Is Numbers 5:11-31 referring to God causing an abortion?

Numbers 5:11-31 describes a ritual that was prescribed for Israelite couples when the husband suspected the wife of adultery but had no proof. This passage has sometimes been interpreted as referring to God causing an abortion. However, a close examination of the text and historical context suggests this was likely not referring to abortion.

The ritual described in Numbers 5:11-31

The ritual involved the following steps:

1. The husband would bring the wife before the priest with an offering (v11-15).
2. The priest would take “holy water” in an earthenware vessel and also take dust from the floor of the tabernacle (v17).
3. The priest would remove the headdress from the woman, unbind her hair, and place in her hands the grain offering (v18).
4. The priest would make the woman take an oath that if she was guilty, the “water of bitterness” would cause her thigh to waste away and belly to swell (v19-22).
5. The priest would write the oath on a scroll, wash it in the water, and make the woman drink the water (v23-24).
6. If she was guilty, she would be cursed – her belly would swell, thigh waste away, be barren. If innocent, no harm would come (v27-28).

This ritual was referred to as the “law of jealousy” and was a means God provided for dealing with suspicion of adultery in the absence of evidence.

Key elements suggesting this does not refer to abortion

There are several key elements in this passage that suggest it is not referring to abortion:

1. No mention of pregnancy – The passage does not specify that the woman is pregnant. It applies the ritual to any wife whose husband suspects infidelity.
2. “Thigh to waste away” and “belly to swell” – This language is ambiguous and may refer to some form of physical affliction as judgment, not necessarily termination of a pregnancy.
3. Barrenness vs. terminating pregnancy – The curse says she would be made barren if guilty. It does not state a pregnancy would be terminated.
4. “Miscarriage” translation questioned – Some translations say “miscarriage.” But this is debated by scholars, as the Hebrew word yarek literally means “thigh.”
5. Goal was determining guilt, not termination – The goal was to determine guilt or innocence of the woman, not necessarily to cause an abortion per se.

Given these elements, most modern scholars do not believe this passage is about terminating a pregnancy. The thought of intentionally inducing abortion through this ritual would likely have been foreign to the original audience.

Potential meanings of key ritual elements

Below are some potential meanings of key controversial elements in this passage:

• “Thigh to waste away” – Could refer to injury or disabling of the thigh area. “Swelling of the belly” may parallel this, referring to some sort of physical affliction.
• “Barrenness” – May refer to future barrenness being cursed upon her, not necessarily termination of a current pregnancy.
• “Miscarriage” translation – The passage says “her thigh will waste away.” Scholars debate if “miscarriage” is an accurate cultural parallel.

None of these elements necessitate the passage be about abortion. They have alternative potential meanings in the cultural context.

Old Testament law on causing harm to children

Additional support that this passage is likely not about abortion comes from other Old Testament laws about causing harm to children:

• The Law treated the life of an unborn child as sacred, such as in Exodus 21:22-25 where causing the death of an unborn child required the death penalty.
• The Law prohibited child sacrifice to idols, which was practiced by neighboring cultures (Leviticus 18:21).
• The Mosaic Law valued human life and set harsh punishments for harming children.

Given these strong protections and punishments, it would be incongruous if this ritual involved intentionally aborting a child. This ritual likely involved a physical affliction, not termination of a life.

New Testament teaching on marriage fidelity

The New Testament affirms the importance of fidelity within marriage:

• Jesus affirmed the creation ideal of marital faithfulness between one man and woman (Matthew 19:3-9).
• Hebrews 13:4 calls for honoring marriage by keeping it pure.
• 1 Corinthians 6:18 says to flee sexual immorality.

However, while still abhorring adultery, the New Testament moves away from punishing adultery by physical affliction or death. Rather, redemption and forgiveness are offered through Christ (John 8:1-11).

Conclusions

In summary, the textual, historical, and theological evidence suggests Numbers 5:11-31 was likely not about intentionally causing an abortion. The passage should be understood as follows:

• It describes a ritual to bring judgment upon a wife suspected of, but not proven guilty of, adultery.
• The judgment involved physical affliction, not pregnancy termination.
• The ritual revealed God’s abhorrence of adultery within marriage.
• But the New Testament ultimately offers redemption and forgiveness for adultery.

While controversies still arise over this enigmatic passage, the best scholarly understanding is that Numbers 5:11-31 was not about abortion. Rather, it upholds God’s standards for marital purity according to Old Testament law. But it should be interpreted through the redemptive lens of the New Testament.