First of all this is not a pro-abortion post. So please do demonize me as a baby killer, womb wrecker or any other terms people address those that they think are for abortion.

Why is it then when people say they are pro-choice no one seems to understand that word "choice." Theologically can't we respect the "free will" of individuals especially those who are not of any faith to make a choice of whether or not they want to be parents?

What theological basis do we have to force anyone to do anything since it appears that God gives us free will to choose life or death (with regard to salvation Deut 30:18-20).

According to Ron Harris, I can be venomous so please stick to the topic and answer my question without trying to assess my personal position on the issue.

-- Anonymous, September 18, 2004

Answers

Harold, You are right about the words of extremists that are designed to trigger the emotions. This is what I believe the Bible clearly teaches:

(1) Abortion as a means of birth-control is sin for the people of God and harmful to those who do not believe in God. Sin for God's people because we are to respect life that is God-given. A society that sacrifices its young will collaspe into itself and be destroyed.

(2) If carrying the baby to term and attempting delivery is endangers the life of the mother, she should be able to choose to either abort the baby or sacrifice her life for the infant. I daresay in most cases, the mother would be willing to take that risk. (My sister died giving birth, both she and the infant. I don't know if she had a chance to choose.)

(3) If Roe vs Wade is not repealed this nation will not long endure.

Be Blessed

pastor paris

-- Anonymous, September 19, 2004

Rev. Paris:

What scriptures do you use to back your position? Thanks.

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2004

The basic problem with "Roe" is the Supreme Court imputed certain rights which are not in the Constitution. There is no "right to privacy". It is a legal fiction, pure and simple. Now concerning Harold's broader issue about choice, I think we are sliding down a slippery slope. Society routinely imposes restrictions on choice. A 20 year old Army infantry soldier in Iraq cannot exercise his freedom to purchase Heineken beer at a store in St. Louis, MO. Senior citiizens are denied the right to work due to mandatory retirement laws. Racial discrimination in its purest form is nothing more than an act of choice. People develop certain attitudes and beliefs about other people and the end result is they "choose" no contact or reduce market opportunities for the despised group. The purpose of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act is to demonstrate that such acts of "choice" are not in the best interests of a civil society.

If individuals choose to express their choice by practicing racial exclusion that decision will be met with stiff fines, penalties and sanctions. Title VII makes clear that there is no right to discriminate. If we as a church condemn capital punishment as state- sanctioned murder, which I believe is the correct view, how then can we come back and say abortion is different? QED

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2004

Mary, thanks for your question. My conclusions above are based on the whole body of scripture, the complete Bible. I cannot cite one or even a dozen individual scriptures that definitively "prove" my conclusions. To do so would open different translations and in trepretations of the scriptures. It is much like the Apostles Creed which is based on the whole body of scripture and agreed to by the Apostles at the time of its development. I can and have written essays within which examples of scripture are cited. But this forum is not the place for essays.

Be Blessed.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2004

Thank you Bill. You helped my thinking on this matter.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2004

Brother Gibson posed part of the question as follows:

"What theological basis do we have to force anyone to do anything since it appears that God gives us free will to choose life or death (with regard to salvation Deut 30:18-20). "

Without referencing the bible, it is simply one man's opinion.

-- Anonymous, September 22, 2004

I agree with Bill's assessment of the issue of choice. Our society, like all others that I know of, has already limited "choice" in ways that the people agree to be mutually beneficial. I think the most pertinent example of this in relation to abortion is our prohibition of murder. We are not free in this society to take someone else's life. When you approach abortion from that vantage point you then introduce the whole argument about "the viability of the fetus." In other words, at what point can we consider a fetus to be living. I have heard many pro-choicers say that life begins at the point that the child could live outside of the womb. A generation ago that would have been almost a full-term baby. Now, with the medical advances that have been made, a child can live outside of the mother's womb as early as 5 months into the pregnancy. Yet, abortion is routinely performed on babies that have developed past this point. It's a tremendously complicated issue. I look forward to reading further posts.

-- Anonymous, September 22, 2004

Thanks Mary for the help. I understand the political ramifications of the abortion debate and I appreciate the rational discourse thus far, but I was really hoping that we might speak "theologically" about this issue.

It is important in my opinion that when the church addresses issues of public policy that we speak from a theological standpoint. Bill's argument is interesting but it is political and judicial.

How does the Bible specifically shape your opinion of this topic?

-- Anonymous, September 22, 2004

Harold -

You suggest my anaylsis is too dependent on judicial-political consideration. Fair enough. Let me try again from a slightly different angle. Since the Bible does not make an explicit reference to the term abortion we can only make an inference in developing any reasoned theological position. Abortion is the cruelest form of infanticide. The Bible clearly condemns infanticide (see the story in Luke Ch. 2). Ergo, abortion is not consistent with God's Will for family planning. QED

-- Anonymous, September 23, 2004

Bill--

Your Luke 2 example would be a good point if we did not have Exodus 12:29. Where infanticide was decreed by Yahweh himself against the Egyptians from the first born of Pharaoh on his throne to the first born of the prisoner in the dungeon.

Therefore are you saying God only cares about the children of the faith? If so, then the women of the faith must not exercise the choice of abortion while, for non-believers this exercise is clearly cool with God?

I don't think that is what you meant, but it has helped to understand that a theological discussion can be very, very interesting.

-- Anonymous, September 23, 2004

Harold -

You are quite right. The reference about the death angel in Exodus slaying the first born male child suggests that infanticide was a part of GOd's Divine Plan for the liberation of Israel. It would appear though that in the absence of the Israelites door posts with proper insurance (covered with the blood of the lamb), they too would have experienced the loss of young life. Your last response pose difficult and important questions. I'm a stand-up guy and not ashamed to admit I don't know the answers. This is indeed an intriguing topic. It sure would be helpful if some of our seminary trained contributors on this MB offered an informed opinion on this subject. QED

-- Anonymous, September 24, 2004

Harold and Bill Dickens:

The questions you raised is the very reason that you must consider the whole body of scripture. Any isolated verses or examples will always break down and create further questions.

Does God love the UNSAVED? Yes, "God so loved the WORLD". But compared to His love for the SAVED, the love for the UNSAVED is like hate. "Jacob, I have loved, Esau I have hated."

How can one consider the actions in Egypt infantcide when they were offed a clear alternative, "cover the house and all its inhabitants in the blood of the lamb"?

The UNSAVED has the same choice: Cover themselves in the Blood of Christ or suffer the ultimate death, eternal separation from God.

Seems fair to me.

Be Blessed

-- Anonymous, September 25, 2004

Pastor Paris:

You have also picked a troubling scripture because when you consider the whole of scripture, why did God love Jacob a conniving so and so and hate Esau a man for the most part seemed to be living a moral life?

On the other hand, with regard to my original question, perhaps I am hearing you say that a person has a choice to choose heaven or hell, if so why would you oppose giving people that choice based on your scriptural understanding and the environmental factors that ground your perceptions.

-- Anonymous, September 25, 2004

Bro Gibson wrote:

"You have also picked a troubling scripture because when you consider the whole of scripture, why did God love Jacob a conniving so and so and hate Esau a man for the most part seemed to be living a moral life?"

God loved Jacob because Jacob TRUSTED God. God "hated" Esau because Esau trusted HIMSELF. These two brothers represent us today: Those who recognize their sinfullness and that they cannot be saved by works (Jacob), and those who live "good" lives trusting their works (Esau). It is not what you do; but what you believe, who you trust.

Bro Gibson further stated: "On the other hand, with regard to my original question, perhaps I am hearing you say that a person has a choice to choose heaven or hell, if so why would you oppose giving people that choice based on your scriptural understanding and the environmental factors that ground your perceptions."

The "choice" that this discussion started with is a National choice that our nation has made. We who submit ourselvs to the authority of government are responsible for the choices our leaders make in our name. The moral law must always supercede the law of man when the two disagree. God's people rose against legal slavery choosing to obey the moral law of God. MLK, and many others fought to change the law of the land that denied the rights as citizens to black folk. God's people must also rise up to protect the rights of the unborn, whom God knows (Jerimiah), though we do not. How can we call ourselves the people of God, Christians, and stand by while our unborn babies are being killed as a means of birth control?

Again, based on scripture, the wrath of God will visit those of god's people who do not protect the helpless. The wrath of God is not something that happens when we die, it is here and now. Lest I preach,

Be Blessed

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2004