Abortion: A Biblical and Theological Analysis-Part 5

By: Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon; ©2003

The authors explain why abortion is prohibited on the basis of Exodus 21:22-25.

Scriptures that Prove that God Values the Fetus as Much as an Adult (Exodus 21:22- 25) prohibit abortion.

If, as we have seen, the Bible gives no precise answer on the origin of the soul, or the exact time at which the soul is placed in the human body by God, we can be sure that the Bible makes it absolutely clear that the life of the unborn child in the womb is held by God to be a person and valued as highly as an adult.

There are Christians who assert that even though many of the Bible verses we have studied talk about the value of unborn life in the womb, there is a higher value placed on children at birth than those who are developing in the womb. But Holy Scripture does not give us a precise value to be set on the human fetus at each stage of the fertilized egg up through viability, to birth, and a neatly categorized numerical value on each alternative evil with which we may be faced if one aborts the fetus at that stage. Rather, the Bible teaches that the fetus in the womb at any stage is valued as highly as any adult life.

Where does the Bible teach this? Exodus 21:22-25 states,

If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Distinguished Jewish exegete Umberto Cassuto interprets and translates Exodus 21:22- 25 in his celebrated Commentary of the Book of Exodus:

When men strive together and they hurt unintentionally a woman with child, and her children come forth but no mischief happens—that is, the woman and the children do not die—the one who hurt her shall surely be punished by a fine. But if any mischief happened, that is, if the woman dies or the children die, then you shall give life for life.^[1]

Keil and Delitzsch in their Old Testament commentary on the book of Exodus explainthat the passage demands exactly the same penalty for injuring the mother as the child.^[2]

In the ’60s and early ’70s some Evangelical theologians interpreted Exodus 21:22 wrongly. One well-known Evangelical translated this passage as follows:

When men struggle together and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and she suffers a miscarriage but no other harm happens, he shall be fined according as the woman’s husband may exact from him… But if harm does ensue, then you shall impose soul for soul….^[3]

Here, the clause “no harm happens” is seen as referring only to the fetus, and assumes that the fetus has died as a result of the induced miscarriage. The phrase, “but if harm does ensue, then you shall impose soul for soul,” is thought to refer only to the mother, as the law does not “fine” someone for the death of another human being.^[4]

Under this interpretation, if the fetus were valued as a full human being, then the law would have required capital punishment. But, since none was fixed in this verse, apparently the fetus was not valued as a full human. Evangelical theologians espousing this view did not imply that the fetus was of no value, but the value would not be equal to that of the mother’s life.

But these Evangelicals erred in their interpretation and later changed their minds. The first error they made was in supposing that the fetus died in both cases and is not being considered. Second, they erred in supposing that the clause, “no other harm happens” and “if harm does happen, then you shall impose soul for soul,” is concerned only in regard to the mother. But actually, each phrase refers back to both mother and fetus. The Hebrew is clear that if either the mother or fetus suffers minor harm, then a minor harm should be assessed; but, if further injury results to either mother or fetus, such as death, then the fine or punishment is equal to a life for a life, and an eye for an eye. There is absolutely no ground to differentiate between the mother and the child in this context if we keep to the rights of language.

Distinguished Hebrew scholar Dr. Gleason Archer has stated about this passage:

There is no ambiguity here whatever. What is required is that if there should be an injury either to the mother or to her children, the injury shall be avenged by a like injury to the assailant. If it involves the life, the nephesh, of the premature baby, then the assailant shall pay for it with his life. There is no second class status attached to the fetus under this rule. The fetus is just as valuable as the mother. It is as if he were a normally delivered child or an older person. The penalty is life for life.^[5]

In his article “Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus,” Meredith G. Kline, Professor of Old Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary in California also argues forcefully that this Scripture underscores the personhood of the fetus as well as its equal value with adult human life. His detailed arguments and exegesis should permanently lay to rest the idea that this passage justifies assigning a lesser value to pre-born life than to adult life. A quick summary of his conclusions may be noted:

This law found in Exodus 21:22-25 turns out to be perhaps the most decisive positive evidence in scripture that the fetus is to be regarded as a living person…. No matter whether one interprets the first or second penalty to have reference to a miscarriage, there is no difference in the treatments according to the fetus and the woman. Either way the fetus is regarded as a living person, so that to be criminally responsible for the destruction of the fetus is to forfeit one’s life…. The fetus, at any stage of development, is, in the eyes of this law, a living being, for life (nephesh) is attributed to it…. Consistently in the relevant data of Scripture a continuum of identity is evident between the fetus and the person subsequently born and Exodus 21:22-25 makes it clear that this prenatal human being is to be regarded as a separate and distinct human life.^[6]

The sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” (Heb: murder) refers to every act of mur­der: child, wife, husband, stranger, self, etc. Since it is scientifically established that the fetus is a human being, the commandment applies to abortion as well. “Thou shalt not kill” is equivalent to “Thou shalt not commit abortion.”

Of course, we should remember that in any culture the death penalty is the prerogative of the state alone, never of the individual. The only responsibility of the individual is confes­sion of their sin and restoration to God.

In addition, a variety of biblical teachings collectively prohibit abortion. For example, the fact that every person has value and dignity because he is created in God’s image should influence our view of abortion. Also, repeated biblical teaching on God’s special care for the poor, the innocent and the defenseless bears on the abortion question. Further, the Bible clearly teaches that men and women in the act of procreation are co-workers with God in the process of bringing new life into existence. Then, too, the Scriptures teach that God forms the child in the womb, that the child is an “artwork” of God Himself. Finally, we find in the Bible that all human life is absolutely unique, precious, and loved by God. Those who destroy human life are held accountable by God.

All of the above and a great deal more indicate that the Bible is not silent on abortion. To the contrary, a biblical understanding of God, man, procreation and conception, gestation, and life itself reveals that far from being silent on abortion, the Bible teaches that abortion is a crime against both God and man.

Read Part 6

Notes

1. ↑ Umberto Cassuto, Commentary on the Book of Exodus (Jerusalem, Magnes Press, The Hebrew
   University, 1967), p. 275.
2. ↑ C. F. Keil, F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten Volumes, Vol. 1 (Exodus)
   (Grand Rapids, MI, Eerdmans, 1978), pp. 134-135.
3. ↑ Bruce K. Waltke, “Old Testament Texts Bearing on the Problem of the Control of Human Reproduction,”
   in Walter O. Spitzer and Carlyle L. Sayor (eds.), Birth Control and the Christian
   (Wheaton, IL, Tyndale, 1969), p. 11.
4. ↑ Ibid.
5. ↑ Television program transcript, “Abortion,” (Chattanooga, TN, The John Ankerberg Television
   Ministry, 1982), p. 3.
6. ↑ Meredith G. Kline, “Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus,” The Simon Greenleaf Law Review, Vol. 5
   (1985-1986), pp. 75, 83, 88-89.