We live in a deteriorating society.
It has become obvious to me in recent weeks as I've observed a few trends regarding the value of vulnerable children in America.
First, a few weeks ago, the cancer-fighting Susan G. Komen Foundation announced that it would no longer fund Planned Parenthood, the largest organization providing abortions in the United States. This was great news. An organization committed to saving the lives of people with breast cancer should never have been in any kind of partnership with an organization committed to eliminating the lives of pre-born children. It made sense to sever ties.
However, in a discouraging turn of events, within two days, the Komen foundation reversed its policy due to public outrage that it would not support the abortion industry. Public reaction in favor of funding the nation's largest abortion provider was so strong that the cancer-fighting charity felt compelled to reverse its decision.
Then, President Obama's administration came up with a regulation requiring all businesses and organizations (except churches) to provide contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs in their health care plans. Ignoring concerns from Roman Catholics who cannot support contraception, Christians in general who oppose abortion, and the president's promise from a couple of years ago to exclude abortion coverage in his health care plan, the Senate recently voted in favor of the president's decision. All health insurance plans in America will now pay for drugs to kill pre-born children.
Finally, the Journal of Medical Ethics has published an article by two medical ethicists promoting "after birth abortions" (infanticide) in all cases in which abortions are currently legal (in other words, in all cases). When people objected to this idea, the editors rejected those who protested as ignorant racists. Those who shape the philosophy of the age are preparing us to accept the legalization of infanticide. It may take a few years or a couple of decades, but it's the direction in which ethicists are going; and the law will eventually follow.
So what can Christians do? Can we save this society? Possibly not. But that may not be God's expectations of us anyway.
Jesus said, "You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot" (Matthew 5:13, New International Version).
Salt can preserve meat, but it cannot reverse the rotting process. We can speak out against the atrocities of our society. We can lobby and vote to restrict the inhumanity. We can care for the vulnerable children, disabled, ill, and elderly. We can pray for our enemies. And we can let people know about the forgiveness offered through Christ. We may not be able to reverse the course of society, but we can still make a positive difference.
Showing posts with label Infanticide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Infanticide. Show all posts
Sunday, March 04, 2012
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Why Did God Command the Complete Destruction of Some Nations?
Last week, a co-worker was reading Deuteronomy 20. He came to me with an important question: Why did God command the Israelites to completely destroy some nations?
This is my attempt to deal with this difficult question. (And I acknowledge that my response may not be completely adequate, but at this time, it's my best response.)
As the text states, the Israelites were commanded to completely destroy some nations as they were entering the Promised Land so that "they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the LORD your God" (Deuteronomy 20:18). Leviticus 18 describes the total corruption of these societies. They tolerated and practiced incest, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, and child sacrifice in service to their false gods. Evil was celebrated. Selfishness, brutality, and narcissism ruled the land.
"(W)hen God directed the Children of Israel to go in and conquer the Promised Land, He told them to destroy the peoples who lived there. This command was necessary because of the vileness of the pagan religions practiced in that good land. The most brutal worship of all was that demanded by Moloch. This cruel demon was represented by an iron idol with hollow belly and with both arms bent in front in a cradling position. A fire was built in the hollow belly, and each mother was required to sacrifice her first-born by placing him in the idol's arms to be burned alive. During this horrible ceremony, the priests and priestesses of Moloch beat drums which reached a deafening crescendo as the mother laid her baby in the idol's arms. The purpose, of course, was to keep the mother from hearing her baby's screams" (Drums of Moloch, Herbert C. Casteel, pp. 94-95).
Two factors made matters worse for the inhabitants of the Promised Land: 1. They had a knowledge of their sins and of the true God who expected better from them. 2. They had been given centuries to repent.
Like all people, they had a basic understanding of right and wrong. However, they chose to "suppress the truth" (Romans 1:18). "Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them" (Romans 1:32).
Although easy to overlook, we should also recognize that the pagan nations were well aware of the Lord's judgment long before destruction came upon them. In fact, Balaam was an internationally-known prophet of the Lord from a pagan land (Numbers 22). The true God was known in lands far away from the Israelites; and they did not have exclusive access to his prophets. Furthermore, as Rahab the pagan prostitute testified before her city was destroyed, "I know that the LORD has given you the land, and that the fear of you has fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land melt away before you. For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt..." (Joshua 2:9-10). For at least 40 years, the people of Jericho knew that their judgment day was coming, but they expressed no interest in changing their ways as the people of Ninevah would several centuries later (Jonah 3:6-10).
In addition, it should be noted that the nations inhabiting the Promised Land were given 400 years to repent (Genesis 15:16; Deuteronomy 9:5). Their destruction came fairly quickly, but it was only after God had waited patiently for centuries for them to change their hearts.
Also, different rules of warfare existed against the nations within the Promised Land than against the nations outside those boundaries. The nations within the Promised Land faced total destruction (Deuteronomy 20:16-18). They were facing the judgment of God. More conventional standards of warfare applied to enemy nations outside the Promised Land (Deuteronomy 20:10-15).
Finally, it should be noted that God's grace was extended to individuals even as their societies faced total annihilation. The prostitute Rahab and her family found grace. They were spared from God's judgment because they placed their faith in God and followed the instructions that they were given (Joshua 2-3).
This is my attempt to deal with this difficult question. (And I acknowledge that my response may not be completely adequate, but at this time, it's my best response.)
As the text states, the Israelites were commanded to completely destroy some nations as they were entering the Promised Land so that "they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the LORD your God" (Deuteronomy 20:18). Leviticus 18 describes the total corruption of these societies. They tolerated and practiced incest, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, and child sacrifice in service to their false gods. Evil was celebrated. Selfishness, brutality, and narcissism ruled the land.
"(W)hen God directed the Children of Israel to go in and conquer the Promised Land, He told them to destroy the peoples who lived there. This command was necessary because of the vileness of the pagan religions practiced in that good land. The most brutal worship of all was that demanded by Moloch. This cruel demon was represented by an iron idol with hollow belly and with both arms bent in front in a cradling position. A fire was built in the hollow belly, and each mother was required to sacrifice her first-born by placing him in the idol's arms to be burned alive. During this horrible ceremony, the priests and priestesses of Moloch beat drums which reached a deafening crescendo as the mother laid her baby in the idol's arms. The purpose, of course, was to keep the mother from hearing her baby's screams" (Drums of Moloch, Herbert C. Casteel, pp. 94-95).
Two factors made matters worse for the inhabitants of the Promised Land: 1. They had a knowledge of their sins and of the true God who expected better from them. 2. They had been given centuries to repent.
Like all people, they had a basic understanding of right and wrong. However, they chose to "suppress the truth" (Romans 1:18). "Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them" (Romans 1:32).
Although easy to overlook, we should also recognize that the pagan nations were well aware of the Lord's judgment long before destruction came upon them. In fact, Balaam was an internationally-known prophet of the Lord from a pagan land (Numbers 22). The true God was known in lands far away from the Israelites; and they did not have exclusive access to his prophets. Furthermore, as Rahab the pagan prostitute testified before her city was destroyed, "I know that the LORD has given you the land, and that the fear of you has fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land melt away before you. For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt..." (Joshua 2:9-10). For at least 40 years, the people of Jericho knew that their judgment day was coming, but they expressed no interest in changing their ways as the people of Ninevah would several centuries later (Jonah 3:6-10).
In addition, it should be noted that the nations inhabiting the Promised Land were given 400 years to repent (Genesis 15:16; Deuteronomy 9:5). Their destruction came fairly quickly, but it was only after God had waited patiently for centuries for them to change their hearts.
Also, different rules of warfare existed against the nations within the Promised Land than against the nations outside those boundaries. The nations within the Promised Land faced total destruction (Deuteronomy 20:16-18). They were facing the judgment of God. More conventional standards of warfare applied to enemy nations outside the Promised Land (Deuteronomy 20:10-15).
Finally, it should be noted that God's grace was extended to individuals even as their societies faced total annihilation. The prostitute Rahab and her family found grace. They were spared from God's judgment because they placed their faith in God and followed the instructions that they were given (Joshua 2-3).
Monday, December 14, 2009
The Pro-Life Implications of Christmas
A few years ago, Planned Parenthood sent out Christmas cards celebrating "Choice on Earth." In doing so, the largest abortion provider in America revealed a profound misunderstanding of biblical teaching and the significance of Christ's birth.
Under the Law of Moses, pre-born children received legal protection (Exodus 21:22-25). They were protected because it was recognized that children were formed by the Lord within the wombs of their mothers (Psalm 139:13-16). As children made in the image of God, they were given the respect and legal protections due to all human beings.
The humanity of pre-born children was further demonstrated in this portion of the Christmas account:
"In those days (after Mary was told by the angel Gabriel that she would be the mother of God's Son) Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord" (Luke 1:39-45, English Standard Version).
At least two pro-life points are apparent within this passage:
1. During the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy (Luke 1:36), Elizabeth's pre-born son was moving and expressing emotions. Obviously, he was a human being who was different from his mother even though he depended on her nurturing for survival.
2. In addition, Mary was called "the mother of my Lord" very early in her pregnancy, a time when Jesus would have been a developing embryo within his mother. Mary did not need to wait until her Son was born; everyone knew that she was a mother long before Jesus was born.
Although Planned Parenthood celebrates "choice" as the ultimate value, the saints of the Bible upheld right choices as far more important than the mere ability to choose. Joseph and Mary chose to protect and to nurture their Son. They chose to risk their lives for him. They chose to look as if they were guilty of sexual impurity in order to care for Jesus, risking ostracism within their religious community for the sake of their Son.
On the other hand, King Herod chose to kill the little boys of Bethlehem in order to protect his standard of living. He wanted to eliminate any threat that a child would pose to his position in society.
Herod made the wrong choice. Joseph and Mary made the right choice. One was condemned. The other two were blessed.
"Choice on Earth" is not worthy of praise. However, selfless, compassionate, and noble choices on behalf of children are worthy of a celebration. Those are the pro-life implications of Christmas.
Under the Law of Moses, pre-born children received legal protection (Exodus 21:22-25). They were protected because it was recognized that children were formed by the Lord within the wombs of their mothers (Psalm 139:13-16). As children made in the image of God, they were given the respect and legal protections due to all human beings.
The humanity of pre-born children was further demonstrated in this portion of the Christmas account:
"In those days (after Mary was told by the angel Gabriel that she would be the mother of God's Son) Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord" (Luke 1:39-45, English Standard Version).
At least two pro-life points are apparent within this passage:
1. During the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy (Luke 1:36), Elizabeth's pre-born son was moving and expressing emotions. Obviously, he was a human being who was different from his mother even though he depended on her nurturing for survival.
2. In addition, Mary was called "the mother of my Lord" very early in her pregnancy, a time when Jesus would have been a developing embryo within his mother. Mary did not need to wait until her Son was born; everyone knew that she was a mother long before Jesus was born.
Although Planned Parenthood celebrates "choice" as the ultimate value, the saints of the Bible upheld right choices as far more important than the mere ability to choose. Joseph and Mary chose to protect and to nurture their Son. They chose to risk their lives for him. They chose to look as if they were guilty of sexual impurity in order to care for Jesus, risking ostracism within their religious community for the sake of their Son.
On the other hand, King Herod chose to kill the little boys of Bethlehem in order to protect his standard of living. He wanted to eliminate any threat that a child would pose to his position in society.
Herod made the wrong choice. Joseph and Mary made the right choice. One was condemned. The other two were blessed.
"Choice on Earth" is not worthy of praise. However, selfless, compassionate, and noble choices on behalf of children are worthy of a celebration. Those are the pro-life implications of Christmas.
Friday, April 03, 2009
Creation and Evolution
"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy" (Exodus 20:11, English Standard Version).
As our son grows older, he will become more aware of the philosophical battles between creationists and evolutionists. With that in mind, I would like to teach him a few principles that have guided me as a Christian.
1. The Bible can be trusted. "All Scripture is breathed out by God" (2 Timothy 3:16, ESV). It has come from the God "who never lies" (Titus 1:2, ESV). When it states that God created the universe in 6 days, you can rely on it.
2. Theories of evolution cannot explain the origins of life. While lifeforms change due to breeding and mutation, inanimate objects do not evolve into living beings. The simplest lifeforms are too complex to come into existence without the help of intelligent guidance. The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel explains this point very well.
3. Do not apply Darwinian theories to the social realm. Social Darwinism teaches people to live by the values of "the survival of the fittest." It can lead people to embrace genocide, eugenics, infanticide, abortion, racism, the oppression of the poor, and apathy toward the disabled. Christ teaches his followers to care for the people whom a social Darwinist might be willing to eliminate.
As our son grows older, he will become more aware of the philosophical battles between creationists and evolutionists. With that in mind, I would like to teach him a few principles that have guided me as a Christian.
1. The Bible can be trusted. "All Scripture is breathed out by God" (2 Timothy 3:16, ESV). It has come from the God "who never lies" (Titus 1:2, ESV). When it states that God created the universe in 6 days, you can rely on it.
2. Theories of evolution cannot explain the origins of life. While lifeforms change due to breeding and mutation, inanimate objects do not evolve into living beings. The simplest lifeforms are too complex to come into existence without the help of intelligent guidance. The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel explains this point very well.
3. Do not apply Darwinian theories to the social realm. Social Darwinism teaches people to live by the values of "the survival of the fittest." It can lead people to embrace genocide, eugenics, infanticide, abortion, racism, the oppression of the poor, and apathy toward the disabled. Christ teaches his followers to care for the people whom a social Darwinist might be willing to eliminate.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Infanticide and Politics (Part 2)
I read an interesting article today in USA Today (which can be accessed at http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-09-22-infanticide_N.htm?csp=34). The article focuses on the practice of infanticide among Indians in Brazil and the efforts of Christians to stop the murders. While the Christians receive criticism, they continue their efforts to protect those children.
I have a few observations about the story.
1. Christians have a long history of rescuing children who have been left to die. The tradition dates back to the early days of Christianity in the ancient Roman Empire.
2. Love compels Christians to care for the children who have been left to die. We cannot ignore such sins when we know about them, and we certainly can't justify them. We must act.
3. It is not racist to save the disabled children of Indians. It is anything but racist.
4. Despite what others write, it's okay to oppose sin within one's culture. I cannot begin to count the number of times I have read Christian leaders cautioning their followers against being known for opposing sin. They warn us not to speak against abortion, homosexuality, and other culturally popular sins, because it presumably hinders church growth. Nonsense. If we oppose sin because it hurts people...and if we offer forgiveness and a new start to life through Christ...we are not harming the cause of Christ. We are being faithful and loving. We are honoring our Savior.
5. Good works will be opposed. We will make enemies. Opposing infanticide and caring for abandoned children seems like a no-brainer. It seems like it should receive no opposition. However, obviously some people favor infanticide. Our job is not to please our opponents. Our job is to continue to do the most good we can despite their opposition.
Thanks for reading! And please don't let anyone intimidate you into apathy and inaction when you are motivated by love for God and people.
I have a few observations about the story.
1. Christians have a long history of rescuing children who have been left to die. The tradition dates back to the early days of Christianity in the ancient Roman Empire.
2. Love compels Christians to care for the children who have been left to die. We cannot ignore such sins when we know about them, and we certainly can't justify them. We must act.
3. It is not racist to save the disabled children of Indians. It is anything but racist.
4. Despite what others write, it's okay to oppose sin within one's culture. I cannot begin to count the number of times I have read Christian leaders cautioning their followers against being known for opposing sin. They warn us not to speak against abortion, homosexuality, and other culturally popular sins, because it presumably hinders church growth. Nonsense. If we oppose sin because it hurts people...and if we offer forgiveness and a new start to life through Christ...we are not harming the cause of Christ. We are being faithful and loving. We are honoring our Savior.
5. Good works will be opposed. We will make enemies. Opposing infanticide and caring for abandoned children seems like a no-brainer. It seems like it should receive no opposition. However, obviously some people favor infanticide. Our job is not to please our opponents. Our job is to continue to do the most good we can despite their opposition.
Thanks for reading! And please don't let anyone intimidate you into apathy and inaction when you are motivated by love for God and people.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Infanticide and Politics
"Rescue those being led away to death;
hold back those staggering toward slaughter.
If you say, 'But we know nothing about this,'
does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does not he who guards your life know it?
Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?" (Proverbs 24:11-12).
I cannot pretend to be neutral. I am pro-life. Please check out http://www.bornalivetruth.org/ to find out about Senator Obama's record on infanticide. It is disturbing.
(Thanks to fellow blogger Christy Ellis for alerting me to the web site.)
(After reading this post again, I realized that I needed to explain my pro-life convictions and why I am not neutral on this issue. My explanation can be understood best by reading two of my previous posts:
http://adisciplesthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/01/happy-birthday-christopher.html
http://adisciplesthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/06/sage.html
In those posts, you will see why this issue affects me so personally and why I am so committed to opposing the unnecessary killing of children.)
hold back those staggering toward slaughter.
If you say, 'But we know nothing about this,'
does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does not he who guards your life know it?
Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?" (Proverbs 24:11-12).
I cannot pretend to be neutral. I am pro-life. Please check out http://www.bornalivetruth.org/ to find out about Senator Obama's record on infanticide. It is disturbing.
(Thanks to fellow blogger Christy Ellis for alerting me to the web site.)
(After reading this post again, I realized that I needed to explain my pro-life convictions and why I am not neutral on this issue. My explanation can be understood best by reading two of my previous posts:
http://adisciplesthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/01/happy-birthday-christopher.html
http://adisciplesthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/06/sage.html
In those posts, you will see why this issue affects me so personally and why I am so committed to opposing the unnecessary killing of children.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
