Who Twists God’s Word for Abortion?

Washington Post columnist’s attempt to dehumanize preborn people by twisting Scripture and ignoring millennia of Christian teaching against abortion.

It’s amazing the way that those who want to justify immorality will use the Bible to do so! Often such people will take a passage that teaches one thing and twist it to “mean” the opposite of what the text clearly teaches. And a recent commentary in The Washington Post is a perfect example of such twisting of the Scriptures.

The authors argue that Christians are against “abortion rights” (there is no such thing—rights are endowed by our Creator, who said, “Thou shalt not murder,” Exodus 20:13) because of two verses from the Law (Exodus 21:22–23), which they believe are often mistranslated.

How absurd. Christians who believe the Bible are against abortion because of the totality of Scripture, which teaches that (1) humans are fearfully and wonderfully made (Psalm 139:14) in God’s image (Genesis 1:27); (2) murder is wrong (Genesis 9:6); (3) we’re to speak up for those who have no voice (Proverbs 31:8); (4) God hates those who shed innocent blood (Proverbs 6:16–17); (5) human life in the womb is described with the same terminology as children already born (Luke 1:41, 18:15); and (6) a human life has so much value that the Creator of the world stepped into history to pay the price for our sin so we might be saved from its consequences! While abortion advocates say we should sacrifice the life of a child for the desires of the mother, father, or others, the gospel says lay down your life for the good of another. That’s just the short version of why so many Christians are (or should be!) vehemently opposed to the slaughter of unborn children in their mother’s wombs!

But what about their argument that there’s a mistranslation in Exodus 21? AiG’s Tim Chaffey, the content manager for our attractions, thoroughly debunks that claim:

Put simply, The Washington Post commentary focuses on the wrong word in Exodus 21:22–23 and betrays an ignorance of Christianity. Since it’s in The Washington Post, we can have little doubt that they aren’t going to handle Scripture faithfully. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this paper wouldn’t publish a commentary supportive of pro-life using Scripture!

So, the argument in the article is that Christians cite only these two verses in Exodus to make a case against abortion:

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life.

Apparently, they’ve never heard of Genesis 1:27, Psalm 139, Luke 1, etc. Never mind the biological fact that the baby is a living human being from fertilization!

Apparently, they’ve never heard of Genesis 1:27, Psalm 139, Luke 1, etc. Never mind the biological fact that the baby is a living human being from fertilization!

Back to the commentary: the authors claim that the keyword in Exodus 21:22–23 is the Hebrew ‘ason, translated as “serious injury” (NET), “harm” (NKJV, ESV), “injury” (NASB), etc. The LXX (Greek Old Testament) translators, who were generally very good in the Pentateuch, chose the word exeikonizomai, which The Washington Post authors say should be translated as “from the image” (ek as “out of, from” and eikon as “image”). While, as they say, that is a literal rendering, we need to look at the context to see what it means. The various LXX versions in English that I have each translate it as “not fully formed” or “imperfectly formed.” In other words, the idea is that the child who is born has some sort of deformity (“not in the form of”). This is obvious given the imposition of the lex talionis (law of retribution, i.e., eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, etc.) in the following verses.

There really is no difference in meaning between the Hebrew and Greek. The Hebrew says that if the mother gives birth and the child has been seriously harmed, then the man who hit her shall pay eye for an eye, limb for limb, etc. The LXX says that if the mother gives birth and the child is deformed (meaning not fully formed), then the man who hit her will pay eye for an eye, limb for limb.

The real mistranslation in this verse occurs just a couple words earlier. (This is what I focused on in a 2011 article I wrote.) Some English translations (RSV, NRSV, and Amplified are the only ones I found) use the word “miscarriage” instead of referring to premature birth. By doing this, they make it seem as if it’s the mother’s injuries or life that are in view in the following verses. But this is not the meaning of the word or the point of the passage. It all has to do with what happens to the child. If there is no injury, then the man pays a fine. If the child is injured or dies, then the attacker pays eye for eye, life for life. You will notice that The Washington Post piece uses “miscarriage” in both “translations” of the passage, even though the word does not refer to miscarriage. The Hebrew and Greek both have a meaning of something like “the child(ren) go out.”

Think about how foolish the argument is in their article. The authors claim that Exodus 21:22 states either of the following:

Hebrew: If a man hits a pregnant woman so that she miscarries but there is no further harm (to the mother), then the man pays a fine imposed by the judges. (My 2011 article rebuts this view.)

Greek: If a man hits a pregnant woman so that she miscarries but the child is not deformed, then the man pays a fine. But if the (dead) child is deformed, then the man dies.

What? How ridiculous is that argument? If the child is already dead, why would it matter if the child is deformed or not? Obviously, the verse is not talking about a dead child (unless caused by the attacker). It is talking about a child who is born prematurely and may or may not be injured/fully formed as a result. Rather than being a verse that could be used in favor of abortion, this passage teaches that the unborn has identical value to the one already born.

How ridiculous is that argument? If the child is already dead, why would it matter if the child is deformed or not?

The writers of the article make other egregious errors. For example, they write:

Theology, based on that translation, soon followed. It’s easy to see how Saint Augustine, working out of the Septuagint, could develop his theory of ensoulment from here; a fetus early in formation, or in the early stages of gestation, did not have a soul, and thus it was not considered manslaughter to cause its accidental miscarriage. A fetus that was more “formed” did have a soul, so a person who caused its miscarriage would be, indeed, liable as though they had killed a fully formed person. Saint Thomas Aquinas, too, pointed to the moment of “quickening” — the moment at which fetal movement could be detected by the pregnant person — as the point of ensoulment.

Sorry, but Augustine wasn’t “working out of the Septuagint.” He struggled with Greek and didn’t know Hebrew. He may have been commenting on the LXX here, but he certainly wasn’t “working out of it” as his preferred translation. Later in life, he became a little better with Greek, but it is well known that he worked out of the Vetus Latina (the Old Latin prior to the Vulgate). The Vetus Latina was based on the LXX, so the statement isn’t necessarily 100% wrong, but notice how they are trying to connect a supposed mistranslation in the LXX (when really it means the same thing) to Christian theology, as though the church is basing its views on Augustine. In the Fearfully and Wonderfully Made exhibit at the Creation Museum, which makes a biblical and scientific case for the sanctity of unborn life from the moment of fertilization, we don’t ever cite Augustine or Aquinas. We cite Psalm 139; Genesis 1:26–27 and 9:6; Luke 1:43–44; Matthew 1:23; and Exodus 21:22–25.

Besides, three hundred years prior to Augustine, the Didache (Teaching of the Apostles, late first–early second century) stated, “[Y]ou shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born” (Didache 2:2). The Epistle of Barnabas (late first century–early second—not the 16th century pseudepigraphal Gospel of Barnabas) states:

Thou shalt not doubt whether a thing shall be or not be. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain. Thou shalt love thy neighbor more than thine own soul. Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion, nor again shalt thou kill it when it is born. Thou shalt not withhold thy hand from thy son or daughter, but from their youth thou shalt teach them the fear of God. (19:5)

But never mind those details! Christians are supposedly against abortion, the columnists argue, because Augustine supposedly relied upon a supposedly unreliable translation of Exodus 21:22, and if we were to just listen to the liberal theologians’ non-sensical understanding of the passage, then we would “see” that the Bible doesn’t speak against abortion at all.

It’s so sad that people are so willing to twist Scripture in a way that leads to the murder of babies.

God’s Word is clear—unborn persons are persons, made in God’s image, with equal value to persons who are further along in their development.

God’s Word is clear—unborn persons are persons, made in God’s image, with equal value to persons who are further along in their development.

You can discover more about the sanctity of each and every human life in our phenomenal pro-life exhibit at the Creation Museum, Fearfully and Wonderfully Made, or in our new book based on that exhibit (featuring stunning photographs of our beautiful models of babies at various stages of development), Fearfully and Wonderfully Made.

Source: Answers in Genesis

New Bank to Support Christian Charities, Not Planned Parenthood

According to Christian evangelist and entrepreneur Nick Vujicic, “90% of banks ‘give philanthropically toward abortion.’” Ninety percent! This means nine out of ten banks are donating towards the murder of unborn children by giving to places such as Planned Parenthood, a company that wants to kill as many children in the womb as they can and celebrate this as a “woman’s choice,” “reproductive freedom,” or “healthcare.” Well, in response to this, Vujicic is co-starting his own bank, potentially to be named ProLifeBank.

The bank’s website reads, “Noah built an ark to save lives. We’re building a bank to do the same.” Rather than supporting hands that shed innocent blood, this new “for-giving” (instead of “for-profit”) bank will donate “50% of net profits to Judeo-Christian-aligned-nonprofit organizations to further the Kingdom of God.”

It’s shocking that such a large percentage of banks chose to put some of their philanthropic monies towards the violent destruction of children in their mother’s wombs—there’s absolutely nothing “philanthropic” about the murder of helpless babies! But it’s a reminder that the broad way (the world) is against God.

And it’s also worth noting that PayPal, a large financial institution, recently announced it will “fight extremism” on their platform. By current definitions, those who believe what the Bible says about life, sexuality, and marriage will quite likely be labeled “extremists” by such anti-God groups.

We are seeing more people recognizing the need to deal with the anti-Christian worldview permeating businesses and companies and do something about it!

Source: Answers in Genesis

Answers News: October 6, 2021

Boston owner sells skinny house; Scans put Turkish Durupinar formation back into the headlines; Western Washington University segregates students based on skin color; Evolutionists argue about meaning of human footprints fossilized in New Mexico; William Lane Craig endorses old mytho-history heresy . . . and other stories reviewed during this October 6, 2021, broadcast of Answers News.

For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Matthew 24:37-39

Source: Answers in Genesis

Answers News: April 12, 2021

Saturn’s moons proclaim Jesus’ majestic power; Heidelberg evolutionists wants to change cephelod timeline by 30 million years; Reverend senetor tweets and deletes; Another story about gene transfer smells fishy; Alberta authorities fence off church property and use police to prevent assembly; Students sue US government in effort to defund Christian colleges who refuse to embrace LGBTQIA+ doctrine; Study confirms rapid adaptation in zebras . . . and other stories reviewed during this April 12, 2021, broadcast of Answers News.

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.

John 3:17-19

Source: Answers in Genesis

Who Leads Harvard?

Canadian weatherman’s dog joins broadcast; Booksellers apologize for true books; Palaeontologists spin teeth into three new creatures with backstories; Biologists find even less time for plants to evolve moisture-regulating stomata; President insists Texas abortion limits are “outrageous” and “extreme”; Dozens of Harvard chaplains unanimously elect atheist leader; Team led by graduate student claims that intelligently designed antibiotic treatment follows mindless evolutionary principles . . . and other stories reviewed during this September 8, 2021, broadcast of Answers News.

Source: Answers in Genesis

Who Blends Animal and Human DNA?

Connecticut bear steals package; Lawmakers fail to block research into human-animal hybrids; Survey shows correlation between worldview and belief in alien life; HuffPost tries to marginalize Ken Ham; Geologists try to explain why millions of years of rocks are missing; Harvard biologists publish a statistical model to prop up their evolutionary worldview; Fewer Americans assert a Christian worldview . . . and other stories reviewed during this August 30, 2021, broadcast of Answers News.

Source: Answers in Genesis

What does Disney teach?

Seifi invents straw to cure hiccups; Disney broadcasts their “Pride Celebration Spectacular” for kids; Queer authors publish children’s book about abortion; Egyptian farmer unearths 2,600 year-old stone tablet; Evolutionists mutate mice to reduce purine production and use results to prop up stories about neanderthals; Biologists discover 71 new ‘imprinted’ genes in the mouse genome; New Zealand sends male weightlifter, Gavin, to compete in women’s Olympics as Laurel and other articles reviewed in this June 28, 2021, broadcast of Answers News.

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!”

Matthew 18:1-7

Source: Answers in Genesis

Dinosaurs—a Divine Deception?

Some suggest dinosaurs are a big hoax, but God is not a liar—discover the 7 Ages of Dinosaurs so you can know the truth about these “fearfully great lizards.”

Dinosaurs—fact or fiction? A recent article highlighted the beliefs of some ultra-Orthodox Jews regarding dinosaurs. According to this article, the author was taught, “God put those fossils in the earth so you would think the world is billions of years old . . . There were never actually dinosaurs. God simply wanted to supply us with a believable ecosystem.” So, did dinosaurs actually exist or were the fossilized bones planted by God to confuse us?

Well, God is not the author of deception. It simply isn’t consistent with the character of God, who is truth, to create something merely to confuse or deceive us. But we don’t have to try and creatively explain away dinosaurs—the Bible gives us the history we need to understand them.

In my children’s book Dinosaurs for Kids, I teach kids about the 7 Ages of Dinosaurs. This helps children build a proper understanding of history—using the Bible as the history book of the universe—and understand how that history explains dinosaurs. Here are those 7 ages:

  1. Formed. God created dinosaurs on day six of creation week, along with all the other land creatures and man. It’s only evolutionary assumptions—based on the wrong starting point, man’s fallible word—that gives people the idea that dinosaurs couldn’t possibly have lived with man. But we must reject man’s reasoning, and, instead, start with the only perfect, eye-witness account of history, the Word of God.
  2. Fearless. Originally, God’s creation was “very good” (Genesis 1:31), and mankind and the animals were all vegetarian (Genesis 1:29). Dinosaurs didn’t eat other animals and were no danger to man. Sharp teeth and claws were originally used to shred and chomp various plants and fruits. It wasn’t until after sin that death and carnivory came into creation.
  3. Fallen. When Adam and Eve sinned, they broke God’s original “very good” creation. Death came into the world because of that sin, and animals began to eat each other.
  4. Flood. About 4,350 years ago, God judged man’s increasing wickedness with a global flood. As I teach children, if there really was a global flood, we’d expect to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. And that’s exactly what we find! The fossils—including the dinosaurs—are a testimony to the worldwide catastrophe of the global flood. Now, Noah took two of every kind of land-dwelling, air-breathing animals, seven pairs of some, aboard the ark. This would’ve included dinosaurs (and probably juveniles for the few dinosaurs that grow very large).
  5. Faded. After the flood, dinosaur kinds slowly began to die out probably due to climate change, human hunting, or changes in their environments (the same reasons creatures die out today!). Slowly, the memory of dinosaurs began to fade, but it never completely disappeared—it remains (in exaggerated form) in dragon legends found around the world, art, and recorded even in the Bible, in the book of Job, chapter 41 (“behemoth” was likely a sauropod dinosaur).
  6. Found. In 1841 dinosaurs were first named “dinosaurs” (or “fearfully great lizards”) by Sir Richard Owen as scientists began to dig them up and study their fossils.
  7. Fiction. Sadly, many scientists interpreted, and continue to interpret, these fossils through the lens of millions of years and evolution. Suddenly dinosaurs became a great mystery, belonging to a lost world. But they’re only a great mystery when we ignore the history God’s given us in his Word!

Dinosaurs aren’t some kind of deception from God to confuse us. They’re amazing creatures God made on day six of creation week that were buried during the flood and slowly faded from memory. You can learn more in this article: “What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs?

Source: Answers in Genesis

Science Confirms The Bible

Learn about DNA as evidence for the infinite God, the basics of genetics and natural selection as they relate to biblical “kinds,” the origin of so-called races, the truth about Cain’s wife, evidence for the worldwide Flood, the actual time of the Ice Age, literal vs. figurative creation days, the origin of death, dating methods, and more. The Bible is true. Science confirms it, and with the help of this video, you and your teens will be better equipped to defend it!

Source: Answers In Genesis