D. Charles Pyle has recently discussed Num 5:21 and whether it supports the Bible supporting abortion (TL;DR: it doesn’t):
Q. Are translators trying to hide abortion in the
Bible? Numbers 5:21 transliteration "beten" is rendered abdomen only
3×, but is womb 32× and "naphal" rendered waste away appears 3×, yet
fall 130×. Fall out of womb=abortion.
A. No. In fact, those translations that do not
render the passage that way actually are the ones that are correct in
translation. And any translation or false claim of such meaning that turns that
passage into a reference to abortion is making things up and inserting that
meaning into the translation where it doesn’t belong, and where the Hebrew text
itself implies no such thing. The Hebrew language had perfectly good words and
phrases to speak of such a thing, and these are not used here in the above
passage in question. Following is the Hebrew text in question.
וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ
הַכֹּהֵן אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה בִּשְׁבֻעַת הָאָלָה וְאָמַר הַכֹּהֵן לָאִשָּׁה יִתֵּן
יְהוָה אֹותָךְ לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבֻעָה בְּתֹוךְ עַמֵּךְ בְּתֵת יְהוָה אֶת־יְרֵכֵךְ נֹפֶלֶת וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵךְ צָבָה׃
(Biblia Hebraica, Numbers 5:21)
The phrase in question in the
Hebrew text is set in bold typeface. While it is true that the word נֶפֶל can
refer to an abortion or untimely birth as something fallen, it cannot be
referring to such here in the Hebrew because the marker of the accusative plus
noun (אֶת־יְרֵכֵךְ, “your thigh region”) tells us what it is that is being
caused to fall/degrade/waste away by the LORD, and it isn’t referring
to a child being aborted. It is referring to (יָרֵךְ) the soft or thigh region,
as a euphemism for the outer reproductive parts in the region between the
thighs. This is in conjunction with וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵךְ “and your abdomen/womb”
(either abdomen or womb could be meant by the term but only the distended
abdomen would be seen, so more likely the abdomen being referenced here) being
caused to swell, as in the sense of becoming inflamed, bloated or visibly
distended, as well as the outer reproductive organs to drop or waste away. More
than this, the loss of an unborn child also is described with the Hebrew phrase
יָצְאוּ יְלָדֶיהָ (“her offspring has departed”) elsewhere in the Hebrew text
of Exodus 21:22. Nothing like this is used in the above passage in question to
describe what would happen to her, either. So, definitely not referring to an
abortion or loss of offspring.
The intention of the curse
was to cause the woman not to be able to bear a child ever again and be very
visibly seen as someone accursed among her people and to be avoided by anyone
wanting a faithful wife and children in future. Such a thought of being unable
to bear children forever after and forever marked as an unfaithful wife also is
a fate that many women of the period would have wanted to avoid, and the
fear-factor by a woman of the period involved very likely would have resulted
in a confession before being handed the cursed drink in
question. The drink itself also was not an abortifacient. The passage is very
clear that it would be בְּתֵת יְהוָה, the LORD who would cause the events to
occur in the case of a woman who had been unfaithful and took the draft.
