Abortion

[rlvaughn]

Originally posted by post-it:
But it can't be interpreted that way...

I see that when it comes to Bible versions you are PIVO - post-it version only. You say it can't be interpreted that way, yet I have access to and have shown five translations that have interpreted it that way, from the New Revised Version to the New American Standard Version. That's a pretty bold statement from you and your Strong's Concordance - "it can't be intepreted that way" - when a number of Greek scholars certainly have interpreted it that way. Could they be wrong? Yes. Could you be wrong? Yes! I'm gonna assume that they had a couple of more Greek lessons than you had, and that you simply are unwilling to admit that you are (or even could be) wrong when you say it can't be interpreted that way.

Greek language is not so limited that they couldn't convey a clear meaning here. Why didn't it say "from conception" or "from this time" or 10 different ways of saying it so that is would be understood "while yet in the womb"?...

Nor is the Greek language so limited that you can look up a word in a concordance and think you know the entire semantic range of that word. Why didn't it say "from birth"? You have been unwilling to acknowledge that it does not say that either. It says "ek koilias" - "from the womb." The Greek has other words that could say "from his birth" as well.

A final consideration that should be made in attempting to understand Luke 1:15 and the babe being filled "from his mother's womb" is the context. It seems hard to understand that Luke is not recording the incident of Elisabeth and Mary in relation to the promise of the angel to Zacharias: "Luke 1: 41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy."

Notice these things:
</font>

1. The babe leaped in her womb</font>
2. Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost</font>
3. There was a witness of the Spirit that Mary was mother of the Lord</font>
4. She attributed the babe's leaping to the emotion of joy</font>

Elisabeth, filled with and speaking through the Holy Ghost, knew that Mary was carrying the Lord in her womb, and that her babe (John) leaped for joy because of this. How could a lifeless fetus have an emotion? How could a lifeless fetus have witness that the babe in Mary's womb was the Lord? In fact, how could any infant, however alive, have witness that the babe in Mary's womb was the Lord, apart from the Holy Ghost's witness? You appear to have waffled on the John issue, unless, for example, statements like these are only meant to be facetious:

...we can assume this was a special case baby with a spirit that other babies don't have since no other baby leaps in their mother's wombs.

 

[post-it]

Originally posted by rlvaughn:
[ 44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy."

She attributed the babe's leaping to the emotion of joy


How could a lifeless fetus have an emotion? How could a lifeless fetus have witness that the babe in Mary's womb was the Lord? In fact, how could any infant, however alive, have witness that the babe in Mary's womb was the Lord, apart from the Holy Ghost's witness?

You have made a very strong argument on this point. I'll have to give it further consideration.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by post-it:
Joesph, I'll wait for your conclusion on the breath definitions before posting any more. Thanks for the attention you are giving this. I'm sure many here are looking forward to what your research brings.
Just a quick request, also look up nishmath (the word that also is spelled "nephesh" by some dictionaries) it was the word right before RUACH.

Found the word. It is not derived from the word you were thinking though. Here are the results of the search. It is a noun that is derived from the verb "Neshem". Here is what BDB says:

Neshahmah-"breath...2. breath of man...Gn 7:22 (J); as breathed in by God it is God's breath in man Jb 33:4 34:14..." (BDB, p. 675). It is not derived or in any way linked to the word "Nephesh".

Here is what Laird, Harris, and Waltke say:

"breath...This noun, when used in reference to man, generally signifies the breath of life. It is frequently found in combination with ruah 'spirit' and seems synonymous with nephesh (q.v.)...while in 7:22 nishmat-ruah hayim means 'the breath of life,' breath here expressed by the combination ' breathing of breath.'" (Laird, Harris, and Waltke, p. 605)

Joseph Botwinick

 

[post-it]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by post-it:
Joesph, I'll wait for your conclusion on the breath definitions before posting any more. Thanks for the attention you are giving this. I'm sure many here are looking forward to what your research brings.
Just a quick request, also look up nishmath (the word that also is spelled "nephesh" by some dictionaries) it was the word right before RUACH.

Found the word. It is not derived from the word you were thinking though. Here are the results of the search. It is a noun that is derived from the verb "Neshem". Here is what BDB says:

Neshahmah-"breath...2. breath of man...Gn 7:22 (J); as breathed in by God it is God's breath in man Jb 33:4 34:14..." (BDB, p. 675). It is not derived or in any way linked to the word "Nephesh".

Here is what Laird, Harris, and Waltke say:

"breath...This noun, when used in reference to man, generally signifies the breath of life. It is frequently found in combination with ruah 'spirit' and seems synonymous with nephesh (q.v.)...while in 7:22 nishmat-ruah hayim means 'the breath of life,' breath here expressed by the combination ' breathing of breath.'" (Laird, Harris, and Waltke, p. 605)

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]So which is being used in reference to Adam? "Spirit" or "Breath of life(God)" or are they they same. Does having the Breath of God, mean receiving a spirit? How did the Breath of Life enter Adam and when? While he was being formed or after he was formed? Is the Breath of Life equal to our everyday breathing and without it we die? Do animals have this same breath of life?

These are the questions I was hoping you would anser from your research on the words in those 2 verses.

 

[Helen]

Post-it, since you are the one making the claim about 'breath', why are you asking him to do your research for you?

 

[Gina B]

A friend of mine lost her twins last month. She was five months, and they died before birth. They would not have been able to live outside the womb even if they had had a chance to take a breath. They were born, she held them, named them, and they held a funeral.
The ignorance of people in saying these aren't children makes me sick. You can argue up one side and down the other on the technicalities of it but the truth is that no matter what you say or read you know deep in your heart that you cannot say with 100% accuracy that a soul isn't imparted or a life started until a certain day of gestation. One day you will stand before God and if you're wrong and have taught others that the life he creates is worthless and a blob of tissue until you say it isn't all your science and greek definitions and arguments just aren't going to make your sin any more tolerable.
"But God, it didn't LOOK like a baby yet!"
Post your arguments for abortion as if God was standing beside you listening, because He is. Think really hard on if that's what you'd say in front of Him, because you are. These "blobs" of tissue are his creation, unless you believe that our God is not sovereign and alone holds the power to give life.
Gina

 

[stubbornkelly]

*sigh* I never know what to say on these threads. I know my legal position, which is pro-choice, and I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I don't base my politics on Scripture. And even Scripturally, I don't have a particular position. It's been said that none of us can pin soulhood to a particular week of gestation, and I think that's true. I certainly don't know.

I've miscarried, and I can say that whatever grieving I did was for the child I'd imagined. I've also had an abortion, and I didn't grieve at all. I don't even feel guilty. I'm not being heartless; I'm being honest. And I don't know what that last means exactly, about not feeling guilty, it's just where I am.

The other pro-choice people I know don't say that an embryo or a fetus is not living, or that it isn't human. The question is, is an embryo or fetus a person - which question involves defining what a person is.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by post-it:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by post-it:
Joesph, I'll wait for your conclusion on the breath definitions before posting any more. Thanks for the attention you are giving this. I'm sure many here are looking forward to what your research brings.
Just a quick request, also look up nishmath (the word that also is spelled "nephesh" by some dictionaries) it was the word right before RUACH.

Found the word. It is not derived from the word you were thinking though. Here are the results of the search. It is a noun that is derived from the verb "Neshem". Here is what BDB says:

Neshahmah-"breath...2. breath of man...Gn 7:22 (J); as breathed in by God it is God's breath in man Jb 33:4 34:14..." (BDB, p. 675). It is not derived or in any way linked to the word "Nephesh".

Here is what Laird, Harris, and Waltke say:

"breath...This noun, when used in reference to man, generally signifies the breath of life. It is frequently found in combination with ruah 'spirit' and seems synonymous with nephesh (q.v.)...while in 7:22 nishmat-ruah hayim means 'the breath of life,' breath here expressed by the combination ' breathing of breath.'" (Laird, Harris, and Waltke, p. 605)

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]So which is being used in reference to Adam? "Spirit" or "Breath of life(God)" or are they they same. Does having the Breath of God, mean receiving a spirit? How did the Breath of Life enter Adam and when? While he was being formed or after he was formed? Is the Breath of Life equal to our everyday breathing and without it we die? Do animals have this same breath of life?

These are the questions I was hoping you would anser from your research on the words in those 2 verses. </font>[/QUOTE]Patience, my young padowan. You must learn patience...

I am doing as much as I can with the limited time that I have. I will try to finish the research tonight after the Easter Musical (I am playing the part of Pilate...sounds appropriate, huh). I also have a wife that is carrying my baby...er...big blob of nothing...inside of her that I need to spend time with. So please be patient with me.

Thanks,

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Helen:
Post-it, since you are the one making the claim about 'breath', why are you asking him to do your research for you?

Helen,

I actually offered my time and talents to this endeavor.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[post-it]

Originally posted by Helen:
Post-it, since you are the one making the claim about 'breath', why are you asking him to do your research for you?

Joesph said he would research out the meanings in two verses as best he could and he has now done so now. What he still has yet to do is to relate what the meaning of those verses are saying. It may be that it is so confusing to him that no interpretation can be made (spirit or wind). I don't know since he hasn't given us his interpretation based on the meanings he has discovered.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Post-it,

Please see my 2 posts above.

Thanks,

Joseph Botwinick

 

[post-it]

Originally posted by stubbornkelly:
[QB] I know my legal position, which is pro-choice, and I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I don't base my politics on Scripture.

This is my main problem with the whole thing. People here think that abortion and life in the womb is addressed in scripture when it has clearly not been. So they take a political/personal opinion and try to justify it by claiming "God said it".

It was kind of you to share your experience with us. I know you aren't a murderer Kelly, any you most likely don't care what I or anyone else thinks of you personally since you know you aren't a murderer. But I know I could trust you to babysit my child when I know I would never let a murderer do the same.

So far we have yet to find any clear verses that would indicate when a life begins. After all, an unfertilized egg is "living" in a way but certainly not a person yet.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Genesis 2:7-

wayotser YHWH Elohim eth-ha-adam apar min-ha-adamah wayipach bapayu nishmath chayim wayehi ha-adam lenephesh chayah.

The two major words used here are "Nishmath" and "Nephesh". Ruach is not used in this verse. I will discuss word usage in my next post.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Nephesh: "Soul, Living Being, Life, Self Person, Desire, Appetite, emotion, and passion" (BDB, p. 659).

Word usage in Gen. 2:7:

"2. The "Nephesh" (Transliterated by me since I do not have Hebrew fonts) becomes a living being: by God's breathing "Nishmath Chayim" (Translated as breath of life...Botwinick's translation) into the nostrils of...man Gn 2:7 (J);" (BDB, p. 659).

Harris, Laird, Waltke definition of Nephesh: "life, soul, creature, person, appetite, and mind are the more common of the twenty some varieties of meaning utilized in KJV" (Harris, Laird, and Waltke, p. 587).

Word Usage of Nephesh: "The connection between nephesh and breath is also suggested by such statements as: 'and [the Lord] breathed [nph] into his [man's] nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul' (Gen 2:7)" (Harris, Laird, and Waltke, p. 588).

Word usage of "Nishmath" in Genesis 2:7-

BDB: "breath of life "nishmath Chayim" Gn 2:7 (J)" (BDB, p. 675).

TWOT: "The 'breath of God' may refer to his creative activity (as in Gen. 2:7)..." (Harris, Laird, and Waltke, p. 605).

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by post-it:
So which is being used in reference to Adam? "Spirit" or "Breath of life(God)" or are they they same.

Ruach (which is spirit, breath, or wind) is not used in Genesis 2:7. Therefore it is the Breath of life which comes from God (Nishmath Chayim). This is God creating man and giving him life by breathing the breath of God (life, it seems to me to be used interchangeably in this verse) and because of that breathing into his nostrils the breath of God, life, he became a living soul (wayehi ha-adam lenephesh chayah).

Does having the Breath of God, mean receiving a spirit? [/QUOTE]

According to Gen. 2:7, it means that having the breath of God/life means that you become a living soul. My own interpretation would be that this is a spiritual act, being performed by God creating man.

How did the Breath of Life enter Adam and when?[/QUOTE]

When God breathed the breath of God/ life into him.

Is the Breath of Life equal to our everyday breathing and without it we die?[/QUOTE]

I would say no because it comes from God. This, in my interpretation is not a physical breath, but a spiritual breath, which thus causes man to become a "lenephesh Chayah" (a living soul).

Do animals have this same breath of life? [/QUOTE]

I find no evidence of this in these verses and would say no. We are made in the image of God, animals are not.

I hope this helps.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

WOW!!!!!

I think I just finished my research. It wasn't very hard finding all of the info. Just putting it all together and answering all of the questions...man I am so ADHD. Next time, I won't start something unless I have time to go all the way through without stopping. I hope this answers all your questions, Post-it. I decided to do this before tonight so I could watch "Alias" when I get hom and spend time with my wife. Let me know what you think and if you have any more questions.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by stubbornkelly:
*sigh* I never know what to say on these threads. I know my legal position, which is pro-choice, and I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I don't base my politics on Scripture. And even Scripturally, I don't have a particular position. It's been said that none of us can pin soulhood to a particular week of gestation, and I think that's true. I certainly don't know.

I've miscarried, and I can say that whatever grieving I did was for the child I'd imagined. I've also had an abortion, and I didn't grieve at all. I don't even feel guilty. I'm not being heartless; I'm being honest. And I don't know what that last means exactly, about not feeling guilty, it's just where I am.

The other pro-choice people I know don't say that an embryo or a fetus is not living, or that it isn't human. The question is, is an embryo or fetus a person - which question involves defining what a person is.

Kelly,

I believe that murdering a baby is a sin. That is what the fetus is, a baby, a person. I don't judge you for that, because that is God's place. But, also understand that there is forgiveness for sins for those who repent. In the midst of judgment, there is mercy. (Micah 6:8)

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Gina B]

*sigh* I never know what to say on these threads. I know my legal position, which is pro-choice, and I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I don't base my politics on Scripture.

Right there is a major problem. Politics is how we influence governmental decisions and laws. Our supreme ruler is God and his word. Without it there is no Christianity, and it is central to our morals. It is morals that define how we behave and what laws we want in place. Our moral decisions should be based on Christianity, not self.

And even Scripturally, I don't have a particular position. It's been said that none of us can pin soulhood to a particular week of gestation, and I think that's true. I certainly don't know.

Taking on a pro-abortion opinion when you just don't really know if that child has a soul yet or not is putting one's own wants and opinions pretty high up, wouldn't you agree? "Well, this may or may not be murder, but I think it would be best for me so I'll do it and it's ok".

I've miscarried, and I can say that whatever grieving I did was for the child I'd imagined. I've also had an abortion, and I didn't grieve at all. I don't even feel guilty. I'm not being heartless; I'm being honest. And I don't know what that last means exactly, about not feeling guilty, it's just where I am.

I'm going to say this not to be cruel, but to be honest.
From what I understand you've never been married, and have also stated in the past that you have pre-marital sex and think it's ok.
Now you're stating it on a public board that you've had a miscarriage and an abortion, so I take it this was at a time when you were having pre-marital sex. You're statements don't imply that you feel bad about the pre-marital sex, so I'll assume that you still think it's ok. In the bible this is called sexual sin. Adultery. Impurity. Harlotry. It's a plain truth, and if one can state outright that they are ignoring it than it doesn't suprise me that one doesn't feel guilt over losing or aborting a child that was conceived during that sin.
I would ask you to think hard about this and realize how strongly the bible speaks out against it. Once you do the impact of what you've done as far as abortion may hit you pretty hard, but that's what Jesus shed his blood for. Sin. And for the person who truly believes in Jesus it will be covered and there will be no need for guilt because in his mercy we are granted forgiveness for sins.

The other pro-choice people I know don't say that an embryo or a fetus is not living, or that it isn't human. The question is, is an embryo or fetus a person - which question involves defining what a person is.

What is your definition of a person?

Gina

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Post-it,

Are you still there?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[post-it]

Originally posted by Gina:
Once you do the impact of what you've done as far as abortion may hit you pretty hard, but that's what Jesus shed his blood for. Sin. And for the person who truly believes in Jesus it will be covered and there will be no need for guilt because in his mercy we are granted forgiveness for sins.

But since Kelly is a forgiven Christian and doesn't think abortion is a sin, isn't she already forgiven even if it was a sin and done in ignorance, therefore your admonishment is in vain and totally uncalled for?

What if Kelly thinks something you are doing is a sin when you don't truly believe it is, like cursing her to hell for doing something she doesn't believe is a sin even after careful examination?

I don't think things are quite so black and white as you seem to think they are.