Moving Beyond Pro-Life
This is Douglas Wilson's view of abortion: http://www.credenda.org/issues/8-5anvil.php
This was my response to him:
Dear Doug Wilson,
I have been a fan of yours for the past two and half years (having spent 2 of those years as school teacher at Summit Christian Academy in Yorktown, VA). I had several questions and comments about your essay, "Moving Beyond 'Pro-Life'".
First, how do you define the word "sacred"? I have often argued that "There is no room for secularism, when all of life is sacred." The way I have meant the word sacred, I do not believe I am in heresy for this statement. However, it all hinges on how the word sacred is defined, and depending on how it is defined, I may have to adjust my rhetoric. My point though is that human beings are created in the image of God with great value and therefore should not be murdered.
That doesn't mean that God did wrong when he poured out His wrath on sinners. He is holy, and His wrath is just. That killing is not murder, but abortion is.
On the "fanatics" that kill abortion doctors, in my mind, I put them in the same camp with the abolitionist, John Brown, and John Brown in the same camp with them. But I have not figured out what camp to put them in yet. Are they just vigilantes, or are they lawless murderers? I see clearly that you say they are lawless murderers, but I do not see clearly how you make that judgment.
You said, "When God judges America for her contempt for her children, the judgment will fall not only on the adults, but also on the children--children considered so contemptible that even their own parents slaughtered them."
Perhaps in some cases. However, in many cases, do you not suppose that the children are completely innocent, and are saved by God's grace? Aren't Christians often the victims of injustice? You seem to almost categorically state that all aborted children are contemptible. In truth, we are all contemptible, but who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? Is birth necessary in order to be "reborn" or do all who die within the womb go to hell?
You said, "God does not delight in the death of the wicked (Ez.18:23) and neither should we. But if they persist in loving death after hearing the truth over the course of decades, then we ought not force this emergent alien nation into external righteousness. Let them kill themselves, for 'God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting' (Rom. 1:28), even 'murder' (Rom. 1:29). This is the wrath of God."
There is the Scripture in Revelation that says to let people be as people will be (let those who are vile continue to be vile, etc). However, the vast council of Scripture tells us to hold back those staggering toward the slaughter, to speak out against it, to resist, to make disciples, to command the gospel, to forcefully advance the Kingdom of God. I think the last thing the present church needs to hear is "Let the ungodly kill themselves." Rather, should we not be preaching, "Contend for the faith" and "Boldly declare the gospel" and "Love your neighbor as you love yourself"? Love always protects. True, when God finally pours out his wrath, we ought to acknowledge the justice of His judgment, but until that point, should we not intercede as Abraham interceded on behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah? Will not our prayers move the heart of God (according to His Sovereign plan to have the prayers of his people move His heart)?
"Third, we must take up arms to defend God's covenant children (Neh. 4:14). But we may not use violence until they come after our children. We ought not take up arms to overthrow the established authorities or to defend the lives of Molech worshippers and their children. This is far more secular than biblical."
Is it responsible to take the situation in the Book of Nehemiah to justify violence in our own day? Is there a clear line in Scripture that enables us to discern when violent action is called for and when non-violent protest should be used instead? Is it "our" children that we must defend or "God's covenant" children? How do you know that the child of the Molech worshipper is not one of God's elect? Should not that child be so protected? And what about defending our wives, our sisters, and our mothers?
As we are talking about taking up arms, should we also be talking about how to acquire the weapons we will need when we have to go to battle? Should we be talking about training a Christian militia?
Proverbs says, "A wise man attacks the city of the mighty and pulls down the stronghold in which they trusts." Certainly, we should always be doing this spiritually (through prayer, praise, and worship), intellectually (through preaching, teaching), example (through work with integrity and purity). But what about physically? Should we, like Gideon and Josiah, physically be tearing down the idols of the land?
In a time when many in the modern church have failed to love their neighbors as they love themselves, it seems too easy for people to read your rhetoric and embrace bigotry in the name of Christianity.
God bless.
This is Douglas Wilson's view of abortion: http://www.credenda.org/issues/8-5anvil.php
This was my response to him:
Dear Doug Wilson,
I have been a fan of yours for the past two and half years (having spent 2 of those years as school teacher at Summit Christian Academy in Yorktown, VA). I had several questions and comments about your essay, "Moving Beyond 'Pro-Life'".
First, how do you define the word "sacred"? I have often argued that "There is no room for secularism, when all of life is sacred." The way I have meant the word sacred, I do not believe I am in heresy for this statement. However, it all hinges on how the word sacred is defined, and depending on how it is defined, I may have to adjust my rhetoric. My point though is that human beings are created in the image of God with great value and therefore should not be murdered.
That doesn't mean that God did wrong when he poured out His wrath on sinners. He is holy, and His wrath is just. That killing is not murder, but abortion is.
On the "fanatics" that kill abortion doctors, in my mind, I put them in the same camp with the abolitionist, John Brown, and John Brown in the same camp with them. But I have not figured out what camp to put them in yet. Are they just vigilantes, or are they lawless murderers? I see clearly that you say they are lawless murderers, but I do not see clearly how you make that judgment.
You said, "When God judges America for her contempt for her children, the judgment will fall not only on the adults, but also on the children--children considered so contemptible that even their own parents slaughtered them."
Perhaps in some cases. However, in many cases, do you not suppose that the children are completely innocent, and are saved by God's grace? Aren't Christians often the victims of injustice? You seem to almost categorically state that all aborted children are contemptible. In truth, we are all contemptible, but who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? Is birth necessary in order to be "reborn" or do all who die within the womb go to hell?
You said, "God does not delight in the death of the wicked (Ez.18:23) and neither should we. But if they persist in loving death after hearing the truth over the course of decades, then we ought not force this emergent alien nation into external righteousness. Let them kill themselves, for 'God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting' (Rom. 1:28), even 'murder' (Rom. 1:29). This is the wrath of God."
There is the Scripture in Revelation that says to let people be as people will be (let those who are vile continue to be vile, etc). However, the vast council of Scripture tells us to hold back those staggering toward the slaughter, to speak out against it, to resist, to make disciples, to command the gospel, to forcefully advance the Kingdom of God. I think the last thing the present church needs to hear is "Let the ungodly kill themselves." Rather, should we not be preaching, "Contend for the faith" and "Boldly declare the gospel" and "Love your neighbor as you love yourself"? Love always protects. True, when God finally pours out his wrath, we ought to acknowledge the justice of His judgment, but until that point, should we not intercede as Abraham interceded on behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah? Will not our prayers move the heart of God (according to His Sovereign plan to have the prayers of his people move His heart)?
"Third, we must take up arms to defend God's covenant children (Neh. 4:14). But we may not use violence until they come after our children. We ought not take up arms to overthrow the established authorities or to defend the lives of Molech worshippers and their children. This is far more secular than biblical."
Is it responsible to take the situation in the Book of Nehemiah to justify violence in our own day? Is there a clear line in Scripture that enables us to discern when violent action is called for and when non-violent protest should be used instead? Is it "our" children that we must defend or "God's covenant" children? How do you know that the child of the Molech worshipper is not one of God's elect? Should not that child be so protected? And what about defending our wives, our sisters, and our mothers?
As we are talking about taking up arms, should we also be talking about how to acquire the weapons we will need when we have to go to battle? Should we be talking about training a Christian militia?
Proverbs says, "A wise man attacks the city of the mighty and pulls down the stronghold in which they trusts." Certainly, we should always be doing this spiritually (through prayer, praise, and worship), intellectually (through preaching, teaching), example (through work with integrity and purity). But what about physically? Should we, like Gideon and Josiah, physically be tearing down the idols of the land?
In a time when many in the modern church have failed to love their neighbors as they love themselves, it seems too easy for people to read your rhetoric and embrace bigotry in the name of Christianity.
God bless.
posted by Dan | 5:23 PM
|
23 comments
