There exists a lack of understanding or agreement among the myriad of theological and political opinions regarding a most thorny subject, that of abortion.† First, it would seem that the subject is often viewed from an already biased position without regard for the ancient truths, and primarily from the Male perspective. I therefore have questions that are relevant to the issue. Perhaps you do too.


Why does scripture seem to be so confusing on this very contentious subject? Can something conceived in the womb be considered a separate person while it is getting all its sustenance from its mother and before it ever takes its first breath? How does this compare to the way Adam became a living soul? Does our benevolent God place a different value on a fetus than on its mother? And, is an unborn child lost forever, as some religious scholars, mostly men, believe and teach?


Take a short journey with me through common sense and solid biblical evidence and determine for yourself if there is room for debate as to the differing religious views in this rather weighty matter.


Please allow me to share an important observation relating to a routine pregnancy. No woman of sound mind, having conceived in a normal manner, would ever even think to bring harm in any way to what is being formed in her womb. It is emphatically not in her DNA to do anything other than to protect and nurture. For the same reason a woman would never consider abortion as a typical birth control method, only as a last resort. For a man however it is quite different. He can either support a woman whom he got pregnant, or he may run away, since the fetus does not grow inside his body.


Considering then that a man is affected in a very different way than a woman, it is not strange that a credible report arose during the recent controversy about contraception, that upwards of 98% of Catholic women use some form of standard birth control.† Men in the Catholic hierarchy consider many forms of contraception as a very early type of abortion, yet most fertile Catholic women, by their actions, do not agree. A Catholic womanís power to make her own birth control decision apparently supersedes the Churchís extreme position. Maybe that is partly because a woman carries virtually all the burden from conception to birth and beyond.† As radical as the Catholic position is, many mainstream Christian denominations are not much different in their approach, yet most of these fertile women use birth control too. Politically connected religious radicals are quietly moving against all these women.


Many clergymen also teach that a woman who has been raped or is the victim of incest is not entitled to a choice as to her future.† Since she was the victim of violence or other egregious crime, why would she not be entitled to a choice? Who would dare suggest that she does not have right to only bear children to a man she really loves?† She is most often expected to give up her choice of family with a man of her dreams in order to raise a child fostered by a man of her nightmares, who himself already ran away!


This makes no sense whatever. Where are all the activists, protesting against the deadbeat men who abuse these women and then just leave a poor woman to her own devices? By their actions, these men already chose to reject or abort any child they fostered just by skipping out with no consequence from society at all. What a blind travesty, since a woman is held to a high standard, while a man is not. Has anything changed since the first century when a lone woman was brought before Jesus having been caught in the very act of adultery? Nobody asked the whereabouts of the man, yet this double standard still exists in modern society. How utterly shameful of anyone to place such a burden only on a woman!


Okay, now that we have some questions and principles that beg for further examination, letís continue with an event from long ago, that of Noahís flood. The flood was a God ordained abortion of at least 235 million of our ancestors, all washed out of the womb of the world by water!† Only eight adults were saved, but not even one child. What is the ultimate fate of those millions of adults, children and unborn fetuses who perished in the flood? Are they lost forever? Ecclesiastes six informs us that both a man who lives to be a hundred years old and an unborn child go to the same place. Clearly that place would be that of awaiting a resurrection. Therefore an unborn child is not lost forever in the same way that victims of the flood are not lost forever, but rather are awaiting a resurrection to a better life.


Letís take a look at whether a fetus can be considered a separate person before ever taking its first breath at birth. Our example is found in the way in which Adam became a living soul. Genesis 2:7 describes the process, and here we read that Adam was fully formed, but was not considered a person until he received breath. This is the pattern that God set right from the beginning.† According to this pattern, the receipt of breath is what gives personhood and therefore, human rights. In the case of a fetus, this is not possible. Anyone who has already been born is usually considered dead if they quit breathing. Apparently, God shows us through Adamís example, that it is the same with a fetus. Just like Adam, until or unless it begins to breath, a fetus is not considered legally alive, very similar to American civil laws today. Breath= life. This is the biblical formula, not a pet theory, which radicals want to change.


So, what about the biblical valuation of a mother as compared to her children, are they equal in the eyes of Godís law? To see the comparison of a child to its mother as a biblical principal, one can first compare the language of just one passage; that of Deuteronomy 22 verses 6 and 7.† Here God informs us that a mother bird is worth far more than all her offspring, either born or unborn, but what about humans?


Exodus 21 verse 22 (G. N. Bible, Living bible, KJV.) specifies in the legal sense, that the value of a human fetus is monetary. Both Deuteronomy 22 and Exodus 21 place a different value on a mother than on her offspring, but Exodus 21 tells us that while a human mother may be worth another personís life, her unborn child is not.† This is very important knowledge as it flies in the face of extremist theology.† It is, however, consistent with ancient Jewish tradition and any number of bible translations, those that were based more on accuracy in translation rather than those that inject pet theories into their text.


The primary mistake that is so prevalent seems to be to view the ancient bible as if it were written this morning, and therefore what is normal in our world today. For example, advanced medicine has allowed many premature babies to survive, but this absolutely was not the case when the Bible was written, since premature birth almost never resulted in survival of the fetus. So I am compelled to view some modern interpretations of the bible with skepticism unless they happen to agree in principal with the norm of the ancient societies and original biblical history. A few recent translations, in an attempt to please extremists, rewrite the language of Exodus 21 to allow for a live birth, rather than a miscarriage.


Okay, so letís back up for a moment. Most extremist clergymen and politicians will continue to argue that a fetus should become by law equal in value to its mother. If these men have their way, a pregnant woman who happens to be involved in an accident while driving, such that she suffers a miscarriage, may be arrested and charged with manslaughter! Even a woman who experiences a normal miscarriage might be arrested for possible felony charges if she simply drank something questionable. These would be likely scenarios with new radical legislation that would arise.


To say that a fetus is of the same value as its mother is like saying that a human is of the same value as God! Does anyone believe that? Not anyone Iíve ever heard of who is of sound mind.


God, our Father, in a very real sense is also like a mother, as life giver, and as such even the most dedicated activist will say that God has right to also withhold life if He so chooses. God has created all human life, but no human can create God.† Perhaps this is the idea of a mother bird compared to her offspring. She can give life to any number of babies, but they cannot give life to her. This same idea applies to humans.


In a very similar way, a woman is a life giver, and like God, in normal circumstances will only nurture and care for a child she has conceived. But what about something out of the ordinary, does not the life giver, the mother, have the right to make a different choice? God decides when and to whom to give life. Like it or not, a woman has similar power on the human level. She does have a choice, but it can weigh heavily on her, especially if she was abandoned and never loved by the man who put her in such a lonely position to start with. Then to be also abandoned by a heartless society is the final insult.


By the way, how does God select children for his spiritual family? Will He allow any in who have been fathered by his enemy, the devil? Only those who have and use Godís seed (Spirit) will be allowed into His family, so too does a woman have no obligation to bring a child into the world that is fathered by a criminal action against her! She is only obligated to bear children to a man she will or already does love. Many modern day extremists passionately disagree, but are no different from the Pharisees of Jesusí day. Matthew 15 informs us that these men were teaching their own pet theories as if they were the commandments of God, and thereby making the law of God, as well as 2000 years of established precedent ineffective. This is exactly what their modern counterparts are doing today, teaching their pet theories as if they were the commands of the Creator God.


I personally have strong objections to extremist theologians and politicians who inject themselves into the public debate, such that If they get their way, not only will a miscarriage become a felony, but women everywhere will lose their freedom to choose clinical contraception of any kind. These power hungry men are intent on advancing the war against women through State and Federal legislation in order to greatly reduce a womanís reproductive rights.† The question is; will women simply continue to lie down at the altar of these men and lose this war, or stand and fight? That is the choice.

Text Box:


The Present Commission†† All Rights Reserved† 2016