Abortion is not illegal. God oversees gov't.
Moderator: Moderators
Abortion is not illegal. God oversees gov't.
Post #1Romans 13 say's we are supposed to obey our government. Since abortion is not illegal, why do Christians have a problem with it?
-
Heretic Gal
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 151
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:06 am
- Location: San Fernando Valley area, California
Re: Abortion is not illegal. God oversees gov't.
Post #12Based on your OP, I assumed the issue at hand was why (some) Christians opposed abortion, even though it is legal, because in your opinion they ought to be obeying a Scripture verse that says they should always obey the government. Did I misunderstand?
"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Re: Abortion is not illegal. God oversees gov't.
Post #13Adultery is not illegal, but I have a problem with it. Does obeying our government mean that I should be OK with adultery?corky wrote: Romans 13 say's we are supposed to obey our government. Since abortion is not illegal, why do Christians have a problem with it?
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #15
Beth1 wrote: I am not for it. I do not feel it is right to kill a child that never asked to be made. Everyone has a right to live.
Does that include the mother? Have you ever known anybody to have died in childbirth?
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
-
Heretic Gal
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 151
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:06 am
- Location: San Fernando Valley area, California
Post #16
I actually did know someone who died in childbirth. Her death made me both pro-choice and anti-abortion. She was told that her pregnancy was bad for her health, and that she could die if she continued it.
She was NOT a religious person, but she loved life, and wanted to share it with a child. So she made the FREE CHOICE to continue with the pregnancy.
Sadly, neither she nor her baby survived - both died within 24 hours of the birth. That was a risk she and her husband were very well aware of. But they took it anyway, because of their belief that their child should at least have a chance to live.
So it's because of Stephanie and Denise that I can see both sides of the argument. She considered her fetus to be a human being, with the right to at least have a chance to live. But - she also knew that she had every right to terminate her pregnancy, without the added fear of being put in jail.
Abortion should continue to be legal. And we should strive to make it rare.
"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #17
I will totally agree with that assessment. That happened to the aunt of the girl that adopted me.. for pretty much the same circumstances. She didn't live to give birth though. It was one of those rare incidences where a burst uterus was fatal. It really messed up a few peoples lives having to deal with that.Heretic Gal wrote:I actually did know someone who died in childbirth. Her death made me both pro-choice and anti-abortion. She was told that her pregnancy was bad for her health, and that she could die if she continued it.
She was NOT a religious person, but she loved life, and wanted to share it with a child. So she made the FREE CHOICE to continue with the pregnancy.
Sadly, neither she nor her baby survived - both died within 24 hours of the birth. That was a risk she and her husband were very well aware of. But they took it anyway, because of their belief that their child should at least have a chance to live.
So it's because of Stephanie and Denise that I can see both sides of the argument. She considered her fetus to be a human being, with the right to at least have a chance to live. But - she also knew that she had every right to terminate her pregnancy, without the added fear of being put in jail.
Abortion should continue to be legal. And we should strive to make it rare.
There are other medical reasons that people might get abortions too.. and far above the concept of 'birth control by abortion'. I have a specific concept in mind.
What people chose do to , for what reasons, is none of my business
The only time that I have the right to give input is if I would be the father.. .. the final choice, one way or another, must be the woman's.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
-
Gracchus
- Apprentice
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:09 pm
- Has thanked: 19 times
- Been thanked: 22 times
Re: Abortion is not illegal. God oversees gov't.
Post #18It is well to remember that Paul was not a follower of Jesus.corky wrote: Romans 13 say's we are supposed to obey our government.
""No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." --- Matthew 6:24 NIV
Nor can you serve God and Caesar.
Paul was a Christian, and in fact the founder of Christianity. Jesus, on the other hand, was a Jew.
Abortion, like suicide, deprives masters of valuable property, slaves. If you're a shepherd, you want a big flock to fleece and feast upon.Since abortion is not illegal, why do Christians have a problem with it?
The sheep or slaves, buy into the idea that they are holy if they are obedient.
-
Overcomer
- Guru
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Post #19
Gracchus wrote:
3 For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— 4 though I myself have reasons for such confidence.
If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee;
And again, in Acts 22:3, we read:
Then Paul said: “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors.
It doesn't get more Jewish than that.
As for Paul not being a follower of Jesus, bear in mind that accounts of Christ's life and teaching were already circulating orally through the disciples, and that Paul spent time with them. In fact, Peter referred to Paul as his beloved brother (2 Peter 3:15). Do you honestly think that Peter and James, the two top leaders in the first days of the church, would have spent time with him and supported him in his teaching if Paul was not a follower of Christ and was preaching something other than what the disciples knew to be true of the Lord and his teaching?
Paul has been called Christianity's midwife, in that, through his tireless efforts, it was birthed throughout the region. But he did not father it.
The first Jewish followers of Christ didn't think of themselves as Christians, but as followers of a "way" among the Jewish people. Paul himself used that term in describing followers of Christ in Acts 9:2 and again in Acts 22:4. It was the pagans at Antioch who called followers of Jesus "Christian", meaning "little Christs" (Acts 11:26), and they used the term derogatively.
I recommend a book entitled Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity? written by David Wenham. A synopsis of it is here:
http://4hisglory.wordpress.com/2007/10/ ... istianity/
As for the quotation from Matthew, it has nothing to do with the Romans 13 passage mentioned in the OP or the topic of Christian obedience to government. Jesus is talking specifically about the love of money and how it can wrongly take precedence over everything else, including love of God.
It is important to study the times and places in which books of the Bible were written. To understand what Paul was talking about in Romans 13, it's necessary to know that the Jews hated being under the thumb of the Romans. They had hoped that their Messiah would come and overthrow the Romans. Periodically, groups of Jews would cause trouble for the Romans, revolting against their rule. Jesus, of course, was crucified as a seditious leader of the Jews. Therefore, the Romans looked upon his followers as a danger to the Roman Empire.
With that in mind, it is easy to understand why Paul encouraged the Church to live in obedience to the laws of the Roman Empire. He did NOT want the followers of Christ to be seen as a political threat or a violent anti-Roman force of any kind. Jesus did not come to lead a political revolt, but a spiritual one, and that’s what Paul wanted people to concentrate on.
Also bear in mind that it was because Paul was a Roman citizen (born in Tarsus) that he had the rights and privileges that all Roman citizens had, regardless of their ethnicity. He recognized that this was a good thing and should be appreciated. Check out this passage from Acts 22:
22 The crowd listened to Paul until he said this. Then they raised their voices and shouted, “Rid the earth of him! He’s not fit to live!�
23 As they were shouting and throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air, 24 the commander ordered that Paul be taken into the barracks. He directed that he be flogged and interrogated in order to find out why the people were shouting at him like this. 25 As they stretched him out to flog him, Paul said to the centurion standing there, “Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who hasn’t even been found guilty?�
26 When the centurion heard this, he went to the commander and reported it. “What are you going to do?� he asked. “This man is a Roman citizen.�
27 The commander went to Paul and asked, “Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?�
“Yes, I am,� he answered.
28 Then the commander said, “I had to pay a lot of money for my citizenship.�
“But I was born a citizen,� Paul replied.
29 Those who were about to interrogate him withdrew immediately. The commander himself was alarmed when he realized that he had put Paul, a Roman citizen, in chains.
This shows us that Paul knew the advantages of being a Roman citizen well. It offered him protection under Roman law. The commander could have been in serious trouble for treating Paul as a non-Roman.
However, Paul's teaching to obey those in power politically could NEVER include doing things that went contrary to God. This is why Christians, as monotheists, refused to worship Caesar as a god alongside the Lord, and that is why the Romans persecuted them on and off for several centuries.
When it comes to the issue of abortion, all human life is sacred to God, beginning with conception. This is why I, as a Christian, cannot support it. Christians have the right to speak out against any government they feel is asking people to do what is contrary to the will of God. Are there people who will argue about the will of God? Yes, there are, although I don't find the arguments of those who support abortion compelling.
Another issue of debate between Christians is the matter of participation in a war. There are disagreements about that, too. Again, I believe that there are times when it is necessary to stop tyrants like Hitler. Others insist no Christian should bear arms.
But these issues are secondary. It is the primary doctrines that we must unite on, doctrines such as the Trinity, Christ's atonement for sin, the second coming, etc.
Paul was a Jew every bit as much as Jesus was. We read the following in this letter to the Philippians:It is well to remember that Paul was not a follower of Jesus.
""No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." --- Matthew 6:24 NIV
Nor can you serve God and Caesar.
Paul was a Christian, and in fact the founder of Christianity. Jesus, on the other hand, was a Jew.
3 For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— 4 though I myself have reasons for such confidence.
If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee;
And again, in Acts 22:3, we read:
Then Paul said: “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors.
It doesn't get more Jewish than that.
As for Paul not being a follower of Jesus, bear in mind that accounts of Christ's life and teaching were already circulating orally through the disciples, and that Paul spent time with them. In fact, Peter referred to Paul as his beloved brother (2 Peter 3:15). Do you honestly think that Peter and James, the two top leaders in the first days of the church, would have spent time with him and supported him in his teaching if Paul was not a follower of Christ and was preaching something other than what the disciples knew to be true of the Lord and his teaching?
Paul has been called Christianity's midwife, in that, through his tireless efforts, it was birthed throughout the region. But he did not father it.
The first Jewish followers of Christ didn't think of themselves as Christians, but as followers of a "way" among the Jewish people. Paul himself used that term in describing followers of Christ in Acts 9:2 and again in Acts 22:4. It was the pagans at Antioch who called followers of Jesus "Christian", meaning "little Christs" (Acts 11:26), and they used the term derogatively.
I recommend a book entitled Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity? written by David Wenham. A synopsis of it is here:
http://4hisglory.wordpress.com/2007/10/ ... istianity/
As for the quotation from Matthew, it has nothing to do with the Romans 13 passage mentioned in the OP or the topic of Christian obedience to government. Jesus is talking specifically about the love of money and how it can wrongly take precedence over everything else, including love of God.
It is important to study the times and places in which books of the Bible were written. To understand what Paul was talking about in Romans 13, it's necessary to know that the Jews hated being under the thumb of the Romans. They had hoped that their Messiah would come and overthrow the Romans. Periodically, groups of Jews would cause trouble for the Romans, revolting against their rule. Jesus, of course, was crucified as a seditious leader of the Jews. Therefore, the Romans looked upon his followers as a danger to the Roman Empire.
With that in mind, it is easy to understand why Paul encouraged the Church to live in obedience to the laws of the Roman Empire. He did NOT want the followers of Christ to be seen as a political threat or a violent anti-Roman force of any kind. Jesus did not come to lead a political revolt, but a spiritual one, and that’s what Paul wanted people to concentrate on.
Also bear in mind that it was because Paul was a Roman citizen (born in Tarsus) that he had the rights and privileges that all Roman citizens had, regardless of their ethnicity. He recognized that this was a good thing and should be appreciated. Check out this passage from Acts 22:
22 The crowd listened to Paul until he said this. Then they raised their voices and shouted, “Rid the earth of him! He’s not fit to live!�
23 As they were shouting and throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air, 24 the commander ordered that Paul be taken into the barracks. He directed that he be flogged and interrogated in order to find out why the people were shouting at him like this. 25 As they stretched him out to flog him, Paul said to the centurion standing there, “Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who hasn’t even been found guilty?�
26 When the centurion heard this, he went to the commander and reported it. “What are you going to do?� he asked. “This man is a Roman citizen.�
27 The commander went to Paul and asked, “Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?�
“Yes, I am,� he answered.
28 Then the commander said, “I had to pay a lot of money for my citizenship.�
“But I was born a citizen,� Paul replied.
29 Those who were about to interrogate him withdrew immediately. The commander himself was alarmed when he realized that he had put Paul, a Roman citizen, in chains.
This shows us that Paul knew the advantages of being a Roman citizen well. It offered him protection under Roman law. The commander could have been in serious trouble for treating Paul as a non-Roman.
However, Paul's teaching to obey those in power politically could NEVER include doing things that went contrary to God. This is why Christians, as monotheists, refused to worship Caesar as a god alongside the Lord, and that is why the Romans persecuted them on and off for several centuries.
When it comes to the issue of abortion, all human life is sacred to God, beginning with conception. This is why I, as a Christian, cannot support it. Christians have the right to speak out against any government they feel is asking people to do what is contrary to the will of God. Are there people who will argue about the will of God? Yes, there are, although I don't find the arguments of those who support abortion compelling.
Another issue of debate between Christians is the matter of participation in a war. There are disagreements about that, too. Again, I believe that there are times when it is necessary to stop tyrants like Hitler. Others insist no Christian should bear arms.
But these issues are secondary. It is the primary doctrines that we must unite on, doctrines such as the Trinity, Christ's atonement for sin, the second coming, etc.
Re: Abortion is not illegal. God oversees gov't.
Post #20[Replying to post 1 by corky]
Paul went against the Roman government when he wrote his letters. It is why authorities would soon come after him upon his declaration of Christianity against the Roman structure.
God 'overseeing' government is not what it seems. It explains that such governments are under the ordinance of old law; a natural justice without grace.
Abortion isn't condemned by the structure of old law; the focus on 'life for life' pertained to the female- the fetus was rather considered more like property to be compensated in the event of loss.
However, America is a republic. It has a government, but it is not a ruling one. A Christian therefore is not only not subject to government, but has a moral responsibility to ascertain virtues by the freedom one is granted to do so.
Paul went against the Roman government when he wrote his letters. It is why authorities would soon come after him upon his declaration of Christianity against the Roman structure.
God 'overseeing' government is not what it seems. It explains that such governments are under the ordinance of old law; a natural justice without grace.
Abortion isn't condemned by the structure of old law; the focus on 'life for life' pertained to the female- the fetus was rather considered more like property to be compensated in the event of loss.
However, America is a republic. It has a government, but it is not a ruling one. A Christian therefore is not only not subject to government, but has a moral responsibility to ascertain virtues by the freedom one is granted to do so.
