 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Tearing down walls > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 5/28/2004 5:38 PM (GMT -6) |   | Sharing In The Chief Shepherd’s Heart
quote:
1 Pet 5:2-4 Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers... ...being examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.
The Pastor / Shepherd shares in a partnership with his Chief Shepherd, our Lord Jesus Christ. Picture for a moment how Jesus feels about the thousands of His little lambs who are being legally murdered each day. Simply put: To share in His heart for these precious little ones is to be “in sync” with the heart of our Chief Shepherd. Not sharing in this partnership is to be “out of sync” with His heart. The Pastor is not only to care for Jesus’ flock, he is to protect them – defend them. Is not the unborn baby a part of His flock? Yet today, many Pastors have been unaffected and silent about this legal holocaust in our land. I say this not to bring shame, but to invite in to a fellowship; a partnership.
My prayer for Pastors is to not miss out on sharing in “the fellowship of His sufferings” for His little ones. The losses that come from abortion – the loss of the children, and the damage done to the moms and to our society – should wake up the Warrior-Shepherd in us. These losses should move us to mourn and to find ways to use our God-given position and influence to motivate and mobilize our congregations. We do have two good things going for us: It’s in our Pastoral DNA to protect like this, and, He’s seeking to share His heart with any one who is open.
One way we share in Jesus' heart is through prayer. For the last few years I’ve made it a part of our Sunday service each week to bring His little lambs before His throne in prayer. We pray for the overturning of Roe v. Wade, for cleansing and healing of our nation for the sin of allowing legalized abortion, and for the women who have been effected by abortion; that they’d look to the Lord for forgiveness and healing.
I do this on a regular basis for two reasons: First, I want to keep our hearts tender toward God in this area (it’s so easy to become calloused and indifferent toward this holocaust of legalized abortion happening daily in our land), and second, I want to lead our congregation in doing our part. In this way, we are “blowing the trumpet” and thus freeing ourselves from the guilt of this sin of abortion (see Ezekiel 33:1-20). If God decides to discipline our nation because we’ve allowed this holocaust, I want to make sure that our congregation has cleansed our own hands from this bloodshed.
It’s not just the atrocity of abortion that breaks Jesus’ heart. It’s the fact that we Christians who are citizens of this country have allowed legalized abortion. By pointing our finger at the government we are judging ourselves – for we are the government (of the people, by the people and for the people). You see, only about half of us Christians vote – which allows pro-death candidates to win elections. Does this make the Church answerable to God for legalized abortion? Does this invoke His discipline?
We can passively "wait and see" if it does, or we can pro-actively respond to His Spirit and altogether avoid His discipline. Pastors who share in Jesus’ Shepherd-heart for the unborn victims of abortion need to start by encouraging their people to vote – and to vote for pro-life candidates. Pastors know deep inside that God will give the victory “into our hands” (and give us laws that protect the unborn) if Christians would simply vote for pro-life candidates. An Amercia.restored, or an America disciplined? Who knows if God is leaving it up to us which story we're going to leave to our children and grandchildren.
If there’s a Pastor out there who feels “out of sync” with Jesus in this area, simply say, “Lord, I want to share in Your heart on this.” And when He answers that prayer, Jesus' comfort and His closeness will be that Pastor's reward; for He has said, “Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted…” and “…The Lord is close to the brokenhearted.” The added blessing is the feeling that we're being true to our calling when people call us “Pastor.”
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
 |
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/2/2004 1:28 PM (GMT -6) | | Thank you John Earp for you sane thinking. Are we living in an insane world or what?
Tigress, I think that my words were sincere and compassionate. It's just that I was addressing the most oppressed victim here - the unborn child. Tigress, rather than bashing me, you could ask what I, as a Shepherd, am doing for the women who and men who are involved with abortion. I would gladly share the graceful way we lovingly deal with women and men who have had a part in abortion, or who want to keep their baby to full term - but I think an apology first would be appropriate before I do - since you have already insinuated that I am doing nothing as a Shepherd to minister to these folks.
As long as a person ignores the baby in the womb and de-personalize that awesome child who is made in God's image, the subject of murdering that infant always seems to be a side issue. It's murder. It matters not if you think it is or not - it's murder. Even if you're not absolutely sure that there is a human being in the womb, it seems very humane to give that child the benefit of the doubt. When murder is the issue, what right does a person have to murder? That's the only issue.
Have our "rights" so blinded us that we can't even tell that we're murdering children and don't even know it? I expect "the world" to be thinking like this, but it shameful that Christians are in such a stupor.
If Christians vote their "pocket book" over their "values," God will take that as a request to do something radical to wake us out of our stupor.
Tigress, how do you really fell about that baby in the womb? What are you doing to be a Shepherd to that little innocent one? I am sincerely asking you this and will not judge you before your answer.
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tigress
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1252
| Posted 6/3/2004 4:39 AM (GMT -6) | | Wow, it's really sad that you actually assume that I'm a liberal just because I was rebuking you in Christ for expecting people to do the right thing without helping them to do the right thing. Greg Boyd spoke on exactly what I said to you, a few weeks ago, and said the exact same thing I did - so is he a liberal, too? His preaching is where I got these ideas from. I didn't think this way until I heard what he said about it at that time. If you had read some of my numerous discussions with DLW on this subject you'd see that I'm entirely opposed to abortion and won't even vote for candidates who are pro-choice because I can't in good conscience support abortion because the blood of the babies would be on my hands.
I'm sorry if I presumed anything about you, but what I wrote still stands. If you preach to women to keep their baby but don't also preach to Christians to aid them in doing that, you're abandoning the babies themselves, if the mothers can't provide for them. I fully support all that you wrote, but it should have also included what I wrote so that no one could oppose you. Then, pro-choicers would have no argument against you. And yes I believe women and men should be responsible for their actions so they had better keep the baby. I'm just saying that we can't possibly expect them to do that if they don't have enough money in their bank accounts or any health insurance and emotional good health to do that. It's like saying to a beggar at your door, "God bless you and go in peace!" without being that blessing and giving them some food, clothes and shelter. Jesus Himself said that. Is He a liberal, too? He wouldn't tell a woman to keep her baby without helping her to do that.
I actually had qualms about what Greg said for the very same reason John Earp wrote about. I thought, why should we be responsible for other people's mistakes? If we provide support for them, they'll think it's alright to just go ahead and get pregnant out of wedlock and drop the babies in our laps. But, one of my friends told me that the unwanted pregnancy itself is usually enough of a "punishment" or reality check for the girls/women so that they're unlikely to let it happen again. If they have our loving, Christlike support, they'll be more likely to accept Jesus and teach their child to accept Him, if they do keep the child, and to humbly learn from their own mistakes.
Oh, and in regards to this:
"Tigress, how do you really fell about that baby in the womb? What are you doing to be a Shepherd to that little innocent one? I am sincerely asking you this and will not judge you before your answer."
I'm not the one going around preaching at women, so I don't have to put my deeds where my mouth is - although if I did, then I would. It's not my ministry. But if my ministry were to preach vocally about this, then my ministry would automatically demand that I back it up with action, i.e. support for the women and unborn.
*Note*
I'm adding this next part later in the day:
That darn conscience, I tell ya!  I keep feeling bad about how harsh I was with you. I'm sorry for that, but what I said is still valid even though I was a bit too offensive in stating it. Please forgive me for that.
Tigress 
"Name a shrub after me. Preferably one that's prickly and difficult to eradicate."
-Captain Jack Aubrey
"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" | | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 6/3/2004 8:52 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BemaBound
Sharing In The Chief Shepherd’s Heart
We pray for the overturning of Roe v. Wade
It’s not just the atrocity of abortion that breaks Jesus’ heart. It’s the fact that we Christians who are citizens of this country have allowed legalized abortion.
We can passively "wait and see" if it does, or we can pro-actively respond to His Spirit and altogether avoid His discipline. Pastors who share in Jesus’ Shepherd-heart for the unborn victims of abortion need to start by encouraging their people to vote – and to vote for pro-life candidates. Pastors know deep inside that God will give the victory “into our hands” (and give us laws that protect the unborn) if Christians would simply vote for pro-life candidates. An Amercia.restored, or an America disciplined? Who knows if God is leaving it up to us which story we're going to leave to our children and grandchildren.
Hi Bema,
Thank you for sharing this article. I did not get involved in the other thread on abortion. It took off way too fast and I was tied up with ministry and "life." This is a subject that is near and dear to me. I am a shepherd. I also had an abortion before I became a believer and have had a part in healing with women who have considered abortion and not followed through, as well as women who did have an abortion.
I would caution you (I know this isn't your article) in something. Yes, abortion is murder. But, it doesn't necessarily follow that those who have an abortion are murderers. And we do need to speak up, but always in love. I have heard abortion "preached" against in a way that was very hurtful to those who had abortions. We need to speak the truth in love. It is a silent holocaust for sure.
It is my understanding that the author of "Roe vs Wade" was saved and wrote a second book? Have you heard that? I haven't had a chance to research that.
I recall an award winning photograph on the front of Time magazine (I think...not sure) of a physician holding the tiny hand of an unborn child. He was performing surgery on the baby and the infant clutched his finger. He lifted it beyond the womb for one stunning photograph.
I do not believe that we "allow" abortion, anymore than God allows abortion. Perhaps we don't always speak up as we ought to. With free will, abortion is impossible to stop. It is another evil that objectifies people.
The last paragraph above suggests that the Father will discipline us for "allowing" this to take place. That would be like punishing us for His creating us with free will. I do not believe that He does that. Yes, there are consequences for sin. Perhaps I am understanding this wrong.
I know that all sin has consequences. I also know that He has removed our sin, as far as the East is from the West. I believe grace is what we really need to offer...if we can reach the mothers of these unborn children and offer what might prevent them from deciding to abort these children (or those who decide for them). At the time, it seems like a desperate escape route. It is only when you follow that route that you find it is a trap, and a far more desperate one.
I do believe abortion is one of the most horrific evils of our time. We don't pray enough about it. Even I get so busy with family and life and ministry that I literally "forget" about it.
Thanks for reminding us.
God Bless,
Jo-Anne
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/4/2004 5:54 AM (GMT -6) | | Jo-Anne,
Thanks for your input and care for the unborn. A few clarifications:
I am not saying that those who have abortions are murderers. I do believe that many who have abortions are duped into thinking that the child in the womb is nothing but tissue. If that's the case, then they wouldn't be "pre-meditated murderers." Yet, if the act of taking someone else's life is murder, which it is, then, whether it’s intentional or not, it still by definition nothing but murder.
I’m sure that many bigoted slave owners didn’t think it was murder when they killed one of their slaves. After all, that slave was considered to be only 4/5 human – so, it wasn’t killing a human being. The black person wasn’t considered a person who was made in the image and likeness of God. Besides, they were just property of the white man. Hmmmm. Sounds similar to our present situation. The woman “owns” that which is in her womb so she has the right to kill that baby – since it probably isn’t human anyway. I wonder how the liberal woman will feel when she finds out that she is acting exactly like the bigoted white man whom she despises?
And as for us being responsible for allowing legal abortions…the real question is: How are we, as Christians, as citizens of this country not responsible? God is the one who not only gave us citizenship, but gave us a vote. We are the government of and by and for the people. We’re it! We've allowed it and, by not doing something to get laws to protect these little precious lambs, we are continuing to allow it.
You see, the first purpose of a government’s laws is to protect its citizens – and our laws are not protecting the most innocent children. I will agree that hearts need to be changed, and just laws don’t change hearts – only God can do that. But just laws get the heart thinking and moving in the right direction.
For example, since we’ve instilled laws that made slavery illegal, our country has moved in the direction of teaching while people to treat the black person with the same honor and respect as they would a white person (or else!). Some actually in their heart have freed themselves of the chains of bigotry because of those laws. The result has not been the total eradication of bigotry, but look at our country now compared to 1850. And why? Because of laws that forbid this horrible bigotry.
The same thing needs to happen with abortion laws. The laws get us thinking in the right direction – to not kill the innocent baby in the womb. It will not prevent all abortions, but it will prevent millions of little ones from having their lives snatched away, and these laws will free us from being a hypocritical nation that claims life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all (except the unborn) – not to mention the hypocrisy of going in to another country to help innocent people, while legally allowing innocent children to be murdered in our own country.
Anyway, I was in the middle of writing a post in response to Tigress. There are some points there that may bring further clarification. I will post that as soon as I post this.
Thanks again for your tender care and concern for the unborn.
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
|
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/4/2004 8:05 AM (GMT -6) | | Tigress,
I would like to accept your apology, but it seems like you did it again. You accused me, rebuked me for not "...helping them (the women, men) to do the right thing." You wrote:
quote:
I was rebuking you in Christ for expecting people to do the right thing without helping them to do the right thing (emphasis mine).
What did I say (or not say) that led you to conclude (and therefore rebuke me) that I wasn't helping them to do the right thing? In the same way, you could have rebuked me of "not helping the orphan and the widow" just because I didn't mention anything about helping the orphan and the widow. Do you think that this warrants a rebuke? I was simply pleading the case for a people group who are called "non-people" and who are legally being murdered. The Bible says:
quote:
Prov 31:8 Open your mouth for the speechless, in the cause of all who are appointed to die.
I appreciated the tenor of your second post and was glad to hear that you are pro-life. Just to let you know, our church provided a 13 week class for women who have gone through the trauma of abortion. The Lord ministered healing to their souls and to their relationships. Women who are hurt and confused because of their pregnancies are receiving help from Crisis Pregnancy Centers, from caring Christian friends, and our Church is filled with these caring Christian friends. We are not a large church (about 100), but for the last few years we've been in the top 10 givers during the Chrisis Pregnancy Fundraisers in the Phoenix area. I'm not tooting my horn, but I am proud of our people and their care for those women who are struggling in their pregnancies. And I'm grateful that I can have a part in promoting and emphasizing the importance of this kind of care.
These women have people coming-along-side them. This is good and ought to happen more and more. But this battle is fought on many fronts. Who are the ones pleading the case for little children being murdered each day? In a war, if there are limited troops in an area, it’s the soldiers who are in immediate danger of death who ought to receive help over those who are needing their wounds bandaged. We are not to neglect those wounded, but it would be uncaring to not make it our priority to cry out for those who are in immediate danger of being killed.
The issue I'm addressing is that there are image bearers who are in immediate danger of death; little children in this country are legally being murdered every day. Murder is horrible enough; but it's the "legal" aspect of this that should break our hearts and cause us to be outraged. One doesn't have to be a Pastor, or a Shepherd to hurt and be outraged when little children are being legally murdered. One only has to be a human being that has feelings, a conscience and a heart to care. Many people who are not even believers in Jesus can see the obvious wrong in what is being done. We all know in our heart of hearts that there’s something terribly wrong happening whenever little innocent children are being legally murdered.
I recently heard Dr. Boyd's message on abortion. He expressed his take on how to think about this issue in a "Kingdom-under" way. But it seems like he did what so many others do. The moment one takes the focus off of a little child being murdered, then everything from a woman’s right, to a woman’s need for understanding and love takes precedence. And then anyone who brings up the little children who are being murdered are labeled as “political,” “judgmental” or “not showing Jesus’ love for those women who have made poor choices (the choice to either get pregnant when they had no intention of being a mother, or the choice to have an abortion and then having to deal with the guilt and shame and heartache because of that choice)."
I'm not saying that Dr. Boyd did this deliberately. He seems to me like a very caring man. Yet, what he did do was to raise the question about the unborn child’s personhood without answering that question. This is more destructive than he is aware of.
He said, (and I quote)
quote:
Dr. Boyd: …A lot of metaphysical questions: when does personhood begin? When does the soul enter the baby? When does it take on the image of God? And who should make these decisions? The world has never had a consensus on this. Western culture has never had a consensus on this.
In raising these questions without answering them, Dr. Boyd throws doubt on the personhood of the baby in the womb. And after he de-personalizes these children, he then plays the peacemaker between the pro-life camp and the pro-choice camp. How noble. You see, it's up to us, the Church, to let the world know what God thinks about an issue – whether it be slavery, or abortion, or same-sex marriages. The Scriptures say
quote:
1 Cor 2:15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no man.
In these few sentences above, Dr. Boyd's de-personalization of the unborn baby and then raising himself up as the peacemaker and "true kingdom builder" needs to be assesed. Let’s assess this de-personalization through the unanswered questions he raises:
quote:
Dr. Boyd: "When does personhood begin? When does the soul enter the baby?"
There is a nutty professor at Princeton - Peter Singer - who is an advocate for (and I quote him) "... active euthanasia for severely disabled newborn infants..." (www.petersingerlinks.com/self.htm second paragraph from the bottom). He says that a parent should have the right to kill that infant if there are any abnormalities they see in the baby up to a certain age. This is where our darkened thinking is taking us.
If we have not determined when the soul comes in to a human being, cannot a parent justify killing an unwanted 1 or 2 year old? After all, he too doesn't know when the soul comes into the human being. He'd be using the same argument as Dr. Boyd. It is an unanswered question, isn’t it?
Or, should we let the courts decide when? But they have already decided. The Supreme Court says (in essence), “At birth the baby becomes a real human being, with the full rights of an American citizen – and not until then." Well, if that’s true, then don’t be upset at those who choose partial birth abortion on a nine month baby in the womb. Don't call that "wrong" because it may not be a soul yet at 9 months in the womb. And don't raise your voice in outrage if in 10 years our country decides that a baby is not a true human being until its first birthday, and women are killing their unwanted 9 month old babies (with legal protection) because the child isn't really what they wanted.
quote:
Dr. Boyd: And who should make these decisions?
He is insinuating that nobody can make these decisions. It's interesting that in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme court hinted that the lawmakers need to determine when life begins. So, they were really leaving it up to us, the people, who elect these lawmakers.
The answer to his question is this: The Church is the one that God set up to be the authorative voice on important issues like this one; we are Jesus' ambassadors - giving God's perspective, God's voice to the world. And it's not because we're any better or smarter, but because He has equipped us and called us to be His voice - especially those whom God has set up to be spokespersons (i.e. Pastors). But the reason the Church can't have one voice on this matter is because there are Pastors who would rather have a "win/win" for the pro-lifers and pro-choicers - instead of having one voice that proclaims outraged because of this holocaust of legal infanticide happening in our land. If not the Church, than who should have the authoritative voice? The politicians? The courts?
It's God's people who have God's heart and mind. Whether or not the world listens to us, we must tell them the unpopular, politically incorrect message that abortion is murder, homosexuality (along with all the other sexual sins like adultery and pedophilia) is wrong, and that God who deeply loves all people will forgive, cleanse, heal and bring restoration to anyone who calls on Him. Let's face it, "the world" considers Christians as weird; we may as well be weird with the truth, rather than weird and acting just like the world.
But here’s the real issue: in America, it’s the people who decide what the laws will be. We elect men and women to represent our choices. Since we are the government here (remember – of, by and for the people?), we have already decided on this issue by electing representatives to choose for us. Citizenship is a stewardship given to us by God. And we will answer to God for the way in which we stewarded/ruled our country. Like it or not, and whether we chose it or not, we are the rulers of this nation (though some judges today think that they are and are usurping themselves over "we the people"... - just a side note there).
We don’t have the pro-life representation because we, the Church, either voted our purses over our values, or we didn’t vote at all (under half of Christians actually vote). We have already decided – by being O.K. with the laws that say a baby isn’t a real person – and can be killed if the mother so chooses – without any legal consequences. Our silence is a loud proclamation to God, "God, we just don't care!" ... no matter how we clothe that fact with theological gobbledygook.
Remember, it's the enemy who is the one who "comes to kill..."; he is the evil force behind killing God's image bearers in the womb. He is the initiator of this horrible evil - not the women, or the politicians - even though he dupes them to do his dirty work. He is a killer and he has fooled us to thinking that the killing isn't even happening. Therefore, there should only be compassion for those who don't know what they're doing. It's the Pastors - the Shepherds that ought to know better. They ought to know in the spiritual realm what's really happening. And they ought to be leading God's people into the heart of God on issues such as this - not leading them to feel O.K. about such a horrible thing happening right in front of our eyes; something that we can do something about - through our prayers, and through our God-given rulership in this country. But, why bother if we're not convinced that children are really being legally murdered each day?
I expect the world to de-humanize the unborn. But, as those little eyes in the womb look to the Pastors (the "Shepherd who defend") and say, "Help me", only to hear the Pastor say, "I'm not even sure if you're human - we're trying to get a concensus here..."; as long as that pastor de-humanizes that precious little one, how can we expect the Body of Christ to feel the pain of little children being killed every day - legally - in our midst - when we can do something about it - but we don't?
Dr. Boyd knows in his heart of heart that the unborn child in the womb is a human being, a person with a soul, made in the image of God. He knows because he’s a pastor, he’s a Christian, and he’s a human being with an awakened conscience. This is not an attack on him - but it is taking his message and challenging it. If he reads this, I hope he'll honestly consdier what is said. The final quote of his:
quote:
Dr. Boyd: The world has never had a consensus on this. Western culture has never had a consensus on this.
Since when is truth determined by a majority vote – or by Western Culture? Believe it or not, as weird as we are to the world, the world actually looks to us, the Church, and asks, “What’s God's take on this matter” - whatever the issue (remember right after 9/11, the cameras and microphones were in the face of Church leaders to discover "God's take" on the Twin Towers). Culture is not who determines what the truth is. God does - and he has left it up to us, His Church, to proclaim that truth.
Do we wait for a world consensus, or a consensus by Western culture to determine if Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? God's spokesperson looks to God's word, prays to his God and then gives God’s take on an issue. And when it comes to issues like abortion, we have the Bible, His Holy Spirit, our awakened consciences, and we even have a majority of people in America that believe abortion is murder. Yet, we have pastors speaking for God and saying that’s it’s not yet determined if that little one in the womb is a person made in the image and likeness of God, with a soul.
The main flaw in Dr. Boyd's message was that he skirted the issue of calling these little ones "real image bearers - real people" and in doing so, he has become part of the problem and not the solution. If he pleads ignorance to the unborn child being a real person, than why would he promote the cause of moving toward that “so-called” agreed upon solution - that “abortions should be as few as possible?” If he’s convinced that it’s just a bunch of tissue in the womb and not a person, then what difference would it be to have many or few abortions? And if he is not sure of that living thing in the womb (not sure if it’s just tissue or a living soul), than why is he not giving the benefit of the doubt to the baby (who is possibly being murdered) rather than to the woman (who may lose the right to rid herself of a mass of tissue)? How disingenuous. He can't have it both ways. If he's not sure, why isn't he giving the baby the benefit of the doubt? Dr. Boyd - what say you about the unborn in the womb? You are positioned by God as a Pastor to make a decision. A baby? You're not sure? Just some tissue without a soul? If the answer is one of the first two, then you have a responsibility to defend the innocent child. If it's tissue, then say so. Your position doesn't allow you to be indifferent.
Leaders give clarity - not cloudiness. And if God is the one to whom the Pastor will answer, how would God feel if that Pastor erred on the side of calling that living thing in the womb a human being made in His Image - and then cried out for that child's right to live, but found out it wasn't a human being after all? I think you would not have any regret. On the other hand, how would God feel if He sees that living thing as much as an image bearer as you are, and you missed that truth - and didn't defend that little precious one in the womb? I think that you would have much regret. I'm just trying to spare you from that regret; honestly. Because I believe that's exactly what a Pastor will feel when he sees Jesus face to face if he doesn't cry out for that little precious innocent bearer of God's image.
I'm sure the moment a Pastor calls the unborn "human," he will see what's really happening, and he will immediately connect with God's heart and be a co-intercessor with our Great High Priest, our Chief Shepherd and loving intercessor, Jesus Christ. That precious partnership awaits every believer who has the eyes to see, the courage to believe, and the voice to proclaim the humanness - the personhood of the unborn.
quote:
God: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." (Gen. 9:6)
Thank God for His grace and mercy through Jesus Christ to cleanse from every sin. But, if abortion is killing, and you don't call it killing, then how will you truly minister the love of Jesus to the woman who is full of guilt and shame in her conscience for an abortion she had? Will you say, "Oh - don't worry... we don't even know that it is a real human being. There's a chance that you didn't really kill that baby."
The powerful Gospel and the powerful love of Jesus is able to completely cleanse from every sin and to restore any soul - even if that person took the life of another. Yet, that cleansing and restoration can only truly come as we "confess our sins." How can you really minister to the precious woman of God if she knows that she killed her little one, but you minimize the just guilt and shame she feels (which Jesus is ready to free her from) by causing her to doubt if she really did commit an act of murder? You have no right bringing her to Jesus for complete cleansing of a sin that you are not sure she even committed. And do you also train your women leaders to minister like this to women who need Jesus' cleansing and healing? You boldly proclaim: "We ought to be showing Jesus' love to these women..." but your words have disqualified you from ministering the kind of "Jesus' powerful and pure love" that's needed for a woman who has gone through the trauma of abortion. His blood cleanses us from all sin - not from all "kind-of" or "maybe" sin. It's not a sin to kill "tissue." It is a (forgivable) sin to kill one made in God's image.
We will all see in the end that God sees the baby in the womb as a person, for which Jesus died; a person Jesus deeply loves – as much as you and I. And we will see how brokenhearted God was with all His little ones being murdered - legally. I'd rather see that, and share that feeling with God today, then when I see Him face to face.
Even if Dr. Boyd isn’t sure about that, what a different message it would have been if he would have started out by saying: “Since we are not sure that there is an image bearer in the womb – from conception - then let’s give the benefit of the doubt to that baby in the womb. “ Then, he would have to deal with the abortion issue as a possible act of murder.
If this was his message, I don’t think the focus would be on “how we can have fewer legal murders,” but “what do we need to do as God’s caring people, to change these horrible laws - the laws that legalize the killing of little innocent people. How can we pray, and vote, and lift up our voices? And then he ought to lead God's people in ways to do so. For I’m sure he would have that kind of stand if our society got to the point of determining that one year old children aren't fully human yet, and are allowed to be killed.
Again, pastors: if you think that you are "out of sync" with Jesus' heart on this matter, I challenge you, dare you, plead with you to simply go to Jesus, our Chief Shepherd who pleads for His sheep, and ask Him, "Jesus, give me your heart on this for Your little ones in the womb." Should any sincere pastor do this, then email me when you are crying so hard that you need another pastor to cry with you because the pain is so unbearable.
In His grasp,
Michael
M7J7L7@aol.com
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tigress
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1252
| Posted 6/4/2004 9:10 AM (GMT -6) | | Michael,
I agree with you. But in God's sight abortion is no more sinful than any of the other political issues that Christians in this country have been indifferent to. There are dozens of ways in which our government isn't completely just to everyone it governs and Christians should be protesting those injustices just as much as abortion. Are you doing that? Because if you aren't, you're being a hypocrite. Most Christians do vote pro-life and aren't afraid to admit it. There's not much more most Christians can be expected to do than that because God calls different Christians to focus on different ministries and issues. So, don't assume a position of self-righteousness over those of us who aren't called to do everything that you're saying that all Christians should do. If what you're saying is true, you should be giving equal amount of time to protesting the poor health care system in this country; the injustice of heavily taxing the middle class and not taxing the upper class enough; overpriced prescription drugs for the elderly; lower wages for women than men; environmental issues which if not solved will affect the health of our descendents and on and on.
My point is that Christ's commission to His Church was simply this: "Go and make disciples of all nations." The best way to do that is to show love. No other way works. The more people see Christ's love in us towards them, the sooner they'll accept Jesus and the Holy Spirit Himself will convict them of sins like abortion, etc. Yes, it's right to stand up for the oppressed like the unborn and those discriminated against, etc. but our sole purpose as Christ's ambassadors is to reach the lost for their eternal salvation. That's our primary purpose, and all else is secondary to that goal. Don't lose your focus because if you do, you'll let God down and when you stand before Him, He'll have to tell you that you focused too much on trying to make people do the right thing without showing them how to live with Jesus for eternity - putting the cart before the horse. Whenever Jesus talked with anyone He told them first how to come to Him - so their spirits would be made anew. That was of primary importance to Him. He didn't focus on their individual sins because that would have wasted too much time. It was more important to Him that they understand that all sin in general separates them from the Father, so He told them to repent and make Himself their Lord. Then the Holy Spirit could start regenerating their hearts and minds so that they'd have the power to stop continuously sinning whatever individual sins each person struggled with.
Paul said that we're not to judge the world - only the Church, because the world hasn't made Christ their Lord (1 Cor. 5:12-13). So, the only way for the world to care about doing the right thing, is if they come to the Lord. Otherwise, all the protesting Christians do will be in vain - not doing anyone any good.
Tigress
"Name a shrub after me. Preferably one that's prickly and difficult to eradicate."
-Captain Jack Aubrey
"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" | | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 6/4/2004 2:24 PM (GMT -6) | |
(Bema) Thanks for your input and care for the unborn. A few clarifications:
I am not saying that those who have abortions are murderers. I do believe that many who have abortions are duped into thinking that the child in the womb is nothing but tissue. If that's the case, then they wouldn't be "pre-meditated murderers." Yet, if the act of taking someone else's life is murder, which it is, then, whether it’s intentional or not, it still by definition nothing but murder.
(Jo-Anne) I realize that you're not saying that "those who have abortions are murderers," but you'd be surprised what an easy leap it is for some. I was one of those who were "duped" as you put it, and although I am not (was not) a murderer, I do agree that abortion is murder. I can't think of any instance where you are actually killing somone, that you don't know that you are killing someone (with this exception).
(Bema) I’m sure that many bigoted slave owners didn’t think it was murder when they killed one of their slaves. After all, that slave was considered to be only 4/5 human – so, it wasn’t killing a human being. The black person wasn’t considered a person who was made in the image and likeness of God. Besides, they were just property of the white man. Hmmmm. Sounds similar to our present situation. The woman “owns” that which is in her womb so she has the right to kill that baby – since it probably isn’t human anyway. I wonder how the liberal woman will feel when she finds out that she is acting exactly like the bigoted white man whom she despises?
(Jo-Anne) The difference is - as we talked about before this, is that the "bigoted slave owner" sees the person, and knows he/she is taking a life, regardless of how they see that life. But here's an interesting thought. I have come to understand that evil objectifies people, and an unborn baby that is referred to as tissue (as my parents Dr told me), is objectifying that child. It's easy to get rid of "tissue." What a stupid thing to say. If only I had thought to ask what he meant by "tissue." I thank God for His forgiveness and healing and transformation and for two beautiful children.
(Bema) And as for us being responsible for allowing legal abortions…the real question is: How are we, as Christians, as citizens of this country not responsible?
(Jo-Anne) I guess we are "not responsible" in the sense that we are not responsible for the free will choices of others - both human and non. We are however to be influencial, and there is no excuse for not being influencial.
(Bema) You see, the first purpose of a government’s laws is to protect its citizens – and our laws are not protecting the most innocent children. I will agree that hearts need to be changed, and just laws don’t change hearts – only God can do that. But just laws get the heart thinking and moving in the right direction.
(Jo-Anne) Precisely because they do not see them as children. Even photographs of an 8 week old baby have not afforded them the same rights and privileges of a newborn. We do need to have a voice. You're right. I think part of the reason this is unaddressed is that the enemy keeps us so busy in ministry "putting out little fires" that we fail to see the evil that is burning out of control.
(Bema) For example, since we’ve instilled laws that made slavery illegal, our country has moved in the direction of teaching while people to treat the black person with the same honor and respect as they would a white person (or else!). Some actually in their heart have freed themselves of the chains of bigotry because of those laws. The result has not been the total eradication of bigotry, but look at our country now compared to 1850. And why? Because of laws that forbid this horrible bigotry.
(Jo-Anne) (I'm Canadian, but we have our share of racism/bigotry. It's universal I guess - and is rooted in fear. Perhaps that is what abortion is rooted in as well - fear - and the answer to fear is perfect love. Perhaps it means loving one mother/father at a time?)
(Bema) The same thing needs to happen with abortion laws. The laws get us thinking in the right direction – to not kill the innocent baby in the womb. It will not prevent all abortions, but it will prevent millions of little ones from having their lives snatched away, and these laws will free us from being a hypocritical nation that claims life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all (except the unborn) – not to mention the hypocrisy of going in to another country to help innocent people, while legally allowing innocent children to be murdered in our own country.
(Jo-Anne) If they were seen as children, their would be such an outcry, but they are not.
(Bema)Thanks again for your tender care and concern for the unborn.
(Jo-Anne) Bema, thank you for your passion about this, and for making a difference. "It only takes a spark to get a fire going..." I'm sure you will inspire others.
Jo-Anne
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/4/2004 4:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Jo-Anne, JefScott,
I appreciate your posts and the soundness of your thoughts and words. Sane thoughts and words always make my heart leap for joy.
Tigress,
You said,
quote:
So, the only way for the world to care about doing the right thing, is if they come to the Lord. Otherwise, all the protesting Christians do will be in vain - not doing anyone any good.
Would you tell all the black people that marched in the 60's (protesting the laws that discriminated against them) that it didn't do any good; that all they needed to do was to love the white bigot, pray for them, and find a way to lead them to the Lord (since no change can happen unless they come to the Lord)? Did any change happen through their peaceful marches?
Why then should we vote at all if all we need to be doing is to "preach the Gospel"? It's not like people who are outspoken for the innocent unborn are doing nothing but this. Regarding this atrocity of abortion, I may spend a few minutes in prayer, read up on what's going on, speak out for the unborn, vote for pro-life (rather than pro-death) candidates, and pray for about a minute in our Sunday service (not only for this issue, but for those who don't know the Lord, and for the servicemen in war right now). God's word commands us to make disciples, preach His word, visit the sick, care for the widow, orphan and the weak, speak out for those who can't speak for themselves, do your work unto the Lord, give of your finances to His work, speak out for the defenseless... and on and on. Why are you insinuating that we're to do one and not the other?
All injustices are wrong. But it just seems to me that an emphasis on changing laws that allow the legal murdering of little children is a little more important than making sure that we get a fair price on gas.
I've thought a lot about this - about why are not our souls gripped and our hearts breaking over this abortion issue. What I've surmised is this: the legal killing of the unborn doesn't grip our souls and break our hearts is because we don't understand that this unborn being is a precious soul to God, a human being made in His image, and (if we do understand this), it's because we think a woman has a right to kill her baby because it's in her body (even though that body is not hers... it belongs to God).
I know this is true because there's not one person I know who wouldn't be broken-hearted and outraged if we had laws in place that protected mothers killing their one year old children. Would your heart break and would you do something if this was true? If I'm right about this, then do you see the hypocrisy with the different responses toward the unborn and the one year old? If a person honestly admits:
"Yes, I'd weep and wail and do what I could to change the laws if the laws protected women who killed their one year old child - but my response is different if the laws protect a woman to kill her child in the womb. My heart doesn't break over that, nor do I think it's necessary to take action"
- then that person is admitting to being hypocritical - because they believe that the unborn are human beings just as much as the one year old child, yet they are unmoved by the murder of the unborn.
Jo-Anne - you said it so perfectly:
quote:
Jo-Anne:If they [the unborn] were seen as children, their would be such an outcry, but they are not.
By the way - part of "discipling the nations" is to "teach them His ways." And His way, regarding the unborn, has never changed: it's "Thou shalt not kill."
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
|
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/5/2004 3:09 AM (GMT -6) | | Perhaps, this can help us to see things a little more clearly. I cut and pasted this from the "Silent No More" websight (given at the end of this)
SLED
The unborn differs from the newborn in four ways, none of which are relevant to its status as a human being. Those four ways are size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency. The acronym SLED is a helpful reminder of those differences.
Size: The unborn are smaller then newborns, but since when has size had anything to do with the rights that people have? Men are generally larger than women, does that mean they deserve more rights? Is Shaquille O'Neal more of a person than feminist Gloria Steinem simply because he is larger? Clearly size isn't the issue.
Level of development: True, the unborn are less developed than newborns, but this too is morally irrelevant. A newborn, for that matter, is less developed than a toddler. A toddler is less developed than an adolescent. An adolescent is less developed than an adult. But we speak of all as equally human. Is a child of 4, for example, less of a person because she has not yet developed sexually? It follows, then, that the ability to perform human functions is not a necessary condition for human personhood. Rather, a person is one with the natural, inherent capacity to give rise to personal acts--even if she lacks the current ability to perform those acts. People who are unconscious do not have the present capacity to perform personal acts. We don't kill them because of it, nor should we kill the unborn.
Environment: True, the unborn is located in a different place, but how does a change in location suddenly change a non-human into a human? Did you stop being human when you walked from your house to the car? From the kitchen to the den? Clearly, where one is has no bearing on who one is. A child in the incubator of her mother's womb is no less a child then the one being sustained by neonatal technology. Ladies and gentlemen, you don't stop being human simply because you have a different address.
Degree of dependency: If viability is what makes one human, then all those dependent on kidney machines, heart pace-makers, and insulin would have to be declared non-persons. There is no ethical difference between an unborn child who is plugged into and dependent upon its mother and a kidney patient who is plugged into and dependent upon a kidney machine. Siamese twins do not forfeit their right to live simply because they depend on each other’s circulatory systems.
We can see, then, that the unborn child differs from a newborn in only four ways--size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency--and none of those differences are good reasons for disqualifying it as fully human. Once you can put to rest the opposition’s arguments that the unborn are not human, the only logical conclusion that anyone can arrive at is that abortion is murder.
www.afterabortion.org
Silent No More Web Site: www.silentnomoreawareness.org
“...the unborn child differs from a newborn in only four ways...”
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tigress
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1252
| Posted 6/7/2004 5:11 AM (GMT -6) | | Michael,
I agree with your statements regarding how the differences between the unborn and born don't mean that the unborn is not human. I wrote a poem about the unborn once called, "I Am The Consequence." A really good fictional book that gives wonderful arguments for the personhood and humanity of the unborn is, "Deadline" by Randy Alcorn. Fiction tends to teach me better than nonfiction because I'm more right-brained, and that book has so many great scenes in it in defense of the unborn as well as revealing the deceptions to women that there won't be horrible emotional pain after the abortion. It's my very favorite book of all time.
What exactly do you want all Christians in the U.S. to do about this issue? It sounds like you want us all to vote only pro-life so laws will be made to protect the unborn and make all abortions illegal. Is that all you want us to do, (aside from praying of course) or do you expect more than that? Do you want us to actively protest at abortion clinics and at our state capitols? What else? I agree that Christians need to be unified on this issue and that corporately we could influence our government and culture much more effectively if we were to do that. But, I just don't think God is going to punish our nation like He did in the Old Testament for not doing enough. I don't believe He does that anymore since Jesus completed His work on the cross. I believe He will hold the Church accountable for not doing enough, but I highly doubt that He will actively smite us with horrible things like He did to Israel in the OT whenever they strayed from Him. I think He will discipline the Church in some way, but I don't think He'll actively wreak havoc and destruction on the nation as a whole since it's largely a pagan nation and cannot be held to the same standards as individual Christians are. All this doomsday talk that many Christians use to try to get other Christians to do the right thing is ridiculous. If anything horrible does happen, it won't be because God made it happen. It will happen because of the natural consequences of a given action. We've already seen that happen in our culture, with the erosion of the sanctity of life.
Tigress
"Name a shrub after me. Preferably one that's prickly and difficult to eradicate."
-Captain Jack Aubrey
"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" | | Back to Top | | |
|
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/7/2004 7:14 AM (GMT -6) | | Tigress,
Thank you for coming out and asking me what I'm really advocating. I think we have a real, honest to goodness dialogue going now. By the way, I've also read a lot of Randy Alcorn's material and think he's right on target.
It seems like you've grabbed the essence of what I'm saying: that those Christians who do not vote (which is the majority of Christians) need to simply do their duty as citizens and vote, and to get "in sync" with Jesus for the unborn through prayer, and to keep our hearts tender toward innocent people who are being disregarded. Also, I'm advocating that when Christians do vote, that they'd vote "as unto the Lord" - that they'd vote their values and consciences - not their wallets and purses. In other words, let's look out for "the little guy" first before we look out what's best for us (i.e. to vote for Pro-life candidates).
I don't understand how a Christian could trust a pro-death candidate to make good moral decisions if that candidate doesn't even have the heart or mind to see that there's a baby in the womb that needs to be protected. When a candidate cares more about "quality" of life over "sanctity" of life, that candidate should not be trusted. His/her discernment is fatally flawed. I do advocate to vote for candidates that first and foremost undersand the sanctity of human life - from conception to the old age.
You said:
quote:
Tigress: I believe God will hold the Church accountable for not doing enough, but I highly doubt that He will actively smite us with horrible things like He did to Israel in the OT whenever they strayed from Him. I think He will discipline the Church in some way, but I don't think He'll actively wreak havoc and destruction on the nation as a whole since it's largely a pagan nation and cannot be held to the same standards as individual Christians are. All this doomsday talk that many Christians use to try to get other Christians to do the right thing is ridiculous. If anything horrible does happen, it won't be because God made it happen. It will happen because of the natural consequences of a given action. We've already seen that happen in our culture, with the erosion of the sanctity of life.
Regarding possible impending judgment on America and on the Church in America, I have this to say: First of all, I look at it as possible discipline - and God only disciplines those He loves. I never said that I’m absolutely sure that God will discipline us severely – though it seems like you’re absolutely sure that He will not. What I did say was that I don't want to wait to find out. If there's a strong possiblity of this kind of severe discipline and if there's still time for us as a Church to repent for our passivity and indifference and apathy, I advocating that we do our part, rather than to "wait and see."
You see, up until a few hundred years ago, (and please correct me if I'm wrong) no government was set up as a Republic -"for the people, of the people and by the people." But along with this new form of government by the people through elected officials, there came new responsibilities for each citizen. God will judge rulers of nations, and it just so happens that we, the people, are the rulers of this nation. Yes, we are reaping the natural consequences/judgments for our wrong actions. But my opinion is that in light of this new kind of governing, there's not enough Biblical data to assure me that God would not intervene; especially if the majority of the rulers of this nation are His people (Christians). Perhaps you have that Biblical data, or maybe you have a kind of special revelation from God on this to give you such confidence that it will never happen.
Besides this rulership aspect, it's our constitution and claims that seem to expose an hypocrisy that may invoke God's disciplining intervention. We, as a country, claim that God has given each person the right to life as we legally kill the most innocent people (those in the womb). If this indeed is what's happening, how is that not hypocrisy in the worst way? Jesus, who is the same yesterday, today and forever, always seemed to have this thing about hypocrisy: HE HATED IT and it got Him VERY UPSET. To rest on this "but we're His people" is the same thing the Jewish people leaned on when Jesus got so upset with them. Listen, hypocrisy is hypocrisy - and God hates it; whether it's coming from a New Testament saint or an Old Testament saint. Remember, Paul got upset over Peter's hypocrisy (Galatians 2:11-21).
Also, though I agree that we're in the New Testament times, God is still the just judge. Remember, Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-12)were New Testament believers that were severely judged by an intervening God because of their lying. This seemed to be an exception and not the rule; for if this kind of judgment happened today every time Christians lied, the magazine Christianity Today would have a whole section in the back just for obituaries. Perhaps, right at the Church's conception, God used that scene with Ananias and Sapphira to send us a strong message: "Yes, you are in a time of great grace and mercy because of what my Son has done for you. But I will intervene with judgment from time to time to let my people know that I am still The Judge of heaven and earth."
The future judgments of God that have yet to take place (written about in 2 Thess. 1:5-10; Revelation 16:4-7) tell us two powerful truths: God doesn't change, and, it's better to be judged (disciplined) now and receive mercy through repentance, than to be judged later and have regret and shame with no hope of repentance (whether for the believer at Christ's judgment seat, or for the unbeliever at the Great White Throne judgment).
We have such a dim view of God's judgments/disciplines. Discipline is a way that God, in His loyal love, preserves His purposes as well as His people. The child that knows he/she will be disciplined by father and mother is a secure child. What I'm advocating is this: it's better to do the right thing and avoid this possible fierce discipline - the same discipline that you seem to be absolutely sure that God would never, ever, ever do. We serve a very tender and merciful, yet fierce God. A few quotes about the lion Aslan from C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia:
quote:
“He is both good and fearsome…”, “He's wild, you know. Not like a tame lion."
I hope that our culture hasn’t so affected the Church's thinking that we have created an Aslan that can be tamed.
Sincerely,
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sisters of Cain
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 431
| Posted 6/7/2004 8:02 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BemaBound
You see, up until a few hundred years ago, (and please correct me if I'm wrong) no government was set up as a Republic -"for the people, of the people and by the people."
The concept of "Republic" comes from the Greek city-states, notably Athens.
quote:
There is no question but that the laws and principles which Solon laid down both foreshadowed and prepared the way for all republics of later ages, including our own. He introduced, into the visible record of man's efforts and progress, the very principle of "government by written and permanent law" instead of "government by incalculable and changeable decrees" (Will Durant). And he himself set forth one of the soundest axioms of all times, that it was a well-governed state "when the people obey the rulers and the rulers obey the laws." This concept, that there were laws which even kings and dictators must observe, was not only new; I think it can be correctly described as "Western".
http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/welch.html
So Will Durant seems to identify Republics with government not being capricious and arbitrary but with permanent laws that even rulers must obey.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tigress
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1252
| Posted 6/7/2004 9:57 AM (GMT -6) | | I think my anger and outrage about this issue is because I can see things from a woman's point of view. Again, I believe that murdering an unborn baby is wrong, but I also believe it's extremely necessary to validate a woman's feelings during her unwanted pregnancy. I've never been pregnant before but I don't want children at all, so I can understand the terror a woman might feel were she to become pregnant if she didn't want to be.
Don't get me wrong, if we want to be sexually active we have to be prepared for a possible pregnancy. I've never had intercourse before and don't plan to until I'm married, but even then I wouldn't want to become pregnant. And then I read articles like the one in the most recent Time magazine about certain pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for contraceptives to women even after the women brought in the police. It's so crazy to me that if a woman wants a husband she also has to be a mother, by some peoples' standards. Besides, if people want to prevent abortions, they should be pushing contraceptives so that unwanted pregancies wouldn't happen. Granted, some contraceptives are essentially abortion pills, and I don't advocate those, but the ones that are not abortion pills should be given to married women, at least, when they request it.
And when a woman does become pregnant unwillingly, those around her need to be very careful to not make her feel like she is all of a sudden of less importance than the growing baby inside of her. I think that's one of the biggest complaints of feminists - and they're right. A woman doesn't just automatically become a second-class citizen just because she's carrying a baby. She's not simply a baby making machine. That's not her sole purpose in life. And she shouldn't be made to feel like she's horrible for not wanting an unplanned child. She can't be expected to immediately change her feelings regarding the pregnancy. The counselors have to make her feel just as important as the child inside her and help her to understand that how she feels is relevant and important and even understandable. And they also need to give her full support in keeping the child if that's what they keep begging her to do.
Again, I'm not saying that people should endorse a woman having an abortion, but I am saying that while they're trying to convince her to keep the child, they should help her to feel like no less of a person than she was before her pregnancy. I tend to suspect that many Christian Pro-life groups don't do enough of this. I think especially well-meaning Christian men tend to underestimate the power of certain messages they send without realizing it. In their righteous zeal to protect the unborn, they often unintentionally make the mother feel as if her status as a human being is being buldozed (is that spelled right?).
Tigress
"Name a shrub after me. Preferably one that's prickly and difficult to eradicate."
-Captain Jack Aubrey
"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tigress
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 1252
| Posted 6/8/2004 5:28 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BemaBound
Good post jefscott.
I really love God's word. We know what life is all about through His Word. It sounds like in His Word, God is saying that children are a gift from Him... a blessing from His hand. Notice the words given, and gift and blessed in these passages where God reveals how He feels about children:
Gen 33:5 Then Esau looked up and saw the women and children. "Who are these with you?" he asked. Jacob answered, "They are the children God has graciously given your servant."
1 Chr 28:5 Of all my sons-- and the LORD has given me many-- he has chosen my son Solomon to sit on the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.
Ps 127:3 Behold, children are a gift of the LORD; the fruit of the womb is a reward.
Ps 128:3-4 Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your sons will be like olive shoots around your table. Thus is the man blessed who fears the LORD.
Married people have a choice in this matter. They can choose to be blessed, or choose to not be blessed.*
The Lord bless you,
* of course, there are two biblical exceptions to this: those who can't have children, and those who have the gift of being single for Jesus (1 Cor. 7). God has many secret blessings for both these exceptions.
You're hurtfully overlooking those of us who are the exception that want to enjoy the blessing of married life, without the sacrifice and responsibility of childrearing. I don't believe God would deny us the blessing of a spouse simply because we don't want the added responsibility of raising one or more children. I don't deny that children are a blessing, but you also must remember that for some people, having children would be neither a blessing nor a good idea. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to enjoy holy matrimony.
And I wasn't using technology to justify the use of contraception. People have been trying to control having children for all of history whether it be through the rhythm method, condoms made from sheep skin/intestines, or oral stimulation, etc.
Can't you understand and give a little grace here to those of us who want to be intimate with someone without the added pressure of producing a family? Where in the Bible does it say it's a sin to be married and refuse to have children? And don't quote passages that talk about children being blessings. That's not saying that it's a sin to not want them.
Yes, children are a blessing to those who would enjoy such a HUGE responsibility, but to those of us who don't want that much of a responsibility, we shouldn't be made to feel like we're somehow sinning against God by not having children within marriage.
Further evidence that it's okay to not want to have children is this: I was given a prophecy by a preacher/healer at WHC that I will have a husband someday, so I know that God is alright with me not wanting to have children.
Finally, the Bible says that in the end times, those with children would suffer a lot more than those without, and considering the ways things are nowadays (even if it's not the end times), I'd be much too stressed out to deal with one or more children on top of all the other stresses of every day life. Plus, I want as much time alone with God and with my husband once I'm married and children would take a considerable amount of time away from doing that.
Tigress
"Name a shrub after me. Preferably one that's prickly and difficult to eradicate."
-Captain Jack Aubrey
"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" | | Back to Top | | |
|
BemaBound
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 50
| Posted 6/8/2004 6:04 AM (GMT -6) | | Tigress,
I'm a little offended again that you're accusing me of saying that it's a sin for a married couple to choose to not have the blessing of children. I didn't say it was a sin to not have children. Whether or not it's a sin, God, who looks at the heart and judges our motives, is the judge of that.
All I said was that children are a blessing from the Lord, and married people can choose either choose this blessing, or choose to not be blessed.
Jefscott mentioned "the biological design" factor. I'm sure you will agree with him that God is the great Designer. And since God designed a woman to have children - both physically and emotionally, and since having children has always been considered a blessing in every culture for every people group that have lived on the face of this earth, he gave a good solid line of reasoning to perhaps cast some doubt on this "advanced" culture of ours that promotes going against God's design, and going against history, and going for an avoidance of sacrifice and responsibility for a "perceived benefit" of intimacy that one thinks is possible by being married and choosing not having children. That's all.
I think his motive is right to encourage a woman to proceed with (rather than against) her God-given design, rather than create a life for herself outside of God's design and purpose. I've personally seen too many women who, at age 40, want to have children and can't and are really angry at the big lie this society has propagated.
I have 2 daughters and 5 grandchildren (2 on the way), and I can say from experience, grandchildren are the greatest, coolest, most delightful blessing this side of heaven. And I also learned that in order to have grandchildren, one must first have children - who, by the way, are also a blessing (did I mention that children are a blessing from the Lord?). Perhaps, in the sacrifice and responsibilty I've lost a few years of my life, but I've gained character and richness of life - and I'll take that with me into eternity. Perhaps this is an application to Jesus' words "finding our lives as we lose them."
So, I wouldn't pass judgement on anyone - accusing any married person of sinning if they choose to not have children. But I am convinced that they're choosing their idea of blessing over God's idea.
Be bless'd,
Michael | | Back to Top | | |
| 169 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:12 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|