Sanctity Of Life

Growing numbers of major cities now have designated lanes for commuter traffic in which no cars can drive with a single passenger. In two different states recently pregnant women were arrested while in a vehicle alone. Their defense has been that since they were pregnant there were two persons in the car. In both instances they won their appeal. Thus, indirectly the courts ruled the unborn infant was a human being. Hence, the court disputes those who refer to such a being as “fetal tissue.”

One must concede that within the womb of a pregnant woman is a “being” by virtue of something simply “being” there. That “being” was conceived by two human beings, thus, the “being” resulting is a human being. It is human life and that makes it special.

In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court, as revered as it is, made a mistaken ruling. Under the “Dred-Scott” ruling black people of America had their “right to life” taken from them by law. The court determined they were subhuman and the right was given to masters allowing them to kill them. Fortunately, since then, sensibility has prevailed and that law countermanded.

In 1973 under Roe V. Wade unborn children in America had their right to life taken away. At the time two sitting members of the court wrote opposing opinions.

Justice William Rehnquist: “To reach its results, the court had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment.”

Judge Byron White: “I find nothing in the language of our history of the constitution to support the court’s judgment. The court simply fashioned and announced a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers.”

The opinions of these justices vivify the fact that in that decision a new moral direction was taken in America. Thereby life was devalued. The concept of the “sanctity of life” suffered a mortal wound. A logical question is where does this lead?

One can look back at Nazi Germany for a historical example of the result. Likewise, a current example is now being reported from China.

As abhorrent as the following is consideration must be given it to understand why sooner rather than later the trend of depreciating human life must be stopped. In China Dr. Zou Qin, who claims to have aborted several hundred unborn alleges to have eaten more than 100 fetuses, and said, “People normally prefer [fetus from] young women, and even better, the first baby and a male.” This form of Chinese pharmacopoeia is alleged to be increasing in popularity.

Here in America we don’t eat them but pharmaceutical companies use fetal tissue in experiments. This is an effort to put a moral sheen on brutally ending a human life. Will our “Culture of Death” be the next society to denigrate the sanctity of life by eating the unborn? There was a time in America when the casual abortion of a child was thought to be as abhorrent as the idea of eating pre-born infants now sounds. We have become

desensitized by wholesale destruction of life. In a degenerate society that which is vile today is often valid tomorrow.

Emerging on the moral horizon is the question of who is next? The step from saying life in the womb isn’t sacred to saying life outside the womb isn’t sacred is a short one. Bioethicists indicate that the location of life inside or outside the womb cannot make a crucial difference.

Having assumed the right to kill the pre-born will we soon sanction the right to kill adults if they don’t meet prescribed standards. Or, perhaps based on aborting the pre-born simply because they are a nuisance, will we conclude it is legitimate to kill adults simply because they are a nuisance? If so, who determines who is a nuisance? In Germany the Nazi Party established a committee to make the judgment. Their conclusions are well documented.

It is estimated that 98 percent of abortions are performed because of reasons such as social, nonmedical, emotional strain or inconvenience to the mother. Interpreted that means the pre-born is a nuisance.

When “quality of life” replaces the “sanctity of life” as a nation’s ethic the seeds of degeneracy have sprouted.

Will the elderly follow the blacks and the pre-born in being reclassified as nonpersons?

SECULAR SUPPORT OF THE SANCTITY OF LIFE
Efforts to reclassify pre-born infants, just as we did blacks, are appropriate. Self-defense, if no other reason, should motivate us. Sociological if not theological logic should catalyze us to make a moral U-turn as a nation. Barbarism in any cloak is self-defeating.

In 1984, 61 physicians (including two past presidents of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology) issued a signed statement entitled “The Utmost Respect For Human Life,” which stated in part, “We urge all those engaged in the abortion debate to recognize that a central issue in the discourse must include acceptance of the fact that induced abortion causes the death of a living human.”

This statement is in keeping with the very definition of the word abortion. The Latin root word for abortion is “aborior,” which means “to perish by untimely birth.”

SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR THE SANCTITY OF LIFE
The very word “sanctity” is defined as “sacred or hallowed character … a sacred thing.” Is human life a sacred thing?

The answer is affirmed in Genesis 1: 27 with confirmation that reverberates from heaven to earth: “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”

The Psalmist, referring to God the Creator, declared: “Your hand made me and fashioned me” (Psalm 119: 73).

Through the inspired penman God said, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you…” (Jeremiah 1: 5).

There are two Greek words for “child.” One is “teknon.” It is used ninety-eight times in the Greek New Testament. It refers to a child as viewed in relation to a parent. The other word is “brephos” which is used only eight times such as follows.

“People were bringing infants (brephos) to Jesus…” (Luke 18: 15).

“And how from infancy (brephos) you have known the Holy Scripture…” (II Timothy 3: 15).

Now the application. When the virgin Mary told Elizabeth her good news it is said, “When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting the baby (brephos) leaped in her womb…” (Luke 1: 41).

Elizabeth further said to Mary, “As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby (brephos) in my womb, leaped for joy” (Luke 1: 44).

God’s Word makes it perfectly clear He considered the pre-born as much a human being as the babies later brought to Christ and the infant that knew Scripture. To Him the life of the pre-born is sacred.

While we debate what is the right attitude toward abortion and euthanasia, God has been very specific in stating His feelings.

“These six things which the Lord hated … hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6: 16 – 19).

Each year the “innocent blood” of 1.8 million preborn American infants is shed. That is more blood than was shed in all human history before the 20th Century. By killing approximately one child in three by abortion our generation has become the most ravenous in history. Based on Scripture it can be safely concluded God doesn’t like that AT ALL.

An exegetical overview of Scripture reveals three things:

One, the unborn are viewed as developing children by God. Two, taking an innocent human life is hated and clearly condemned by God. Three, God especially detests taking of human life simply to ensure prosperity or cover sins.

From the beginning Christians have opposed abortion based on the sanctity of life. The “Didache,” an early second-century document, summarized Christian conviction: “Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion\destruction.”

Tertullian, at about the same time wrote in his “Apology,” “To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to be one; you have the fruit already in the seed.”

Those early Christians won the sanctity of life debate not by superior logic alone but by converting the empire to faith. Soon after Constantine legalized Christianity it was made illegal for a father to kill his child. Today Christians must work to win the “empire” to Christ. An associated victory will be winning the battle for the sanctity of life.

Though the Christian community must perennially fight the battle for the sanctity of life it is not likely to be won in the courts. The battle lines might better be defined there, however.

Informed consent laws will help reduce the carnage. A number of states have now passed such laws.

Offering alternatives to abortion is element. Roswell Street Baptist Church is one of several churches that operate a women’s pregnancy center. Young women contemplating an abortion come to it seeking information regarding a potential abortion. They are shown a low key scientific based film that does not incorporate scare tactics. After seeing it and having a brief counseling session approximately 80% of those that enter anticipating an abortion elect to give live term birth. That has resulted in over 6,000 live births in that one clinic.

Avoidance of pregnancies that result in abortions will not be achieved by condom distribution, sex education, or scare stories regarding diseases. Teens know all that and are still promiscuous. What is it they are seeking so desperately they will risk death? It is not sex. It is love. Youth today are so desperate for love they are willing to flirt with death.

Therefore, a large part of the solution to the problem that exists is to show genuine love for the “sanctity of teen life” of vulnerable adolescents. Parents must return to caring demonstrative love for their children.

Salvation: How To Be Saved

Salvation comes only by faith in Jesus Christ.

“For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2: 8, 9).

“Grace” simply defined means God giving us what we need without us deserving it.

“Faith” involves believing the facts AND trusting the person, Jesus Christ.

“Gift” is something someone obtains for us and provides it for us without cost to us. That means there is nothing we do to earn, merit, or deserve God’s favor. His “grace” provides the “gift” of salvation; the forgiveness of our sins. Though it costs us nothing it cost Christ His life on Calvary. There He the just one died for us the unjust ones. He the holy one died for us the unholy ones. He the righteous one died for us the unrighteous ones. He assumed the guilt for our sins and took upon Himself our punishment.

Note especially this is by “faith” and “not of works.” The work was done and completed on Calvary by Jesus Christ. No person can “boast” of warranting salvation. It is through Christ’s merit not our own.

This wonderful gift becomes ours the moment we invest our faith in Him. Again, that involves accepting the facts AND trusting the person. The facts to be accepted are those just presented. The person to be trusted is Jesus Christ.

This illustrates the point. You might have appendicitis and be told by a fried of a great doctor. You might believe all the facts about him, such as, his age, address, degrees, success ratio, phone number, and name. Having believed these facts you are not healed. You must then trust the doctor’s diagnosis, grant his anesthetic and submit to his skillful hand. In doing so you have completely trusted the doctor about whom you believed the facts.

To trust Christ means to submit and commit to Him as the one who paid the price for the wonderful gift of salvation and willfully receive Him as Savior and Lord.

These verses from the Book of Romans afford a guideline to salvation.

“All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Concede “all” means you. An aspect of trusting the Person is confessing you are a sinner and repenting of it. To repent means to agree with God about it and turn from it to Christ.

“For the wages of sin is death…” (Romans 6: 23a).

Here we are the actor. We do something. We “sin.” A “wage” is what we are paid for what we do. Our sin earns “death.” The death spoken of here is not merely physical death. It is a reference to spiritual death, separation from God. That is the wage of sin.

The picture brightens when we move to Romans 5: 8: “God demonstrated His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” That is, Christ died on our behalf; in our stead. On Calvary where He died physically He experienced separation from God, spiritual death, as indicated by His cry, “My God, My God why have you forsaken me?” There He was separated from the Father that we might be united with Him. In His resurrection He was reunited with the Father.

Now back to the last part of Romans 6: 23b: “…but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Note above in the first half of this verse we act and earn something, spiritual death. Here Christ acts and provides a gift, eternal life. This gift was purchased by Him when He gave His sinless life for us; our sins.

“For whoever calls upon the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:13).

To call upon the name of the Lord means to tell Him of your faith in Him as Savior and ask for the wonderful gift of salvation.

Once you have done so let it be known.

“With the heart one believes to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made to salvation” (Romans 10: 10).

Become identified with Christ and His church by making known publicly you have trusted Him as your Savior.

The Role Of Women In The Church

In churches where the Word of God is the final authority for faith and practice, the answer to this issue needs to be sought in Scripture.

Today, as in the O.T. and N.T. era, the work of God on earth is highly dependent upon women. Miriam (Ex. 15;20, 21), Deborah (Judges 4:4), Hannah (I Sam. 1; 2:1-21), Huldah (II Kings 22:14-22), Anna (Luke 2:36-38), Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38-41), Phoebe, Claudia (II Tim. 4:21), Dorcas (Acts 9:3-43), Lois (II Tim 1:5), Lydia (Acts 16:12-15), and the most honored woman of all, Mary, the mother of our Lord (Matt 1,2; Luke 1,2) are only a few of the many found in Scripture. The list is long in every church today.

The principle of ordination is based on the Greek word KATHISTEMI, which signifies formal introduction into office. It is used twice of church offices (acts 6:3; Titus 1:5). In ordaining the seven men in Acts 6, they laid hands on them. Of the process of laying on of hands, I Tim. 5:22 says, “Lay hands hastily on no man…” By this directive and Biblical example, the process involves the “man.”

The reason many churches do not ordain women is that the Scripture says the pastor is to be “the husband of one wife…” (I Tim 3;2). The word “husband” precludes a woman.” Of the deacons it says, “Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife…” (Vs. 12).

The Greek word rendered “deacon” is DIAKONOS. It can be rendered masculine or feminine. When applied to Phoebe and translated “deaconess,” it is used as an adjective, not a noun, and refers to a role of service, not an office.

In most progressive churches many important leadership roles are appropriately open and occupied by competent and committed women. Many outstanding women serve vital roles on church staffs today.

The issue isn’t equality. Galatians 3:28 says we are all one in Christ. This refers to salvation, not roles. The male who comes to Christ is still a male; the slave still a slave; and the racial Jew still a racial Jew. They are one, though diverse.

Rape And Incest And Abortion

98+% of abortions in America are performed for social reasons. 98+% are done for nonmedical reasons.

Sound studies from incest treatment programs suggest pregnancy is infrequent. Our pregnancy center has seen over 20,000 young women, 8,000 of those who were pregnant changed their minds and gave birth. Not one has regretted it. Of the thousands seen not one was pregnant as a result of rape or incest.

Nationally, studies show less than 1% of pregnancies result from rape or incest. The trauma of sexual assault is likely to prevent ovulation.

Such persons as Ethel Waters and Arthur Rubinstein were children or rape. How many other potentially contributing citizens have been aborted under the same circumstance. The child conceived in such a manner is not a sinner. Scripture notes, “There are six things which the Lord hates…hands that shed innocent blood…” (Proverbs 6: 16-19.) These children are innocent. A child conceived in such a way is in no way entitled to less compassion than any other child.

In an Old Testament passage dealing with Justice it is said, “…do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked” (Exodus 23:7).

It is a child involved in abortion not fetal material. Isn’t it interesting Scott Peterson is being tried for a double murder, his wife Lacey and her unborn child.

Studies show that carrying such a child is no less traumatic for the mother than an abortion. Emotional and emotional anguish from rape or incest is often compounded by taking the life of an innocent child. No innocent baby should be killed for the sin of the father. Abortion is not a treatment for incest. It does not solve the problem of abuse.

One does not become unraped by becoming unpregnant (via abortion). It does not solve the problem and often compounds it.

This is not just an academic topic for me. I have ministered to women who were raped and victims of incest. Some, very few, who became pregnant. Not one of them that carried the child to full term regretted it. Rather they had a sense of dignity and self-worth in doing so. Studies confirm my observation on this.

Women subject to rape or incest deserve the most compassionate and capable help in dealing with the situation. A number of very effective organizations are working in this area.

Consider this case. Would your friends suggest an abortion for reasons of health? The mother is pregnant with her fifth child. Her husband has syphilis and she tuberculosis. The first child was born blind. Their second child died. Their third child was born deaf. Their fourth child had tuberculosis. Should the fifth child be aborted? If the answer is “yes,” you just aborted Ludwig Van Beethoven.

You never know who is being aborted under any circumstance.

In the case of saving the life of the mother this is a difficult situation with options determined by the individual incident often at the last moment. It is a medical call to be made by those involved in light of what they know at the moment.

Predestination

In Ephesians 1:5 the Greek word translated “predestined” is PROORISAS. It means “designated,” “foreordained,” or literally “horizoned us off beforehand.”

It is in the Greek aorist tense and refers to an act in the past once and for all. It happened “before the foundation of the world.” What is referred to here happened in a pre-creation conference between the God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

The verb form for “predestined” is formed from a word meaning to “to survey” as in marking off a boundary.

PREDESTINED is the same as FOREORDAINED.
Before creation, by decree of the Trinity, a boundary was set. It was predetermined that all who came within that boundary would be saved. The boundary is defined as being “in Christ.” Those in Christ shall be saved.

God in His sovereign will DECREED “in Christ.”

Man in his free will DECIDES whether or nor to be “in Christ.” It is an option open to the “whosoever” of John 3:16.

For “Christ gave Himself a ransom for all” (I Timothy 2:6).

Jesus said, “No man comes to me, except the Father… draws him” (John 6:44).

He further stated, “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself” (John 12:32).

“As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become the child of God” (John 1:12).

“The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.”  (II Peter 3:9)

“And whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely” (Revelation 22: 17).

Predestination is never used of unbelievers.

ELECTION (CHOSEN) EXELEXATO

From the Greek word often translated “chose” comes our word elect or election (Ephesians 1:4).

Election basically means God has taken the initiative in His purpose to save. It means He picked out for Himself all who are “in Christ.”

Election is not coercive, we many freely respond positively or negatively. However, if God had not chosen us we could not choose Him.

He did not chose us because of our good but in order that through us He might do good.

Apart from God’s initiative no one can be saved. However, it does not imply fatalism.

It does not imply God desires to save as few as possible but as many. It must be understood in light of John 3: 16 and Revelation 22: 17.

It always stems from a God who is loving and who relates to man who is morally responsible.

Jesus said, “No man can come to me except the Father draw him.” “Draw” is God’s initiative. “Come” is man’s response.

PREDESTINATION AND ELECTION

Predestination and election are basically the same thing.

Election expressed God’s will.

Predestination explains how He accomplishes it.

Election refers to people.

Predestination refers to purpose.

Election points backwards “before the foundation of the world.”

Predestination points forward, that we might be “acceptable.”