I ask because I can't find a darn thing. And if it isn't addressed in the Bible how important can it be?
.
Moderator: Moderators
Which translation is "my paraphrasing translation?" Do you mean the NRSV that I quoted earlier, one of my personal translations, or one of my interpretive explanations? Could you point to what you mean?2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amYet it doesn't assume the scripture is only talking about the woman as your paraphrasing translation does.
You haven't offered any support for that, either.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amTo include the child with the mother if a serious injury occurs is in harmony with the rest of the Bible on the view of lives of men, women and children.
That's fine. We disagree about what "accurate" means.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amThat's your opinion. I see as the most accurate. The additions are in brackets.Furthermore, it's supposed to be a revision of Young's Literal Translation, but the YLT doesn't add anything to the verse and the "revision" has made that verse less literal. That makes it pretty much the least trustworthy translation you have there.
Which translation and which added words?2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amYour translation doesn't even have footnote that miscarriage can mean premature birth or brackets around the added words.
It does. That one's not a bad translation, either.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amEven the Contemporary English Version has a footnote that says, "suffers a miscarriage: Or “gives birth before her time.”
I'm not sure what dogma you mean. Considering that you still haven't attempted to find a harmonious explanation for why an uneventful birth would require the payment of damages, I might suggest that you're engaging in a bit of projection.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amBut you only see what you want to see and seeking accuracy and Bible harmony is not higher than your dogma.
So far, aside from my own translations, I've only quoted the NRSV in support of my position. That's only a "paraphrase" in the sense of rendering the figurative meaning of a euphemism. You keep using "paraphrase" as a pejorative, but the Bibles that you're defending as most trustworthy are much more paraphrastic than that.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amYet the translations you choose are paraphrasing Bibles.
Leaving aside what "exegesis" means, I also showed you the "real Hebrew word" for giving birth. The argument you made applies to that one, too, but isn't particularly meaningful in the first place. "Come out" is used in many different contexts in the Bible to mean many different things, most of which could be expressed differently.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amYou speak of exegesis but don't use it. I have shown you the real Hebrew word for miscarriage and its use in the Bible and you didn't even care.
I'm not sure what you think you're arguing here. The verse says neither "miscarriage" nor "premature birth" literally, so we need to infer from context what the author meant by "come out." I don't think that the author intended to mean a live birth, premature or otherwise based on the wording of vv. 22-25, but I'm not sure what you think my "dogma" is. That the Bible is a progressive document if it's translated correctly? Hardly.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amI'm never surprised when a person's dogma is taking center stage in their translation choice, when what I want is the most accurate. A translation that uses miscarriage for premature birth with not even a footnote is not accurate and you know it but will not accept it because the miscarriage idea fits your dogma.
And if the verse included an actual Hebrew phrase that meant "premature, live birth," we wouldn't be having the discussion, nor would we if either the scholarly consensus or biblical context supported such a reading.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amIf the actual Hebrew word for miscarriage was used in this verse I'd have no choice but to accept it, yet that is not what it says and that is not what many Bible translate it as.
I don't know what translations you're talking about. The only translation I quoted in support of my position is the NRSV and the only other one I quoted was the NWT.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amYour chosen translations also adds extra references to the woman. Words that are not in the manuscripts. I have shown you this but you do not care your dogma pushes out accuracy, what is actually there.
I'm sure you do.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:21 amI can only say that staunchly disagree with your dogma, your rejection of other scriptures that give clarity and the way you pick a Bible translation.
OK.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 1:09 pmI have given my two cents. To go forward would just be a circular argument. Your opinions have been noted.
I'm not an admin. Ignore away.2timothy316 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 1:09 pmSadly I cannot add admins to my ignore list so your posts will not longer clutter up my thread viewing and save time reading, but those that don't treat the word of God aright are ignored and I no longer respond to.
BECAUSE: the two are simply not the same. Even in an abortion-legal society today such a death would be considered a crime. Today it's quite legal to put pins and needles through your face and body all you want; however, it is not legal for others to do it to you if you don't want them to. Elective abortion is far from being the same as an abortion resulting from an assault.onewithhim wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 10:52 pm [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #8]
See post #8, anyone looking on here.
2timothy316 in post #8 wrote:
“If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges. But if a fatality does occur, then you must give life for life.”—Exodus 21:22, 23.
If the penalty is for death for a careless person that accidentally kills an unborn child, I don't see why a person that intentionally kills an unborn child would get a pass.
Lacking any proof or evidence one can only conclude you're making this up. But if by chance you do have proof or evidence rather than mere assertion please present it. Chapter and verse would be particularly nice.Yes, God considers ANY abortion to be murder.
No verses quoted so far support that. He might, but He didn't tell us so if He does.
That's a non sequitur.onewithhim wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 10:52 pmThat life that starts at conception will grow to be a person, eventually an adult human.
That it's an offense to the father and the offender must pay him in compensation for the dead child.onewithhim wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 10:52 pm2timothy gave the scripture that shows how God feels about even an accidental abortion.
Presumably the father would only have to pay himself as long as he didn't permanently injure his wife in the process.
We can't know the full extent of Jehovah's feelings of sanctity for life...they are stronger than any of our feelings, undoubtedly. He considers life so precious that we are forbidden to take blood into our bodies, because blood is the life of the creation's existence. (Genesis 9:1,5,6; Leviticus 17:4) If his view of life is so positively great so that he observes a mere bird falling to the ground (Matthew 10:29), how much more so will he view a fetus' life?Miles wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 1:07 amBECAUSE: the two are simply not the same. Even in an abortion-legal society today such a death would be considered a crime. Today it's quite legal to put pins and needles through your face and body all you want; however, it is not legal for others to do it to you if you don't want them to. Elective abortion is far from being the same as an abortion resulting from an assault.onewithhim wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 10:52 pm [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #8]
See post #8, anyone looking on here.
2timothy316 in post #8 wrote:
“If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges. But if a fatality does occur, then you must give life for life.”—Exodus 21:22, 23.
If the penalty is for death for a careless person that accidentally kills an unborn child, I don't see why a person that intentionally kills an unborn child would get a pass.
Lacking any proof or evidence one can only conclude you're making this up. But if by chance you do have proof or evidence rather than mere assertion please present it. Chapter and verse would be particularly nice.Yes, God considers ANY abortion to be murder.
.
Yet you claim "God considers ANY abortion to be murder." So again I ask, "if by chance you do have proof or evidence rather than mere assertion please present it."onewithhim wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:10 pmWe can't know the full extent of Jehovah's feelings of sanctity for life...they are stronger than any of our feelings, undoubtedly.Miles wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 1:07 amBECAUSE: the two are simply not the same. Even in an abortion-legal society today such a death would be considered a crime. Today it's quite legal to put pins and needles through your face and body all you want; however, it is not legal for others to do it to you if you don't want them to. Elective abortion is far from being the same as an abortion resulting from an assault.onewithhim wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 10:52 pm [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #8]
See post #8, anyone looking on here.
2timothy316 in post #8 wrote:
“If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges. But if a fatality does occur, then you must give life for life.”—Exodus 21:22, 23.
If the penalty is for death for a careless person that accidentally kills an unborn child, I don't see why a person that intentionally kills an unborn child would get a pass.
Lacking any proof or evidence one can only conclude you're making this up. But if by chance you do have proof or evidence rather than mere assertion please present it. Chapter and verse would be particularly nice.Yes, God considers ANY abortion to be murder.
.
He considers life so precious that we are forbidden to take blood into our bodies, because blood is the life of the creation's existence. (Genesis 9:1,5,6;)
You're confusing the import of seeing a single kind of incident with regarding a wholly different condition.If his view of life is so positively great so that he observes a mere bird falling to the ground (Matthew 10:29), how much more so will he view a fetus' life?
Another thing we can look at is how ancient translations and paraphrases rendered this passage into Greek, Latin, and Aramaic.
Targum Jonathan (Aramaic, 1st Cent. AD):Exodus 21:22-23 (Vulg) wrote:
If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child and she miscarry indeed, but live herself: he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman's husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life . . .
Josephus, Antiquities 4.278 (Greek, 1st Cent. AD):Targum Jonathan wrote:
If men when striving strike a woman with child, and cause her to miscarry, but not to lose her life, the fine on account of the infant which the husband of the woman shall lay upon him, he shall pay according to the sentence of the judges. But if death befall her, then thou shalt judge the life of the killer for the life of the woman.
Philo, On Mating with the Preliminary Studies XXIV 137 (Greek, 1st Cent. AD):Josephus wrote:
He that kicks a woman with child, so that the woman miscarry, let him pay a fine in money, as the judges shall determine, as having diminished the multitude by the destruction of what was in her womb; and let money also be given the woman’s husband by him that kicked her; but if she die of the stroke, let him also be put to death, the law judging it equitable that life should go for life.
Septuagint (Greek, 3rd Cent. BC):Philo wrote:
If while two men are fighting one should strike a woman who is great with child, and her child should come from her before it is completely formed, he shall be muleted in a fine, according to what the husband of the woman shall impose on him, and he shall pay the fine deservedly. But if the child be fully formed, he shall pay life for life.
A couple of observations:Exodus 21:22-23 (LXX) wrote:
And if two men strive and smite a woman with child, and her child be born imperfectly formed, he shall be forced to pay a penalty: as the woman's husband may lay upon him, he shall pay with a valuation. But if it be perfectly formed, he shall give life for life