[ad_1]
OPINION:
Dear Dr. E: As a former colleague at a Christian University in southern Illinois, I am quite disturbed by much of what you write. You tend to play loosely with Scripture, and your application is inconsistent. You condemn those on the other side of the “political fence” by implying that yours is the only valid interpretation of God’s word. For example, you keep challenging the faith of Vice President Harris by overlooking the fact that there is a diversity of Christian views on abortion and that the one you hold is really quite a recent development, having its origin in the Republican politics of the 1980s. I’m sure you are aware that there are various Scriptural interpretations among evangelical Christians concerning abortion and that yours is but one of those positions. Please stop implying that there is only one acceptable Christian view on this issue. — PROUD PRO-CHOICE CHRISTIAN PROFESSOR FROM GREENVILLE, ILLINOIS
Dear Pro-Choice Colleague: You argue that I am playing “loosely” and being “inconsistent” with Scripture. Really?
Is it playing “loose” with Scripture to argue that the dismemberment of a healthy 8-pound baby girl just minutes before she is born is unbiblical?
Is it somehow wrong to suggest that tearing her head, arms, and legs from her body is contrary to the Word of God?
Is it biblically “inconsistent” to suggest that harvesting this girl’s organs so they can be sold (at a profit) for research is evil?
Is it playing loose with Scripture to condemn those, such as Gov. Tim Walz and Vice President Kamala Harris, who refuse to support laws that would protect this girl’s life if she survived an abortionist’s failed attempt to kill her?
Are you arguing that all of this is somehow unbiblical and that to take the side of the “little ones” and defend them against this barbarism is somehow an inconsistent application of the Bible and its teaching?
If so, then I’m not sure what Bible you’re reading.
It surely is not the one of your own denomination and church tradition, nor is it even the one representing 2,000 years of ecumenical doctrine and teaching.
On this matter, your denomination is very clear. It states, “The intentional abortion of a person’s life, from conception on, must be judged to be a violation of God’s command, ’You shall not commit murder’” (Free Methodist Book of Discipline).
All of your sister holiness denominations say the same. For example, the Wesleyan Church says in its Book of Discipline that it “seeks to recognize and preserve the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death and, thus, is opposed to the use of induced abortion.” Likewise, The Church of the Nazarene states it “affirms the sanctity of human life as established by God the Creator and believes that such sanctity extends to the child not yet born. Life is a gift from God. All human life, including life developing in the womb, is created by God in His image and is, therefore, to be nurtured, supported, and protected. From the moment of conception, a child is a human being.”
As to your claim that this is all a recent political creation of the Republican Party, well, that is not true. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, for example, makes it very clear that “since the first century, the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion… [as] gravely contrary to the moral law.” And lest there be any doubt on the historicity of this position, the United States Board of Catholic Bishops states: “From earliest times, Christians sharply distinguished themselves from surrounding pagan cultures by rejecting abortion and infanticide. The earliest widely used documents of Christian teaching and practice after the New Testament in the 1st and 2nd centuries, the Didache (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) and Letter of Barnabas, condemned both practices, as did early regional and particular Church councils.”
My friend, you seem to be arguing that my agreement with your own denomination, as well as that of 2,000 years of Church teaching, is somehow inconsistent with the Bible and, therefore, is playing loose with Scripture. Your position seems odd and perhaps even a “loose” and somewhat “inconsistent” application of the truth.
Is there always room to debate biblical application on some minor points of doctrine? Sure. But is it “playing loose” with the Bible to defend the lives of innocent little boys and girls against adults who want to kill them and then sell their limbs and organs on the open market for financial gain? I think I will humbly risk “erroring” on the side of the children. If I’m wrong, somehow, I think Christ will understand.
“If anyone causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better if he had a millstone tied around his neck and be cast into the sea…. What you did to the least of these, you did to me.” ~ Jesus
If you are seeking guidance in today’s changing world, Higher Ground is there for you. Everett Piper, a Ph.D. and a former university president and radio host, takes your questions in his weekly ’Ask Dr. E’ column. If you have moral or ethical questions for which you’d like an answer, please email [email protected] and he may include it in a future column.
[ad_2]
Source link
