Common Bible Verses Used By Abortion Advocates
- Exodus 21:22-25: The life of the child does not have the same value as the mother.
- Genesis 2:7: Life begins at “first breath,” not at fertilization.
- Numbers 5:11: God aborts the baby of the adulterous woman.
- Exodus 11:5, 2 Kings 8:12, Psalm 137:9: God kills babies and orders them to be killed.
- Deuteronomy 28:18- God does not care about the sanctity of life
The Unbeliever Twists the Word of God
It should come as no surprise that unbelieving sinners in rebellion against their Creator would twist His Word. The perversion of sacred truth for devious ends is a hallmark of the ungodly. Scoffers and mockers distort the biblical text to excuse themselves from submission to its authority. This diversion culminates in the effort to lead others astray from the clarity of God’s revelation.
Atheists and agnostics attempt to isolate selected portions of the Bible and weaponize them against pro-life Christians. Their claim is that God allows and even endorses abortion in Scripture. One would call this kind of “proof texting” incompatible with an accurate representation of what the Bible actually says about abortion. Alas, Christians cannot expect God haters to properly divide the Word of truth given what the same Word tells us about their ability to do so. Consider the following:
Scriptural Examples
Ephesians 4:18-They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.
Romans 1:21-For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
1 Corinthians 2:14-The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
The Problem with Unbelievers Is Not Their Intellect, But Their Rejection of God
This reminds us that the fundamental problem with anyone outside of Christ is not their intellectual ability. Wisdom literature describes the one who says “there is no God” as a fool (Psalm 14:1, Proverbs 9:10). This does not mean that the unbeliever is stupid. It does mean that sin and its effects touch us to the core. This includes our reasoning. The issue is not a lack of intelligence; being called “foolish” is a moral indictment. All knowledge is covenantal and therefore not neutral. There are no brute facts. Rather, all things cohere and find their intelligibility in Christ (Colossians 1:17). True knowledge begins with Him.
It is important to clarify at the outset that unbelievers know the truth about God, but they reject Him. The consequence of such prideful ignorance is that their thinking becomes useless and unprofitable. Sure, they may “know things.” But they have no knowledge. They possess no justified, true belief for any conviction, which is why every atheist/agnostic must borrow from the Christian worldview to make sense of his own.
Please note what else the Scriptures tell us: they are ignorant DUE to the hardness of their hearts. Seared consciences produce flawed reasoning. Spiritual truths are spiritually discerned. This means that knowing what the Bible teaches requires a regenerate mind. Apart from new birth granted through the power of the Holy Spirit, discernment and understanding of divine truth are not possible.
Standing Firm When Faced With Alleged Contradictions
Christians that take God’s Word seriously ought to proceed with caution when dealing with supposed contradictions in Scripture. The care to be exercised is not out of fear, as if such discrepancies actually exist and cannot be accounted for. The point is one of fealty to their Lord. Standing on the Solid Rock, Bible believers are not to allow unbelievers to “put God in the dock,” as it were. God is not on trial and in need of explaining His actions to anyone.
The unbeliever is the one on trial. Therefore, Christians are encouraged not to engage in Bible studies with the spiritually rebellious, lest they cast their pearls before swine. Responses should be made, but not in such a way as to prove to the unbeliever’s satisfaction that God exists or to defend the fact that He does all His good pleasure.
However, our prayer is that this resource acts as a sure foundation from which to provide a Scripturally faithful defense against those that desire to undermine the Bible’s ethic for life. We must remember that in answering these objections, atheists, agnostics, and even progressive evangelicals are in need of the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ so that they can have His mind and approach the Bible rightly.
The goal in answering any objection is to get to the heart of the matter and address the person with an appeal to the image of God within them, demonstrating their need for restoration and calling them to repentance (a change of mind), that they would turn to faith in the Living God. In order to accomplish this task of faithful witness, we are charged with clearing the debris of truth that is being mishandled, so that others are not led into futility.
This resource will guide you through responding to some of the most common abuses of the Bible that unbelievers attempt to use to support abortion and oppose the protection of the unborn. We will deal with each objection by establishing the context of the verse in question, refuting the supposed interpretation, and then providing the positive statement of what the text actually teaches so that you, the Christian, may be confident to answer the misuse of God’s Word with clarity.
“The Fetus is Property, Not a Person”
- Exodus 21:22-25
22 “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. 23 But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Objection: The Bible orders the death penalty for murder of a human being, but not for the expulsion of a fetus. Therefore, the unborn are not persons.
Response: God treats preborn persons the same as born persons, even requiring similar justice for criminal harm done to either.
Unveiling the Application of Biblical Case Laws
This section of Scripture deals with application of the moral principles found in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). Case law examples are given to us to flesh out these principles for real life situations. Case law takes the general equity of the precepts and penalties contained in the law of God and applies them in a manner appropriate to the crime that has been committed.
This system of legislation found in the Pentateuch formed the foundation for the legal system of the United States. Little dispute exists about the perversion of our current justice system. However, the basis for all of the blessings of liberty and justice that America has historically enjoyed come from the Bible.
In this situation, two men are quarreling in the presence of a pregnant woman. In the course of their negligence they strike her, resulting in what detractors say is a miscarriage (more on this in a minute), but is actually the premature delivery of the child she carries. Pro-abortion advocates will cite this text in order to claim that the punishment demanded for harm to the woman is greater than what is to be rendered for harm to the unborn child.
The importance of this should not be missed. After all, the entire pro-life position rests on the assertion that unborn children are human persons and therefore worthy of the same protections enjoyed by everyone else (even if the modern-day pro-life movement has been inconsistent in applying this to the legal realm). The line of argumentation goes like this: “if a miscarriage happens there is only a fine, but if the woman dies then it must be ’life for life.’”
The question to be answered is: does the Bible really assign a lower value to babies in the womb than to other human beings?
To be sure, the principle on display in this text is that of Lex Talionis (eye for eye), which means that the punishment to be meted out by the civil magistrate must be commensurate to the crime, all the way up to capital punishment. The opposing side argues that this only applies to the mother. Properly understanding this passage and defending it hinges upon a couple factors.
- The character of God
- The meaning of the word translated in the phrase “her children come out”
- The principle of arguing from the lesser to the greater
Equal Justice For All
We need to establish at the beginning of our response the clear teaching of Scripture that God is impartial (Deuteronomy 10:17, Job 34:19, Acts 10:34, Romans 2:11, Galatians 2:6, 1 Peter 1:17). He does not show favoritism toward one group of people over another (James 2:8-9). Justice is equal under his law for all (Exodus 12:49).
It is upon the basis of His Holy character that justice (and mercy) both rest (Leviticus 19:15, Deuteronomy 1:17, Psalm 82:2-3, Acts 15:9, Romans 3:22-24). God can no more alter or pervert the standards of His own law than he can divide himself (Psalm 89:34). His Word does not distinguish between persons on the basis of arbitrary characteristics (size, age, dependence, location, status, etc.).
To say that He would demand a different standard of justice for a mother and her unborn child would be to fundamentally deny the unchangeableness of His character, undermine the pro-life position, and fail to condemn the injustice of abortion altogether! The Bible itself makes no distinction between the child in the womb and the little one outside the womb.
For example, the same Greek word (brephos) is used in the New Testament to describe both born and unborn (Luke 1:41, 18:15). The teaching of Scripture is that God treats people with the same value in and out of the womb. The unborn child possesses the same worth as the born child. If there is equal value, by necessity there must be equal protection.
This is precisely what we have in the text from Exodus. Notice the passage does not differentiate between mother and child when it comes to the prescription: “but if there is harm.” Harm for whom? The mother or the baby? Yes. Both. If there is harm to either, justice must be served. The mother’s life is not worth more than the child’s life.
Misconceptions That Lead to False Assumptions
Furthermore, there is nothing in the context of the passage that justifies the assumption that the baby is dead, as is often claimed. Yes, “her children come out” is translated as “miscarriage” in the NASB. However, as we will see with the text in the Numbers passage, we must be on the lookout for unbelievers who use the Bible translation that best supports their misleading assertions.
Here is the issue: does the word “miscarriage” have the same meaning as the Hebrew word used in the text? The word here literally means: “the child comes forth.” Its most common Biblical usage speaks of the coming forth of a living thing, in general, and a child in particular (Genesis 1:24, 8:17, 15:4, 25:25-26, 1 Kings 8:19, Jeremiah 1:5, 2 Kings 20:18).
Those who say this is talking about the miscarriage (death) of the baby simply have no basis to do so. The passage is referring to a child born prematurely and not to a stillbirth where the child is dead. So, why the sanction of a fine? If a baby is struck so that he/she comes out prematurely, there likely would have been costs for medical complications requiring restitution, not to mention the trauma for the mother.
Lastly, there remains something vitally important to grasp. The case law example given in Scripture is dealing with unintentional harm to the baby in the womb. Negligent activity on the part of the perpetrators that leads to injuring the image of God in the womb is categorically considered a criminal act.
The question before us is: if God so values the child in the womb that even unintentionally harming them could lead to something as serious as “life for life,” then what does that say for those who, with full knowledge and premeditated intent, commit the crime of murder against the child in the womb? Let it be known that the Bible affords the unborn a level of protection that is second to none.
To navigate the discussion Christians may have in fielding this objection, it is important to understand that the assumptions used by unbelievers to twist the meaning of the text to support the idea that the unborn are not fully human or worthy of equal protection are unfounded. The plain reading of the verse refutes any such notions and forms a powerful argument for the value of life in the womb.
“Human Life Begins at First Breath”
2. Genesis 2:7
7 then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Objection: The Bible teaches that life begins when a baby draws its first breath, not at the moment of conception.
Response: This verse describes the unique creation of the first adult man, Adam. This is different from the process of reproduction by which human beings are made.
Pro Abortion Revisionism Has No Biblical Basis
The consistent pro-life position is that life begins from the moment of fertilization and must be protected until natural death. Both the Bible and biological science are abundantly clear on this point. This has not stopped pro-abortion advocates from engaging in revisionism to support their erroneous self-deceptions on this issue. Phrases such as: “life begins at first breath” are no more than attempts to justify their religious commitment to abortion on demand. They have no Biblical validity or scientific foundation.
This verse from Genesis is often cited to buttress the idea that a fetus is not a “person” until they have exited the womb. The claim is that the Bible teaches that life begins at first breath because Adam was not considered alive until God breathed the breath of life into him. The first thing to note about this verse is what precedes it in the Creation account:
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.
Genesis 1:27-28
We will make three observations. First, man is uniquely created in the image of God, distinguishing him as the crown of creation over all things the Lord made. Second, man was created male and female. Third, the normative way God expands his dominion over the face of the earth is through procreation and begetting of godly offspring.
All three of these points are explicitly rejected by our ungodly culture. This may seem obvious, but context is key. Man is not just another animal as evolution, materialism and atheism teach. His worth is inherent to his being, and indeed is present even before a beating heart.
There is an unbiblical assumption in the abortion-minded person that existence comes before essence. This assumption holds that our personhood is a status we earn and not something that we possess inherently until we have “lived” or had “consciousness,” or a “lived experience.” On the other hand, the Bible teaches that our lives have value even prior to our conception! Every human embryo God actively forms in the womb accords with His predestining purposes.
“Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.
Jeremiah 1:5
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me..
Galatians 1:15-16
Consider the words of David that are used to support the pro-life ethic:
For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.
In fitting together life in the womb, God forms all of our days even before our hearts begin beating, infusing meaning into every moment. These astonishing passages demonstrate that what makes us worthy of protection rests not on what we have done to earn it, but on who we are as creatures made in God’s image.
The question of when life begins is also Biblically defined. The Lord grants conception (Ruth 4:13). There are numerous instances of the Bible referring to men and women as being conceived and then born. In God’s eyes, life begins at conception, not when they are born (as if the birth canal of a woman can magically confer personhood)!
Biology Militates Against the Religiously Grounded Worldview of Abortion
Modern science, catching up to Biblical revelation, further supports this reality. According to the Essentials of Embryology: “The zygote, formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.” This is information we have known for a long time, despite the efforts of pro-abortion medical leaders to change the definition of when life begins. The Genesis text is describing the creation of Adam, the first man. Adam was not carried in the womb of his mother, nor did he experience birth because he was created as an adult. He was unique in that he was not subject to the ordinary processes of reproduction the way that all of us are.
To use this verse to say otherwise is simply a category error and convenient neglect of the Creation account that precedes it. The work of God is presented as that of a master craftsman, sculpting the first man from the dust before breathing “the breath of life” into him. Depicted in this is the twofold human reality of material and immaterial. The Bible teaches that we are both matter and spirit. We live our lives as embodied creatures, affording our bodies an immeasurable level of dignity.
On the other hand, the pro-abortion view, with its Gnostic foundations, sees the preborn body as expendable and inconsequential to the question of one’s “personhood.” In this view, the bodies of babies are reduced to disposable pieces of matter which can be subject to the murderous intentions of their own parents or abortion clinic butchers. How so? Because until a baby is said to have achieved their “personhood” (however this is arbitrarily defined), it may be a human, but it is not a person worthy of our protection. Only the Christian worldview provides the holistic ethic that says all human beings are valuable on every level by virtue of their being in the Imago Dei.
The claim that “life begins at first breath” is thereby unfounded. The creation of the first man was utterly unique and intensely personal. It shows that human beings are in a class set apart from all other created things like animals and beasts of the earth. Functioning as God’s image bearers, men and women were commissioned to take dominion over creation, exercising God’s servant lordship in all areas of life, beginning with the ordinary process of generation. The Creator ordained that through Adam the entire human race would be born (Acts 17:26). This process of male and female becoming one flesh is the exclusive act whereby new human beings are created within the womb and enter into the world.
“God Aborts Babies”
3. Numbers 5:27-28
And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people. But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall conceive children.
Objection: God promotes abortion and even gives instructions on how to perform one.
Response: This text describes a test that a priest could administer to vindicate a wife from the false accusations of her jealous husband.
Unraveling the Ordeal of Bitter Water
Abortion advocates and atheists love to use what is known as “The Trial by Bitter Water” from the book of Numbers to argue that God calls for abortion. The passage tells us of the test a priest would perform in the case of a woman accused of adultery by her husband. The ordeal was meant to either confirm the accusation or vindicate her innocence.
The trial itself was a gracious measure in God’s law that protected the woman from false accusation, thus securing her from the threat of a vengeful man set on divorce (Deuteronomy 22:19). The woman was brought before the Priest, who would mix together holy water and dust (symbolizing the Holiness of God) which was then ingested by the woman. The curses for unfaithfulness would also be recited by the Priest, written down, and then washed into the water itself. If the water affected the woman, visible signs would accompany her guilt (Numbers 5:19-28).
The language used to describe the consequence of unfaithfulness is what has been twisted and weaponized against Christians:
27 And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people.
Those who would presume to indict God for the crime of abortion argue that this verse proves that he intentionally causes the miscarriage of a preborn child. To be clear, Christians believe that abortion is murder, a claim pro-abortionists say is steeped in hypocrisy because of texts like this one. Ultimately, it is a clear understanding of the language being used in the passage that determines the correct understanding. However, there is something more central to establish before examining such things.
The Creator of All Life Determines Right and Wrong
39 ‘See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.
Deuteronomy 32:39
Christians must be reminded of the Biblical teaching that God is the Creator of everyone and everything that exists (Genesis 1:1). He is the source of all life and therefore determines right and wrong. As Creator, God has every right to take any life that He pleases for whatever reason He has ordained and cannot be accused of any injustice in the process. After all, He is God. Human beings often take life in an unjustified manner.
No such charge can be made against God. He creates for His own glory and disposes of His creatures in accordance with the ends that He has ordained for them. He is the Just Judge of all the earth and always does what is right (Genesis 18:25). God knows the number of days given to us before we are born because He has written every one of them in His secret counsel (Psalm 139:13-16). No believer should be ashamed of such basic Biblical truths.
It is also important to be reminded that due to the condition of sin and its consequences, human beings live in a fallen world where things like miscarriages can occur. Children die by “natural cause” outside the will of their parents. Losing a child brings much pain and grief. But this is altogether different than knowingly and intentionally procuring the death of one’s own child through abortion. In one case, the mother and father bear no culpability and ought to be the objects of love and compassion as they heal from the death of their child. On the other hand, the mother that murdered her unborn child ought to be subject to the same justice as someone who murders her born child, along with all other accomplices and responsible parties.
Using Selected Quotations to Support An Agenda
Turning to the passage at hand, what is telling is that nowhere does it say that the woman facing the allegation of adultery is pregnant. The favored translation used to make the case that we are dealing with miscarriage comes from the 2011 New International Version of the Bible:
21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
Is miscarriage really what is in view? The phrase “your womb miscarries” is not translated this way in any other version of the Bible. Rather, the “thigh falling away,” or the “womb shriveling” is a more accurate translation of the original Hebrew. This is confirmed by the fact that later in the text we are told that if it is found the woman is innocent of adultery, she will be able to conceive children. But if she is guilty, the justice of God is meted out in accordance with the offense.
The same sexual organs that she sins with would become the objects of judgment and no longer function as intended. Barrenness may seem a mild penalty to our modern culture, but during this time to be childless was an epic catastrophe. Having no heirs or lineage was considered a curse. This runs directly counter to the values of our current apostate society that chooses barrenness instead of fruitfulness.
It should be apparent that abortion advocates intentionally quote from this version of the Bible. Their strategy is to point out an inconsistency on the part of Christians by showing that God supports abortion. This fallen reasoning flows from a heart at war with its Creator, desiring complete autonomy. Such a heart seeks to assume for itself all of the prerogatives of deity. Sinful man wants to shed innocent blood and take life because he hates God. Unable to strike at Him, he settles for the next best thing: His image in the world.
Men and women want to be like the Most High and decide who lives and who dies. They are at enmity with the law of God and unable to submit to His commands. Guilt and shame are the unavoidable results of such suppression of the truth. The need for atonement remains. Instead of embracing the once-for-all sacrifice for sin found in the cross of Christ, men and women offer up their own sons and daughters in an attempt to atone for their guilt. But God is the only one authorized to give and take away life at will. When he does so, He is being God. When human beings do so for their own selfish gain, they are grasping to ascend to the divine.
“God is Not So Pro-Life”
4. Psalm 137:9, Exodus 11:4, 2 Kings 8:12, Deuteronomy 28:18,53
Addressing Passages That Threaten to Kill Children
These final passages can all be examined in the same section. Together, they constitute ammunition for unbelievers to advance the claim that God promises to kill both preborn and newborn children. Before dealing with this assertion, we would do well to remember the Biblical teaching outlined in the previous heading. God is in Himself the only standard for truth and is completely just in all his actions. This means that for the Christian, there are no such things as “problem passages” in the Bible. If this is the Word of God, then it is the truth that demands our lives and understanding be conformed to the revelation. We dare not attempt to make the truth suit our liking or sensitivities. That said, let us take these passages one at a time.
Psalm 137:9
9 Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!
Objection: God promises to dash infants to pieces and tear open pregnant women.
Response: Israel prayed prayers of imprecation, asking God to do to their enemies in battle what their enemies did to their own children.
Longing for Justice in the Face of Suffering
Psalm 137 contains what is known as an imprecation. Imprecatory Psalms are a type of lament wherein the covenant people of God call upon Him to curse their (and His) enemies. These cries for divine justice are expressed both individually and corporately, highlighting an intense longing in the face of suffering and injustice. Many Christians today believe that these Psalms should not be sung by modern believers living after the cross of Christ. This is a well-meaning, but misguided error. While the language of imprecatory Psalms may strike modern readers as “harsh,” they are Holy Scripture. As such, they are a gift to all believers throughout every generation.
If all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17), then imprecatory Psalms equip Christians to properly curse the enemies of God. Contrary to modern sensibilities, this is not in opposition to the command of Jesus to love our enemies. God’s Word does not contain doublespeak.
The Psalms are the inspired song book for the church. These are songs we are meant to be singing, even if the ones that strike us as foreign demand from us a more mature understanding. Imprecatory Psalms are not songs that long for some kind of mob justice. They represent the Scriptural appeal that vengeance belongs to the Lord and He will judge justly. As Christians, we are to pray for our enemies, either that God would convert them to the faith or see to it that they are cursed for their opposition to His Kingdom. These inspired songs remind us that loving our enemies is never at odds with appealing to justice. In an age where the Church has reduced the love of God to sentimentality, we should allow Scripture to direct our practice.
From the context, this song finds its setting in the Babylonian exile that God promised would befall His people for their disobedience to His covenant word. The writer is lamenting over the destruction of the nation and recounting the torment by their adversaries who required them to sing songs of their fallen nation. In response to the taunts of their enemies, they call down the judgment of God to repay their actions in accordance with what they justly deserve. At this point it is important to recall the principle of Lex Talionis outlined earlier. This principle is echoed throughout the entire Bible. The punishment for the wrong committed fits and is in proportion to the crime. With the measure one has used to judge others, they will be judged in turn (Matthew 7:2).
So, it is evident that what is taking place is the prayers of the Israelites in exile that Yahweh would treat the Babylonian children with the same ruthlessness that the Babylonians showed against Israel in dashing their little ones to pieces. The Psalmist is saying, let them receive the same punishment that they inflicted on Israel. This is not God promising to kill babies; it is the Psalmist praying for what the Babylonians did to them to be returned in war. We find other examples of imprecation and war judgments in the prophets (Hosea 9:10-16, Isaiah 13:18).
The Plague on the Firstborn in Exodus
Exodus 11:4 So Moses said, “Thus says the Lord: ‘About midnight I will go out in the midst of Egypt, and every firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sits on his throne, even to the firstborn of the slave girl who is behind the handmill, and all the firstborn of the cattle.
Objection: God is unjust for striking down the firstborn of Egypt.
Response: God deals with the oppressors of His people in the way that they dealt with His, executing His just judgment on a pagan nation.
Corporate Guilt and National Judgment
Unbelievers view God’s judgments on Egypt as another example of hypocrisy on the part of Christians. To be sure, there are several instances in Scripture where God brings vengeance upon His enemies in dramatic fashion. Sodom and Gomorrah is one such example. The reason this event is singled out by skeptics is that it involves the children of those in leadership over Egypt. Briefly, this is the final plague of judgment Yahweh brings on Egypt with the taking of their firstborn sons. As in the case of the other mighty works, the Lord exposes the futility of Egypt’s gods who claimed power over different areas of life.
In climactic fashion, God shows Himself superior to Pharoah, the self-styled deity-king who believed he had power over life and death itself, evidenced by his own evil decree that all the firstborn sons of Israel were to be slaughtered (Exodus 1:16). God mirrors this act in sending His own angel to carry out the same sentence against the Egyptians that they had brought on the covenant people as a means of population control (Exodus 12:29-30). So we see that as the One who is Sovereign over the lives of all His creatures, the LORD judges His adversaries, bringing on them the same curses they intended to inflict upon His people. This is not hypocrisy. This is God being God and dealing with pagan nations the same way they dealt with His people.
Key to understanding an event like this is a recognition of corporate guilt. This is the Biblical teaching that God not only judges individuals eternally, but entire people groups temporally for disobedience to His Word. In executing this judgment, God uses means to bring such events to pass, as with the Canaanites, whose wickedness had reached such epic proportions that the people of Israel were commanded to completely destroy entire peoples, leaving none alive. In the case of Egypt, Pharaoh represented Egypt, and the people believed him to be a god. Therefore, the whole nation was treated as responsible for the extended abuse and mistreatment of the Hebrews. While the angel of death took the firstborn of Egypt, the Israelites remained safe due to the painting of their door frames with the blood of a spotless lamb (Exodus 12:1-28). This pointed forward to the True Passover Lamb that would bear the corporate responsibility of His people’s sins at the cross as their representative.
2 Kings 8:12
12 And Hazael said, “Why does my lord weep?” He answered, “Because I know the evil that you will do to the people of Israel. You will set on fire their fortresses, and you will kill their young men with the sword and dash in pieces their little ones and rip open their pregnant women.”
Objection: God rips open pregnant mothers.
Response: Elisha explains a prophecy to Hazael about actions he will take in war when he becomes king after the death of Ben-Hadad.
Context is Key
Once again, the accusation leveled by those who abuse passages like this is that Yahweh is the one who rips open pregnant women. Contextual understanding of the passage clears up the issue rather quickly. Ben-Hadad, king of Syria, sends his servant Hazael to the prophet Elisha to ask if God will heal the king from his illness. Elisha gives a response to the question but also recounts the evil that will befall Jerusalem at the hands of Hazael when he takes the throne. The text itself calls these actions evil.
The prophet giving Hazael the details about what will take place does not mean that God condones what will befall Israel. Texts like this hold together two essential Biblical truths:
- God is sovereign over all the events of history
- Man is responsible for his own sinful actions
The cross of Christ is the pre-eminent example of God’s foreordination and man’s responsibility. God planned it before the foundation of the earth and yet, fallen men did according to what was in their hearts. No one made them do anything. Despite their evil actions, God overruled all of it, superintending that His ultimate purposes would be perfectly realized in accordance with His plan.
Acts 4:27-28 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.
God made a world where He not only knows but ordains all things that come to pass, but His creatures are still culpable and make choices that reflect the desires of their fallen hearts.
Deuteronomy 28:18,53
Objection: Because God invokes the curses of His own covenant law, He is not concerned for the sanctity of human life.
Response: This passage describes the self-destructive consequences that take place when Israel habitually disobeys God and pursues idolatry.
Consequences for Covenant Violation
God clearly laid out His covenantal curses that would come on Israel for their disobedience to Him. Among these were the consequences of exile and subjugation at the hands of foreign nations. God describes the horrors of the city being besieged at the hands of its enemies. The dire situation is punctuated not only by what the Assyrians would do to them but by what they would do to themselves. In an act of grisly barbarism, the gentlest souls turned to cannibalism as the women of Israel devoured their own offspring, hoarding the meal from other family members.
Ironically, the pro-abortion apologist is the one that argues in favor of mothers disposing of their own children if they are in a crisis. In their attempt to point out inconsistencies in the character of God, their outrage caves under its own weight as they shout for the freedom of women to murder their unborn children, even up to the moment of birth.
