, therefore knowing the decisive resolve, it becomes wise to simply avoid any exchange on the matter.

Give not thine gold to dogs & swines.. lest they trample..

Turning this into a PR war where the one with the loudest voice gets noticed instead of logic & reason.. well.. brethren, just keep stating the truth with noticing anything else..

Anyway PP holds sway all over America, ain't I right? showing the vehement loud voices without reason to be simply losing-non-minded driven fanaticism.

[Gustave]

PP or Abortion is definitely turned into fanatical issues by its opponents, clearly stating their position of adamant illogical reason over and over again.

Grounds:

1. Israel the bearer of God's truth & direct guidance has been practicing PP for thousands of years and now the story is twisted to that Israel has changed and made their own human laws including PP practice.