Mr. McKinley’s article on “Why Abortion is Biblical” is a perfect example of scripture being twisted and misused to prove a stance on immorality, and a posture that is anything less than wicked. So before we dismantle this heretical argument, I would like to give you a crash course on Bible interpretation. This is an important subject for the saints of God, who are to have a love of the Truth in there hearts. Paul admonishes Timothy to know how to right discern between teachers of false doctrines, and those who would teach and lead men astray through deceitful words. In 2 Timothy 2:15 Paul says:
“Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
In other words, when Paul says “approved” he is stating that taking a back seat, or pleading ignorance about the scriptures is not acceptable. Three terms in this crash course are :
Hermeneutics
Exegesis
Eisogesis
Hermeneutics: The science of Bible interpretation
The Bible has different types of literature in it like the Psalms or the Major and minor Prophet writings. A Psalm is interpreted differently than a Historical account, and prophecies would be interpreted different than the books of the Law. One of the first rules of Bible Hermeneutics is the law of context. This law is set that when you read a passage, it bares relation to the surrounding verses. Now if I was to quote a line of scripture such as- “…Judas through the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hung himself, …go and do likewise!” The reader will probably walk away with a sad view of scripture and no hope. Now these are two separate verses from from two completely separate parts of scriptures cut and put together to produce a horrible passage. To correctly understand the law of context you must read the surrounding chapter(s) and verse(s) to identify what the author is trying to convey in the message. The first part about Judas is from Matthew 27:5, which is the account of Judas’ guilt about his apostasy, and betrayal of Jesus resulting in his suicide. The latter portion stating “go and do likewise” is an excerpt from Luke 10:37, where Jesus is talking to one of the scribes about the parable of the good Samaritan.
Exegesis: The analysis of the historical intention of the writer to the reader.
Exegesis is an important tool of Bible interpretation that lays down the parameter that the original meaning of the text is the only true meaning of the text. So when scripture refers to Jesus being born of a virgin birth, Jesus was literally born of a virgin birth. Another example of an exegesis of scripture would be of the book of Joel, and that when there is an army referred in the second chapter, it is a description of an actual army that is coming.
Eisogesis: Misinterpreting scripture by adding ones perspective that is not the true interpretation of the text. In other words, “I read a verse today, and this is what it means to me…” This is the area that many people fall into, including Mr. McKinley.
The subject of Bible Interpretation is more detailed, and much, much broader than this crash course, but that is another article, another time…
Mr. McKinley starts off his argument stating “One sided. That’s the abortion stance of most Christians–one sided.”(1) I can’t really take this as a bad critique of most Christians’ because it’s true. What I mean is, God is one sided on this topic. His side. God has set parameters, and boundaries. In them are life, wisdom, peace for the mind and soul. There is fullness of joy, and a beautiful inheritance when you find yourself with the guidelines of Gods’ word. The psalmist said “Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I may not sin against thee.”(2) His word is what we hide and cling to, not so we can say that we have verses memorized, but so that we would not sin against God. That is the point, it is about Him. I have no shame in saying God is narrow minded; I am thankful for His ways. As a result of those who are fully persuaded to following God, and keeping His precepts, a culture is created of like minded believers. Brian McKinley states that there is overwhelming evidence in the Bible.(1) He is right, there is overwhelming evidence in the Bible that babies from conception are important to God. Brian states that anti-abortion Christians support their view, by way of a few verses, which he does not believe is the proper interpretation.(1) The first verse quoted (McKinley does not give book/chapter/verse reference too) is from Exodus 20:13- “Thou shalt not kill.” To this verse, McKinley asks if it is murder to kill a fetus, which leads to his next question of “is a fetus a full-term human person?” The answer is yes, but McKinley is thinks not, and proceeds to attack Psalm 139:13-16(1)
“13For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb.14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.15My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.16Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them. ”
Brian recognizes God’s hand in the creation of man, but does not believe that a fetus is of the same value as man when God created Adam. That the fetus is only on the level a created living thing, until it is outside of the womb. Then is becomes man.
“According to Genesis, God was involved in the creation of every living thing, and yet that doesn’t make every living thing a full human person. In other words, just because God was involved in its creation, it does not mean terminating it is the same as murder. It’s only murder if a full human person is destroyed.”-Brian McKinley(3)
Brian’s thinking is totally flawed and contrary to what Scripture teaches. The creation of man was completely different in the process than the rest of creation. Man according to Genesis 1 and 2, was made in the likeness of God, and formed out of the dust of the ground. He breathed the breath of life into man,and called him Adam. Eve was the helpmate God made for Adam, and He spoke purpose into them, and blessed them. He told them to be fruitful and to multiply. The rest of creation was not made into the likeness of God, nor did he give it the blessing that He gave Adam and Eve.
Mr. McKinley, then argues that Psalm 139 was used out of context by anti-abortion Christians, to build a “stand-alone doctrinal statement.” This is truly not the case. Psalm 139 is, and has been a part of Judeo-Christian liturgy. It is also contains orthodoxies about Gods’ attributes, such as His Omniscience, His Immutability, His Omnipresence, His sovereignty, and so forth. The writer of the Psalm uses “I am”, “me”, which is personification, and a reference to having identity, and purpose. The writer does not refer to himself in the womb as just a blob! But special to God. McKinley then teaches that the Psalms are songs and not to be taken literal. He describes how the writer of most of the songs, being King David, was swayed by different emotions and wrote what he was feeling at the time. This is classic example of eisogesis. The Psalms like the rest of the Bible can be interpreted with Hermeneutics and Exegesis to determine what is literal, and what is not. A prime example is Psalm 22, which is a literal, and non literal prophecy about Jesus’ crucifixion. Verse 6 states, “I am a worm…” which we know historically, and naturally that Jesus was not a physical worm. But is a metaphor of His life to be crushed as a worm for the staining of garments. Verses 7 and 8 are actual sayings that the mockers said to Jesus while being crucified on Golgotha. Once again this was to describe the Psalms using literal and non literal excerpts. Brian McKinley brings up 2 Kings 2 to further his point of the danger of using certain verses out of context. 2 Kings 2 is the event of Elisha receiving the mantle of Elijah, and then proceeding to bless Jericho’s water source. When leaving Jericho, Elisha the prophet of God was mocked by 42 young men. The prophet called a curse upon them, and two female bears came and killed them. The Hebrew word for “young men” is Neurim Qetannim, which refers to an age group of 12 to 30 years old. These are not ignorant young men, who were innocently cursed by a “bitter and cruel” prophet. He uses Song of Songs to again make the point, and importance of context. If only he used this rule when reading and interpreting the whole of other Scriptures. Jeremiah 1 is another scripture that Brian McKinley is unsatisfied with the interpretation of anti abortion Christians. He claims that because this is a reference to the birth of a prophet, it can not therefore be used in understanding that God can know someone before they were in the womb, and that anyone less than a prophet does not have divine purpose.
“This is a special event — the birth of a prophet. God brought the prophet Jeremiah into the world for a divine purpose, and because of that, God was planning Jeremiah’s life “before” he was even conceived. God was preparing him to do miraculous things, such as speak on behalf of God while still a child and setting him up as an overseer of nations and kingdoms. “ - Brian McKinley(4)
Throughout all of Scripture, God refers to generations, and generations being known by Him and and the importance of the seed of Abraham which He made covenant with. Psalm 8:3-4 says
the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars,
which you have set in place,
4 what is man that you are mindful of him,
the son of man that you care for him?
Now from here, Brian shifts the article to show how scriptures can be used in support of abortion. What is peculiar is that Brian acknowledges that the verses he uses are not only out of context to support his title thesis, but he then proceeds to argue for them as a case for a pro abortion stance .(5) My only assumption for why Brian would do this, is because he has no legitimate argument against the anti-abortion Christians, and more severely, that there is no love of the truth in his heart.
Brian states-
” In the full context of Ecclesiastes, King Solomon makes the point that much of life is futile.“(5)
This is a half truth, which does not help anyone who is in search of the full truth. The exegesis of Ecclesiastes is that King Solomon, had wisdom, wealth, and women; but he forsook his first love. God. When a man has God, and turns to earthly goods, it will leave him spiritually bankrupt. So King Solomon concludes in the end of Ecclesiastes 12:13,14-
13Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
So Mr. McKinley quotes Ecclesiastes 6:3-5-
3If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he. 4For he cometh in with vanity, and departeth in darkness, and his name shall be covered with darkness. 5Moreover he hath not seen the sun, nor known any thing: this hath more rest than the other.
Brian believes(?) this is a stance for having an abortion to ensure that a child will not have a “miserable life.”(6) The focus of the passage first of all is on the man who has many children, and to live many years. The exegesis of this passage is that this man, is a success! He has many children to carry on his name, and lived a long life on the earth. But if his soul is not filled with good, or if he were to pass away and no one was to notice, he benefited nothing. Jesus said in Mark 8:36-
“For what shall if profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his soul?”
Second the focus is declaring the reader to make a dichotomy between quality and existence. Solomon does not opt, for suicide if the man has no true quality in his life, nor does he interject to kill a child in the womb. He uses the word miscarriage, which a miscarriege is an accident, and not that of intentional plucking and killing as an abortion is.
Ecclesiastes 4:1-3-
” 1So I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter. 2Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive. 3Yea, better is he than both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun.”
McKinley states-
“Here we have an argument for both euthanasia and abortion.”(6)
Nope, here we have a man arguing that a non existence is better than poor existence. Nowhere is there reference to a woman who is with child. The statement of euthanasia is shocking, and that he uses verse 2 as his reference to euthanasia, is a stretch at best. McKinley states-,
“When quality of life is at stake, Solomon seems to make the argument that ending a painful life or ending what will be a painful existence is preferable.”(6)
This is just simply not what Solomon said. Solomons’ statement is between the dead, and those oppressed, and says that a non-existence is better than those who experience the tragedy of life. Ecclesiastes does not end on such a negative note. The reader will find what the preacher, who is Solomon, declares what to be as the true quality and fulfillment in life.
The story of Job comes up in McKinley’s article on why abortion is Biblical. Job is a man who has the fear of the Lord, he has seven sons, three daughters, and is wealthy. He is caught between the working of the devil and the sovereignty of God. Job looses everything at the hand of the enemy, and continues to worship God. Obviously the passage is much more in depth and extravagant than how I have described it. McKinley takes the passage Job 3:2-4,11-19 and Job 10:18-19.
“2And Job spake, and said,3Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night in which it was said, There is a man child conceived. 4Let that day be darkness; let not God regard it from above, neither let the light shine upon it. “
“11Why died I not from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly? 12Why did the knees prevent me? or why the breasts that I should suck? 13For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest, 14With kings and counsellors of the earth, which build desolate places for themselves; 15Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: 16Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light. 17There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest .18There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. 19The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master. “
Job by chapter three, has lost his children, servants, cattle, and his house. As an act of mourning, Job rips his clothing, shaves his head, and pours dirt on his brow. Satan had afflicted Job with boils, and so great was his agony that his three friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar did not even recognize him! The three men rent their clothes, raised their voices weeping, and poured dust on their heads. They sat on the ground with Job, in complete silence for seven days. Verse 3 of the third chapter is where Job speaks, cursing the day of his birth. By chapter 10, Job has complained through chapters six and 7, and continues in chapter 9 and 10. Chapters 4, 5, and 8 are Job’s friends Eliphaz and Bildad admonishing and correcting Job, counseling him to not counsel God! Job does not repent of his complaints or remarks. In chapter 38, God appears in a whirlwind, and rebukes Job for his dark counsel, and words without knowledge. Job repents, and the Lord restores twice what was taken from him. McKinley states that Job’s words are a strong argument for quality of life over existence, and argues that it can be used in a defense that abortion can improve life.(7) This type of thinking is called eugenics. And is not the case in any of the passages.
McKinley then takes a surprising neutral stance on the issue of abortion, implying that the Bible neither supports nor condemns abortion.(7) It is surprising to think that one can truly believe that God could have such a neutral stance on what man does- when the Scriptures convey that God is ever mindful of man.
McKinley again shifts his argument to a Biblical support of abortion by referencing Exodus 21:22-23. He switches between translations, so I have provided below King James, New International, and New American standard translations to try and get a better picture.
KJV
“22If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,25Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. ”
NIV
22 “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. ”
NAS
22“If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. 23“But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life,24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. ”
First off, the passage speaks of an accident that makes the mother and/or the baby as the victim. This passage is not about abortion, because it is not a premeditative killing. Verse 22 gives a scenario of a struggle between two men, who amidst their struggle hit a woman who is pregnant. The word(s) that is in question is the translation of “depart” for KJV / “give birth prematurely” which is the NIV, and NAS. The Hebrew word is “Yatsa”, or “Yasa”, which is also translated as “bear out”, “begotten”, “come out”, “spring out”, “risen”, “pluck out”, and more depending upon the context.(10) It is used in translating the words “child birth”, “gave birth”, and “born.” The word does not denote death, as McKinley would have us to believe. He incorrectly references the word “Yalad” which is interpreted as “young man” , “child”, or “offspring” to mean “coming out.”(8) McKinley translates the Scripture to be miscarriage, and if this were to be true, by definition of miscarriage it does not mean that the child is dead, or aborted. Which then leaves us with the question of- “Is the reference of the injury to the mother or the child?” Professor Archer of Old Testament and Semitic Studies at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, concludes:
“There is no ambiguity here, whatever. What is required is that if there should be an injury either to the mother or to her children, the injury shall be avenged by a like injury to the assailant. If it involves the life (nepes) of the premature baby, then the assailant shall pay for it with his life. There is no second-class status attached to the fetus under this rule; he is avenged just as if he were a normally delivered child or an older person: life for life. Or if the injury is less, but not serious enough to involve inflicting a like injury on the offender, then he may offer compensation in monetary damages…” (9)
In Leviticus 27:6 McKinley says that a monetary value was placed on children.(12) That is wrong. This Scripture is a reference to the people of God who pledged to make a vow. They believed when making vows that it should cost them. Vows were not just made on whim, and then forgotten.
Leviticus 27:1-6
” 1And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the LORD by thy estimation. 3And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. 4And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels. 5And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels. 6And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. ”
The same with Numbers 3:15 is a poor attempt to stir up something that is not there.(12)
Numbers 3:15
.
“15Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them.”
This is not a passage stating that anyone younger than a month is sub-human. This is a passage about the priesthood of the Levites keeping watch over the sanctuary of the Lord. An infant younger than a month would not be expected to be on the watch or charge of the sanctuary, and therefore not included in the counting of the male priests. Brian McKinley’s last argument is to summarize that the neither the Jews’ or God view the fetus as a human.(12) This conclusion is drawn from Genesis 38:24.
Genesis 38:24
“24And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.”
First off Tamar does not get burnt at the stake, and gives birth to twins. Second, the decision to burn Tamar was Judah’s and not God’s. This event in Genesis is about Judah’s sin and hypocrisy; This Scripture is not about if a fetus is human, or God’s Righteousness and Justice. Brian uses this passage, and declares that God views the fetus as sub human.(12) This perception is a horrible conclusion, and solidifies that he has no argument. The Bible contains many events that are what you would call descriptive and prescriptive. Meaning in this event, Judah’s actions were descriptive, they tell of what he did, the results, and how he responded. Therefor in this case:
Judah slept with his daughter in law Tamar, believing her to be a prostitute.
Judah finds that his Tamar to be pregnant with his child,(which he is not aware that the child is his.)
Judah declares Tamar to be burnt
Tamar exposes Judah’s sin.
The Scriptures not only reveal the heart of God for babies in the womb, but on the fact that abortion is a shedding of innocent blood. God is very opinionated about those he calls innocent, and when their lives are being taken from them. He cares about our views on the womb, and about the blood that is being shed for sake of convenience.
Genesis 9:6
” 6Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”
Psalm 106:37-40
“37Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils. 38And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood. 39Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions. 40Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance.”
God is also not mute about what happens when blood is being poured out. Numbers 35:33-
“33So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.”
2 Kings 21:16
“16Moreover Manasseh shed innocent blood very much, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another; beside his sin wherewith he made Judah to sin, in doing that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.”
2 Kings 24:4
” 4And also for the innocent blood that he shed: for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; which the LORD would not pardon.
Deuteronomy 21:1-5
” 1If one be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him. 2Then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain: 3And it shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take an heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke; 4And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown, and shall strike off the heifer’s neck there in the valley: 5And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of the LORD; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried:”
Matthew 23:35
“35That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.”
But there is a greater blood that has been spilled in the land, and that is the blood of Jesus.
“There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Emmanuel’s veins;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains.” -William Cowper
It is time to plead the blood of Jesus in the crisis of abortion. What can wash away our sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
-Joshua Gielow
1. McKinley, pg. 1
2. Psalms 119:11 (KJV)
3. McKinley, pg. 2
4. McKinley, pg. 3
5. McKinley, pg. 4
6. McKinley, pg. 5
7. McKinley, pg. 6
8. McKinley, pg. 7
9. Gleason, Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982) pg. 248
10. Strongs Word Index #3318
11. Strongs Word index #3205, 3206
12. McKinley, pg. 8
13. Words: William Cowper, in Conyer’s Collection of Psalms and Hymns, 1772
all Scriptures used are King James Version, unless otherwise noted
