Scriptural Truth
When I got saved, my late father gave me a Schofield Study Bible as a gift. He placed two statements in the front that I am sure he heard from someone. One statement was; “These pages will keep you from sin and sin will keep you out of these pages“. Another statement he placed on the front page was; “When you figure it out, it no longer is faith.” These two statements have served me well in my walk with Christ. I find myself returning to these two basic statements many times as I strive to follow God’s call as a pastor. This is one of those times.
It seems that some months ago there was a post by a fellow blogger that really caused one to stop and look at the issue of when life begins. You can see that article here. The article argues against the theological position of traducianism, which is an argument for original sin, and applies it to the argument for when life begins. In traducianism the argument is that when the male cell comes together with the female cell it is flesh and soul that is procreated. I do not have the intellectual knowledge or the time to argue every point of differences that one can argue for or against this view. However, as I was reading this blog article by another fellow blogger, I remembered this post.
It seems that Senators Clinton and Obama are having the same thoughts as the blogger in the first linked article as they prepare for Pennsylvania and the Christian Conservative votes in that state. Notice what Senator Obama said as he voiced his uncertainty of the beginning of life; “Is it when the soul stirs?” Then Senator Clinton said it this way; “I believe the potential for life begins at conception…. “For me, it is also not only about a potential life. It is about other lives involved……I have concluded, after great, you know, concern and searching my own mind and heart over many years,…that individuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision…” That, my friends, is the reason the argument that the Scripture is not sufficient to give us an understanding of when God implants a soul is such a dangerous argument to hold to. It rationalizes away the sin of murder. I like the way the author of this article says it;
…it is not up to biological sciences to make a definite judgement on questions which are properly philosophical and moral, such as the moment when a human person is constituted or the legitimacy of abortion. From a moral point of view this is certain: even if a doubt existed concerning whether the fruit of conception is already a human person, it is objectively a grave sin to dare risk murder. “The one who will be a man is already one”.
It seems that if we are going to be truthful to the Scripture we need to stop trying to figure out how God takes the immaterial and places it within the material. If we can take Jesus’ words, “Before Abraham was I AM” John 8:58 we would have to ask when the immaterial substance of God was placed within the material substance of Mary. We do not ask about that. Why? Because God was from the beginning. If that is the case, and it is, then why do we need to question when God determines to place an immaterial soul into the material matter known as humans when he has already told us “Before I formed the in the belly, I knew thee” Jeremiah 1:5?
Denny Burk has a good comment on this at CounterCulture: “Neither candidate knows whether or not life begins at conception. One would think, therefore, that their position on abortion would be a cautious one. After all, why would a candidate support the right to kill a being that even might be human life?”
Comment by Mark Kelly — April 16, 2008 @ 1;50 pm
tim,
amen.
david
Comment by volfan007 — April 16, 2008 @ 2;44 pm
Brother Mark,
Dr. Burk has certainly spoken some wise words.
Volfan,
Amen to your Amen. :>
Blessings,
Tim
Comment by Tim Rogers — April 16, 2008 @ 2;59 pm
Well said folks, well said.
Steve
Comment by Steve — April 16, 2008 @ 6;36 pm
tim,
i say amen to your amen of my amen.
david
Comment by volfan007 — April 16, 2008 @ 10;12 pm
Amen. The stain of innocent blood upon our land should cause any thinking person to cringe and cry out to God to stop this horrific sin.
Ron P.
Comment by Ron P. — April 16, 2008 @ 10;28 pm
Tim R,
I do appreciate what you have printed with this post. May God forgive us and wake us up to reality of this horrible blight on our country. And may He wake us preachers up and give us boldness to stand and defend those who cannot rather than join the parade of the ungodly who sale this junk theology.
Comment by Tim G — April 16, 2008 @ 10;57 pm
You present the issue of personhood as cut and dry, very simple.
But many conservatives and some from your own Convention have, like Hillary and Obama, struggled with the question “when does life begin”
I’m thinking about W.A. Criswell whose view of abortion was much more liberal than Hillary or Obama for many years. To my knowledge, the Bible has not changed over the past 50 years. Was that sacred text not sufficient for Wally Amos back then? Or perhaps he just struggled with a very complex issue like Hillary and Obama?
Comment by Big Daddy Weave — April 17, 2008 @ 12;38 pm
Brother BDW,
When I was growing up we had neighbors that had junk cars sitting around their trailers next door. They, like many of the people I grew up around, used the parts off of the junk cars to keep the car they were driving in running condition. Daddy purchased a new couch and we placed the old couch out in the yard for us to sit in under the shade of the trees basking in the cool breeze. Our neighbors, with the junk cars, reported us to the person that owned the trailer park. The owner came out there and told our neighbor that he was not about to make us remove the couch from the yard until all of those junk cars were hauled off.
You know what I learned from that little memory? One needs to clean up their own back yard before they try to clean up their neighbor’s yard. I believe Jesus said it better when he told a parable in Luke 6:41-42. I believe I would look at the living in my own convention before I point to a person who has been dead for some years in the SBC.
Blessings,
Tim
Comment by Tim Rogers — April 17, 2008 @ 1;54 pm
also, didnt criswell change his view on this….as he understood it more clearly?
david
Comment by volfan007 — April 17, 2008 @ 2;16 pm
Nice way to avoid the question.
Fortunately, this is the blogosphere and not a classroom. A cute story like above wouldn’t cut it in a classroom, even a classroom full of fundamentalists.
If you can’t deal with the past, you’re not suited to deal with the present.
Comment by Big Daddy Weave — April 17, 2008 @ 2;45 pm
Brother BDW,
Ok, I will bite. What are you speaking about?
Blessings,
Tim
Comment by Tim Rogers — April 17, 2008 @ 3;20 pm
Big Daddy,
I did most definitely engage you relating to your Criswellian “strawman” over at my place. I hope you take note of it.
Frankly, it is you who seems incapable of dealing with the past. You constantly dwell upon what you believe to be the injustices of all the theologically conservative world upon you. You are the one who does not seem completely suited to deal with the present realities of life at the present.
cb
Comment by cb scott — April 18, 2008 @ 1;03 am
Is it really a strawman if that strawman points out a glaring inconsistency, CB?
Differentiating between Obama and Criswell by calling the former a theological dwarf and the latter a theological coward is but simply a cute game of semantics. Look who is being post-modern now….
I look to the past because my firm grasp of Baptist history allows me to make a point or two every now and again with those on the far right (though in my opinion often wrong) side of the aisle.
We play to our strengths. That’s why you call folks cowards, dwarfs and question whether they are a Christian whereas I attempt to offer a real contribution to the conversation with a little bit of history and a whole lot of substance.
I only engaged you over at your blog because you did in fact question the faith of a professed believer. That seems uncalled for. Meanwhile, I mention Mr. Conservative Hero Criswell, didn’t question his faith not once, and you scream strawman. Questioning someone’s faith as you often do is a conversation killer and unbecoming of a believer. There’s some honesty.
Comment by Big Daddy Weave — April 18, 2008 @ 6;02 pm
big daddy,
it’s not only hillary’s and obama’s view on abortion that makes them theological dwarf’s. they have a lot more baggage than that. i really wonder if they even understand salvation by grace thru faith in Jesus. especially with the type of churches that both of them belong to, and the way they talk about a lot of issues. so, abortion is not the only issue with barack hussein obama and hillary roadham clinton. there is more….much, much more.
david
Comment by volfan007 — April 18, 2008 @ 6;21 pm
Big Daddy,
You are slipping. Your response was weak and you know it.
Your mention of Criswell versus Obama and Clinton was actually the real game of semantics. Actually, it was apples and oranges. All I did was identify the oranges and the apple.
Sometimes a person’s faith needs to be called into question and you know full well I never said they were not Christians. I said they were theological dwarfs and they are.
BTW, I have never called Criswell a conservative hero. I have never called him a hero of any kind.
Lastly, I am very afraid that much of the history you are reading is that of the revisionist brand. You are not the only one who has cracked a history book or two or probably many more than you.
cb
Comment by cb scott — April 19, 2008 @ 2;10 am