Thoughts on the Loss of a Child

By Samuel M. Frost, Th. D.

Although much appeal is made to the verses in the Torah concerning the death of a child in the womb of the mother in Exodus 21.22 (we will cover that), there are other terms used in Scripture that denote “human life” while in the womb.  For example, 2 Kings 8.12 speaks of the terror of what Israel’s enemies would do: “dash their little ones in pieces, and rip open their pregnant women.”  The term here for “pregnant” (harah) means “conceived”, “with child”.  Isaiah used the term for the “conception” of thought: “conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood” (59.13).  Thus, it’s an “inner” idea, or “conception”.  It can be translated as “devise a scheme.”  In Job 3.3 we read, “Let the day perish in which I am born, And the night that hath said: ‘A man-child hath been conceived.’” (3.3).  The parallelism (reverse) from “born” to “conceived” denotes that conception of the ‘man’ proceeds the ‘birth day’ (or, more literally, the “coming out” – yalad).  That this term, harah, is often translated “pregnant woman” strongly implies that she is carrying human life.  Job, a person, is cursing the day, not only of his (a person) birth, but of his (a person) being conceived.  In 3.7, in poetical terms, Job wished that his mother was “barren” so that he never existed.

Our second term, often translated ‘miscarriage’ (shakal) is never a good thing.  It is “unproductive”, either of animals, women, or the “unfruitfulness of the land.”  ‘Miscarrying’ is a curse (Exodus 23.26).  In the case of Exodus 21.22, the Hebrew reads, ‘and her child came out’: ‘if a man smite a pregnant (harah) woman, so that her child (yeled) came out (yatsar – the LXX is the same rendering in Greek, literally).  This is, simply, what a ‘miscarriage’ of a ‘conception’ (harah) “looks like.”  A dead child prematurely is aborted.  The word for ‘child’ is common enough in what it means. 

The problem is the following clause, “and there is no harm”.  The term, harm (ason) is used only five times, and those in the Pentateuch exclusively.  In Genesis 42.4, 38; 44.29 the ‘harm’ means death.  The other two times it is used is here in Exodus 21.22-23.  It is plain that ‘death’ is meant, too, since the clause in verse 23, “but if there be harm, he shall render life for life.”  A life was “harmed” (killed), therefore a “life” must be given (Genesis 6.9-ff).  Here, the term ‘life’ (nephesh) is not the “soul”, but more defined as “person” – the life ended since it “came out” of the womb as dead due to being violently struck.

What textual analysis has centered in on is whether the ‘death’ is of the mother, or the infant child, or both.  A fine (anash) is given if there is ‘no harm.’  This has to be weighed against the term “if two men are fighting and strike a woman with child…’  Isn’t a punch in the face, or the gut while breaking up two fighting men, “harm”?  No.  This is often what is missed.  The lex talionis that follows states, “eye for eye, tooth for tooth, foot for foot..,bruise for bruise” (21.24-25).  Doesn’t striking a person cause a bruise?  However, if there is no harm cannot mean, if there is no bruise.  A fine is suffice when there is no wound, or bruise.  Could have been a mere slap.  This brings us to consider the use of the noun, harm (ason).  There is no ‘harm for harm’ in the text as a phrase.  There is, however, life for life.  It is very hard to imagine a wife breaking up a fight, or two men fighting and somehow a pregnant woman got hit from a wild swing meant for the man that this would kill her!  That is not the common sense reading of the passage.  “If there is no harm” means, then, “if there is no death” – and this would be related to the action: “if her child comes out”; the woman who has conceived.

There is no denial from any interpreters that a ‘miscarriage’ is in view here.  If we consult the modern day medical entries on miscarriage, it involves a woman who wants the child.  Thus, miscarriages are traumatic.  Here, the pregnancy is going along well, but its loss is caused by a fight.  A wanted, healthy pregnancy is aborted due to no medical or health issue of the mother.  This point is often not brought out, either.  For Judaism, the ‘fruit of the womb’, the excitement of having conceived a child, to have a family is of the highest forms of existence.  To lose such over a mere brawl would be devastating.  A fine will make up for that?  “Sorry for your loss.  Here’s some cash.”  I am sorry, but that’s not torah.

Rather, if we follow what many Hebraists have noted, is that the term “harm” covers the phrase that follows it: “If there is no harm, then a fine is to be given (nathan), but if there is harm, then it shall be given (nathan) life in the place of life.  If there is the loss of an eye, then it shall be given in the place of an eye…etc.”  The syntax of “equivalence” is seen here: Harm = life for life; Eye = Eye; Tooth = Tooth; etc.  The woman, if she lost a tooth, or an eye would not be the ‘harm’.  A fine would not remedy a wound.  A wound remedies a wound.  A harm is remedied by another life.  Thus, in the proposed hypothetical situation of two men fighting, and a pregnant woman gets punched so that her child comes out of her womb because of such a punch (this has been known to happen; even self afflicted), then if there is harm to the child (death), there is only one remedy to be “given” to the one who punched her: death.  If the child comes out and lives (which has also been known to happen in late term pregnancies), that is, if there is no harm to the child (yeled) – then the one who threw the punch is fined for causing a premature birth (quite a trauma), but the child is delivered and alive.  Miscarriages can happen from two to twenty weeks.  Placental abruption, uterine rupture and the like can occur with a severe abdominal blow.  This has happened, and late term birthed children have nonetheless survived.

All in all, it is very difficult to see that kidnappers and rapists are put to death in the Torah, but someone who violently causes a “child to come out” is merely “fined” when the Torah in general praises the virtue of having conceived a child.  Second, the term used for such expulsion is “child.”  One would expect another term more neutral, which Hebrew is able to express.  Her “flow” to come out, or even more fitting, “seed”.  But here, “child” is used.  A “child” is harmed.  A fine won’t cover this.  If the child lives, however, “costs” are in order in terms of inconvenience, getting proper care, duress and the like.  It is often hours after such a blow would cause expulsion, but the damage of the insides is almost readily known by blood loss.  Women then, and their bodies, are exactly the same today, with the same brains, concerns, emotions, and feelings.  The joyful feeling of a mother is the same then, as is now.  The same for the expectant father.  The loss of a son or daughter through the mere blow of someone’s else’s fist demands justice.  A fine won’t cover it.  A fine would be an insult, a lessening of the dignity of being enabled by God to conceive in the first place (a blessing).  It is extremely difficult to see the Torah putting such minor value on a child, born or not.

Thus, the law here expresses the loss of a child due to involuntary manslaughter.  One last point must be made, often not brought out.  If this is the case with a mother who wants their unborn child, and who would have had such a birth, what does it say to those who deliberately “cause a child to come out”?  Here we would appeal to the classic qal vahomer argument in Jewish rhetoric.  How much more?  What would the penalty be for self-inflicted, or to one who, with permission of the parents, caused “a child to come out” with harm?  A fine?  If we saw this law as having no reference to the child, but only harm to the mother (not only a punch to the body, but a loss of a child), but even death to the mother, then would “life for life” be applied?  That is, if “harm” is only in reference to the mother dying, is the Torah suggesting that the child is not “alive” while in the womb?  Again, to side step the issue of such an explicit mention of “her child coming out” (not the usual expression, “gave birth” or “begat”), why bother mentioning this at all if the mother dies?  Obviously, if the mother is killed by a punch, then the baby in utero dies with her.  The penalty: life for life.  The syntax here, however, makes no such distinction.  If the child comes out (late term) and there is no death (harm) to the infant, then a fine is applicable (a lawsuit).  If there is no death to the infant, but the mother received a wound from the strike of the fist, then wound for wound.  But, how in the light of this text is the loss of a child remedied by a fine, when a wound is remedied by a wound?  Isn’t the spilling of blood that always follows a miscarriage a wound for crying out loud?  If a tooth takes the place of a tooth, and wound for a wound; then what takes the place of a “child coming out”?  A fine?  Sorry.  But such reasoning is beyond common sense and plain meaning.

Thus, if the death of the child is not in view here, then what we are being told is that a child coming out of the womb through an act of violence is merely worthy of being punished by a fine.  If the tooth of the mother was knocked out, the striker’s tooth would be knocked out.  If the mother lost her life (the child does as well), thus life for life.  But, if the mother received a bruise, and lost her baby, a bruise would cover the bruise, and a fine would cover the loss of a baby.  Make sense?  Hardly.  If the mother was merely slapped, no bruise, no loss of teeth, but she lost the baby – a fine will do.  Here, the loss of a tooth is more valuable in equivalence to the loss of a “child”!  At least the tooth of the other gets knocked out.  The “value” of the bloody, and often painful loss of a child (a miscarriage) is rendered for mere cash.  So much for the woman, and the child.  Cash will do.

(transliterations are mine, from the Hebrew texts I have translated, and do not follow the SBL transliteration standard).

Author: Samuel M. Frost, Th.D.

Samuel M. Frost has gained the recognition of his family, peers, colleagues, church members, and local community as a teacher and leader.  Samuel was raised in the Foursquare Gospel tradition and continued in the rising Charismatic Movement of the early 1980’s.  While serving in local congregations he was admitted to Liberty Christian College in Pensacola, Florida where he lived on campus for four years earning his Bachelor’s of Theology degree.  It was there under the tutelage of Dr. Dow Robinson (Summer Institutes of Linguistics), and Dr. Frank Longino (Dallas Theological Seminary) that he was motivated to pursue a career in Theology.  Dr. Robinson wrote two books on Linguistics, Workbook on Phonological Analysis (SIL, 1970) and Manuel for Bilingual Dictionaries: Textbook (SIL, 1969).  It was under these teachers’ guidance that Frost entered into his Master’s studies, being granted a scholarship for Greek I and II at Pentecostal Theological Seminary, accredited, in Cleveland, Tennessee (adjunct of Lee University).  Frost completed his study under Dr. French Arrington (The Ministry of Reconciliation, Baker Books, 1980), who used the text of J. Gresham Machen, New Testament Greek for Beginners. Frost studied Hebrew for two years under Dr. Mark Futato (author, Beginning Biblical Hebrew, Eisenbrauns, 2003) and Dr. Bruce K. Waltke (author, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, Eisenbrauns, 1990) at Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, Florida. With combined credits from PTS and RTS, Samuel completed his Master of Arts in Christian Studies and Master of Arts in Religion from Whitefield Theological Seminary in Lakeland, Florida under the direct tutelage of Dr. Kenneth G. Talbot, co-author of the well reviewed work, Hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism (Whitefield Media, 2005) with Dr. Gary Crampton (and Foreword by the late, Dr. D. James Kennedy).  Dr. Talbot also oversaw Samuel’s Dissertation, From the First Adam to the Second and Last Adam (2012) earning him the Magister Theologiae (Th.M.) degree.  He also helped put together A Student’s Hebrew Primer for WTS, designed and graded exams for their Hebrew Languages course. Samuel’s studies lead him into an issue in the field of Eschatology where his scholarship and unique approach in Hermeneutics garnered him recognition.  Because of the controversial nature of some of his conclusions, scholars were sharp in their disagreement with him.  Frost’s initial work, Misplaced Hope: The Origins of First and Second Century Eschatology (2002, Second Edition, 2006 Bi-Millennial Publishing), sold over four thousand units.  While arguing for the Reformation understanding of sola Scriptura as defined by the Westminster Confession of Faith, Frost’s book launched a heavily footnoted argument for a total reassessment of the doctrine known as the Second Coming of Christ.  The conclusion was that the events of the war of the Jewish nation against their Roman overlords in 66-70 C.E. formed the New Testament authors’ eschatological outlook, and went no further than their own first century generation; a view otherwise known as “full” or "hyper" Preterism.  Internationally recognized Evangelical author and speaker, Steve Wohlberg remarked, ‘On the “preterist” side today…we have such influential leaders as Gary DeMar, Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., David Chilton, R.C. Sproul, Max King, James Stuart Russell, Samuel M. Frost, and John Noe.  To these scholars…the beast is not on the horizon, he’s dead” (Italics, his)” (End Time Delusions, Destiny Image Publishers, 2004, page 133).  It should be noted that only Noe, King and Frost supported the “full” Preterist position. Thomas Ice and co-author of the best selling Left Behind series, Tim LaHaye, quote Frost’s work, Misplaced Hope, as well in their book, The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming under Attack (Harvest House Publishers, 2003, page 40).  Dr. Jay E. Adams, who single handedly launched “a revolution” in Christian Counseling with his work, Competent to Counsel: An Introduction to Nouthetic Counseling, (1970, Zondervan), also wrote an analysis of Frost’s work in Preterism: Orthodox or Unorthodox? (Ministry Monographs for Modern Times, INS Publishing, 2004).  Adams wrote of Misplaced Hope as a "useful, scholarly work" (p.6 - though he disagreed with the overall thesis).  Dr. Charles E. Hill, Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, wrote of Misplaced Hope that Frost, “attacks the problem of the early church in a much more thoroughgoing way than I have seen” (When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response to Hyper Preterism, Ed. Keith Mathison, Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing, 2003, ‘Eschatology in the Wake of Jerusalem’s Fall’ p. 110-ff.).  There were several other works as well that took the scholarship of Frost seriously, like Ergun Caner in The Return of Christ: A Premillennial Perspective, Eds., Steve W. Lemke and David L. Allen (B&H Publishing, 2011). Because of the controversial nature of Frost’s conclusions on these matters, it was difficult to find a denomination within the Church-at-Large to work in terms of pastoral ministry.  That situation changed when Samuel was called by a Bible study group in Saint Petersburg, Florida to found a congregation.  Christ Covenant Church was established in 2002 operating under the principles outlined by Presbyterian historian James Bannerman’s work, The Church of Christ: A Treatise on the Nature, Powers, Ordinances, Discipline, and Government of the Christian Church (Banner of Truth Trust, 1974, original, 1869).  By-Laws and a Constitution were drawn up in the strictest manner for what was considered an “Independent” establishment of a Presbyterian Church, granted that a “call” was received and recognized by Presiding Elders duly ordained from existing and recognized denominations.  Two Elders, one ordained in the Reformed Presbyterian Church (Mike Delores), and another ordained in the Presbyterian Church of America (Dr. Kelly N. Birks, now deceased) tested and reviewed the call, ordaining Samuel on October 20th, 2002, the Twenty Second Sunday after Trinity.  Proper forms were submitted to Tallahassee, Florida with the stamp of a Notary Public Witness.  Christ Covenant Church (CCC) functioned as a local church for five years with a congregation as large as 30 members.  Frost was gaining recognition after Misplaced Hope had been published in January of that year, and conferences were hosted that included debates with another prominent "full" Preterist educator, Don K. Preston.  CCC hosted best-selling authors, Thomas Ice, and Mark Hitchcock from Dallas Theological Seminary; and Dr. James B. Jordan (Westminster Theological Seminary), well-known author/pastor in Reformed theological circles.  Frost was invited for the next several years to speak at over 25 conferences nation-wide, was featured in articles and an appearance on local news in Tampa for one of CCC’s conferences.  The Evangelical Theological Society also invited Samuel to speak at the Philadelphia conference (Frost is currently a Member of ETS as well as Society of Biblical Literature). During this time Samuel had submitted one more book, Exegetical Essays on the Resurrection of the Dead (TruthVoice, 2008; repr. JaDon Publishing, 2010); and co-wrote, House Divided: A Reformed Response to When Shall These Things Be? (Vision International, 2010).  Frost also wrote several Forewords for up and coming authors who were influenced by his teaching materials, as well as cited many times in books, lectures and academic papers.  However, because of certain aspects of Hermeneutics and Frost’s undaunted commitment to scholarship (with always a strong emphasis on the personal nature of devotional living to Christ), several challenges to the "hyper" Preterist view he espoused finally gave way, largely due to the unwavering commitment to Samuel by the Dean of Whitefield Theological Seminary, Dr. Kenneth G. Talbot, who continually challenged him.  In what shocked the "hyper" Preterist world, Samuel announced after the Summer of 2010 that he was in serious error, and departed the movement as a whole, along with Jason Bradfield, now Assistant Pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church, Lakeland, Florida .  Christ Covenant Church had dissolved after 2007 while Samuel continued as a public speaker and writer, largely due to reasons that would unravel Frost’s commitment to "hyper" Preterism as a whole. The documentation of Frost’s departure was published by American Vision’s Founder, Gary DeMar, with a Foreword by Dr. Kenneth L. Gentry.  Why I Left Full Preterism (AV Publishing, 2012) quickly ran through its first run.  The book was later republished under the arm of Dr. Kenneth L. Gentry and is sold today (GoodBirth Ministries Publishing, 2019; though still available in Kindle form from American Vision).  Dr. Gentry also gave mention to Frost in his book, Have We Missed the Second Coming: A Critique of Hyper Preterism (Victorious Hope Publishing, 2016), noting him as "one of the most prominent" teachers within Full Preterism (135).  Dr. Keith Mathison, Professor of Systematic Theology at Reformation Bible College in Sanford, Florida, endorsed the book as well.  Samuel has gone on to write, Daniel: Unplugged (McGahan Publishing House, 2021); The Parousia of the Son of Man (Lulu Publishing, 2019); God: As Bill Wilson Understood Him, A Theological Analysis of Alcoholics Anonymous (Lulu Publishing, 2017).  He is also active as a certified Chaplain with the Henry County Sheriff’s Department, Indiana, and enrolled with ICAADA (Indiana Counselor’s Association on Alcohol and Drug Abuse), and worked directly under Dr. Dennis Greene, Founder of Christian Counseling and Addictions Services, Inc., for a year.  Frost’s passion is in the education of the local church on various issues and occasionally works with Pastor Alan McCraine with the First Presbyterian Church in Lewisville, Indiana, and Bethel Presbyterian Church, Knightstown, Indiana, where he periodically is called upon to give the sermon. Samuel, with his wife, Kimberly, helped to establish Heaven’s Bread Basket food pantry that donates food items to local families in need once a month – a ministry of the Session of First Presbyterian Church, Lewisville, Indiana. Samuel also works part time at Ace Hardware in New Castle, Indiana for several years.  He has a solid, family reputation in the community, and has performed local marriages and funerals.  He also sits on the Board of the Historical Preservation Committee in New Castle. Recently, he has completed his two year quest for a Th.D from Christian Life School of Theology Global, Georgia.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: