Whether clueless, wilfully ignorant or deceived, or simply wolves in sheep’s clothing, I continue to be amazed by the number of people who claim to be Christians yet simply parrot all the usual discredited arguments for abortion. It bothers me greatly that those claiming to be followers of Jesus can get it so very wrong on something so important as the sanctity of human life.
I am constantly debating these folks, and find their ignorance or inability to think morally and logically to be quite shocking. All they have done is picked up what the world has to say about abortion, and think they are somehow being good Christians.
Let me here offer a few of the things these worldly believers have tossed my way as we have had these discussions. They are representative of the shoddy thinking and the complete lack of a biblical worldview that so many of these folks have.
‘Abortion is up to the individual and what they see is the right thing to do.’
Um, no. The intentional murder of another innocent person is never up to an individual. Just because someone thinks a course of action is right does not mean it is right. The Nazis thought that what they were doing was the right thing to do.
There must be a higher moral standard that we appeal to when it comes to fundamental matters of right and wrong. Indeed, that was just the argument used against war criminals at the Nuremberg trials. The prosecutors told those trying to hide under the “I was just following orders” excuse that there is a higher law which we are accountable to.
See more on this here: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2009/10/12/abortion-and-the-nazi-doctors/
And no one claiming to be a follower of Jesus can support the slaughter of unborn babies. Have these folks never heard of the sixth commandment? Murder is prohibited – the killing of the unborn is just that. One might as well foolishly say rape is up to the individual, or theft.
‘It is not the job of Christians, prolife activists or anyone else to tell any person they are doing wrong.’
Baloney. We of course have a biblical obligation to point out evil and resist it. We are called to stand for that which is good and oppose that which is evil. But by this goofy and convoluted thinking, Wilberforce was wrong to stand up for Blacks and challenge the slave owners.
By this unbiblical thinking, people like Martin Luther King Jr. were wrong to publicly oppose racism. By this dumb thinking the early Christian missionaries in India were wrong to speak out against the common practice of suttee: burning widows alive in their husband’s funeral pyre.
We must always speak against that which is evil. As R.C. Sproul once said, “It is time for churches that see the evil of abortion to stand up and be counted – no matter the risk or the cost. When the church is silent in the midst of a holocaust, she ceases to be a real church. Wherever human dignity is under attack, it is the duty of the church and of the Christian to rise up in protest against it.”
‘The Bible does not say anything about abortion.’
This is equally silly. Throughout Scripture the sanctity of human life is held up, and warnings against the taking of innocent life are repeatedly heard. We have commands to stand up for those being led to the slaughter, and we have warnings about those who would not protect the innocent.
But more detail on this is found here: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2015/01/05/the-bible-and-abortion-challenging-the-revisionists/
‘Christians shouldn’t force their views on others.’
Just who is forcing anyone to do anything here? How does speaking up for the unborn mean we are forcing people to do something? How does affirming the biblical truths about the sanctity of human life have anything to do with law, force and coercion?
It is the state which has the power of coercion. Christians and non-Christian prolifers have just as much right as anyone else in a democracy to voice their opinions in the public arena. Of course we seek to influence the decisions of our law makers. That is called being a responsible citizen. The pro-aborts are always doing this. Why can’t we?
And how does telling a person that there is biblical hope in this area have anything to do with force? How have I and any prolifer forced anyone in any way in this regard? A person praying outside an abortion mill is not forcing anyone to do anything.
‘We can’t force a woman who was raped to have the child.’
But what does rape have to do with anything? Not only is pregnancy due to rape exceedingly rare, but how does that excuse the murder of the unborn child? And given we are talking about a miniscule amount of cases here, what does that have to do with the biblical preference for the sanctity of life, or with the role of the law?
Hard cases make for bad law, and should never be used to formulate legislation. But I speak to all that in greater detail here, so have a look: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2008/08/19/abortion-and-hard-cases/
And why not consider listening to what those who were conceived in rape have to say about this, instead of rehashing the usual pro-abort red herrings?
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html
There are plenty more such silly objections bandied about by clueless Christians who have simply mindlessly embraced the mantras of the pro-death camp. They are not thinking biblically. Indeed, they are not thinking at all. They are merely emoting.
It grieves me when Christians seem steeped in all the pro-abortion nonsense, yet seem oblivious to the clear teachings of Scripture. We must do much better in biblical and ethical thinking. Jesus would never push abortion for any reason. How anyone can distort Jesus and the Bible into such absurd positions is beyond me.
Sadly it seems some people calling themselves Christians are far more influenced by the world than the Word of God on this topic. No wonder we are in such a bad way when people claiming to be Christians end up doing the work of those opposed to biblical Christianity.
Christians of all people should be leading the charge for the sanctity of life, and defending the defenceless. We do not need so-called believers shrilling for the baby killers. We need many more believers standing with the unborn. As Sproul said on the abortion holocaust: “I pray God for a multitude of Wilberforces who will relentlessly speak against this monstrous evil, until such a day that our nation will wake up.”
And as Richard John Neuhaus once put it:
Whether, in this great contest between the culture of life and the culture of death, we were recruited many years ago or whether we were recruited only yesterday, we have been recruited for the duration. We go from this convention refreshed in our resolve to fight the good fight. We go from this convention trusting in the words of the prophet Isaiah that “they who wait upon the Lord will renew their strength, they will mount up with wings like eagles, they will run and not be weary, they will walk and not be faint.”
In Genesis 25:21,22 as in many other later Bible verses it takes note of conception and antenatal life –
“And Isaac intreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren: and the Lord was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
22 And the children struggled together within her;”
That which was conceived was called a “child” between the conception and the birth.
That totally proves the Bible does speak about human life occurring, being noticed and managed by God well before birth.
I think this low view of abortion is why Christians also go through IVF, knowing that some of their artificially created children will die naturally and others will be killed.
Bill, can we talk?
I would really like to discuss this subject with you. You are so correct on so many things, especially sexual perversion and Islam.
For starters, you refer to “something so important as the sanctity of human life.” I hope you realize that expression means “all human life,” or if it does not, I would like to be informed how it can mean anything other than all human life is sacred. Can you enlighten me here?
For clearly (the way I see it) the expression is untrue. Human life, per se, is not sacred, because it includes cancers and I don’t think you would want to say they should not be destroyed. Their actual human life should be terminated. Cancers are human because they consist of human cells in human bodies (when they do). Human cancers are human life. Do you deny that?
If you do not wish to discuss this publicly would you be willing to reply to a fellow searcher for truth with an email? Sincerely in Christ, Douglas
Thanks Douglas but this is not rocket science. The phrase “sanctity of human life” is a very common and very well-known phrase which everyone – except you it seems – knows means that every human being is made in the image of God and is therefore worth treating with dignity and respect. I really am not sure why this so hard to comprehend! But thanks for asking.
I would say those “Christians” are Christian in name only, considering that a Christian is meant to be a follower of Christ, but how can you be a follower when you ignore his words? Jesus always condemned sin and told sinners to repent of their sins.
And everyone did what was right in their own eyes. Gee I remember something in the scripture about this, it didn’t turn out very well did it?
Well said. I am constantly amazed at “Christians’ who once they know that aborted foetal tissue is used to derive vaccines (yes even in Australia now) continue to not have a problem with vaccination. This is mind blowing. Yet these same people will tell you they have a problem with abortion itself. Go figure.
I am anti abortion but have vaccinated my children. I had not heard about the link before. Bill, what is your take on this?
Hi Bill,
Thank you as always for your comments and your defence of the unborn. Keep up the great work.
Just a thought from my own cogitations; “human life begins at conception” is a concept even the most rabid prochoicer is forced to accept if they support evolutionary theory.
One of the central tenants of evolution is the thought that life began from non-life billions of years ago and that first “replicator” was emensely basic in shape and function. Yet this simple single cell is defended tooth and nail as the origin of all other life and was definitely a life.
Thus if someone agrees that life on earth began in such a simple way and it was definitely life; then it must follow that human life begins at a similar point and no matter how simple it is it is still a life and still a human being. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Either a large portion of what rigorous science identifies as life is not really alive or humans are alive and human from conception.
All the other arguements are essentially just variations on a very ugly form of eugenics or discrimination (ie you are less fully functioning than I think is “normal” so its ok for you to be killed).
So ultimately abortion is still killing a human being if you consistently apply the secularist religion of evolutionary scientism. Let alone those you have itentified above who should know their God better than to justify the holocaust of the innocents.
May God’s justice repay those responsible for their deaths!
Hi Jo,
I am fully aware what the MSM media is saying but if you actually look at the methodology the scientists published when they wrote about their development of vaccines you will find the truth. I too vaccinated my children. I have repented of this.
Here are a few tidbits:
“Explant cultures were made of the dissected organs of a particular foetus aborted because of rubella, the 27th in our series of foetuses aborted. This aborted fetes was from a 25 year old mother exposed to rubella 8 days after her last menstrual period. 16 days later she developed rubella. The fetes was surgically aborted 17 days after maternal illness and dissected immediately. Explants from several organs were cultured and successful cell growth was achieved from lung, skin and kidney. It was then grown on WI-38. The new vaccine was tested on orphans in Philadelphia.”
American Journal Disease of Children;virus Production and Biological control of Live Attenuated Rubella Virus Vaccines, Vol 8Aug 1969; Attenuation of RA273 Rubella Virus; Studies ofImmunisation with Living Rubella Virus; Ach J Dis Child Vol 110 Oct 1965.
“One of my duties as a young student in the laboratory in Stockholm was to dissect human foetuses from legal abortions and send organs to the Wistar Institute. Such material was the source of many important studies of cell lines at the Institute, such as Leonard Hayflick’s study of WI-38 cells… When we collected the organs, this was done immediately after the legal abortions.” Norrby, Erling “Listen to the Music: The Life of Hilary Koprowski (review)”, Perspectives in Biology and medicine – Volume 44 Number 2, Spring 2001 pp 304 – 306 and personal email, from Dr Norrby to DrRene Leiva, Human Diploid Cell Strains, A Brief History of their Origin, 2006
“The isolation and characterisation of human diploid cell strains from fetal tissue make this type of cell available as a substrate for the production of live virus vaccines. ” L. Hayflick and P.S Moorhead, The Serial Cultivation of Human Diploid Cell Strains, Experimental Cell Research, 1961, 25, p 618. or this one… “The cell line developed at Coriell, identified as IMR-90 was the first of several lines planned in support of NIA research programs… The IMR-90 cell line, like WI-38 was derived from the lung tissue of a human female embryo following therapeutic abortion.” Coriell Institutes for Medical Research, Cell Collections, A Brief History of IMR – 90, Christine Beiswanger, PhD, Associate Professof, 2003/2004 Edition.
Very good points, David. Similarity, The Greens will fight for any animal species and their unborn progeny but happily endorse abortion of humans.
Very well said, Bill. After being to abortion actions in the States, I’m startled by the level of complacency among the Aussie Christians concerning abortion. Randall Terry from Operation Rescue said, “If it is murder, then act like it is”.
Bless you in your work, mate
Well put David Gee. The left never want to discuss the science of abortion and homosexuality – because they are on the backfoot.
I’ve been saying for a while – due to pro-abortionists being simple minded – that abortion was under the homicide laws, where the law changed but the science didn’t, therefor, women are still killing babies/homosapiens – just not murdering them.
I have also had to call babies ‘homosapiens’ as the dna at conception is that of a ‘new homospaien’ and therefor, not ‘cells and tissue’ – as the pro-abortionists keep calling it.
Thanks again Bill and all for keeping up the good work. God Bless.
Dear Douglas,
You say the expression that human life is sacred must be untrue because cancers are made up of human cells which destroy human life. However, cancer cells are malignant, unnatural and diseased which some say is a result of modern living with all its pollutants including tobacco. These destroy healthy human organs so how can that be compared to an unborn child [or a fetus if one wants to be precise about it] which is a living, healthy,fully formed human being merely residing in a woman’s womb until it is time for it to be born?You are very confused my friend. I should pray for enlightenment.
Thanks for bringing this issue up again Bill. Never stop doing that.
While I am not suggesting the following is canonical Scripture, the quote below is from a Muslim women around the time she found Jesus and became a Christian:
“As I was seeing right into Heaven, I began to recognize thing sin Heaven. There was no language barrier. I understood angels were saying, “Holy, holy, holy.” I saw a huge crown and people threw it at the feet of Jesus. I saw children under the age of six and they were all worshiping Jesus. Jesus was speaking to me, explaining things to my mind of what I was seeing. Many of these children were babies who died when their mothers got rid of them through abortion. Some died naturally through sickness or were murdered. All of them were at Jesus’ feet and so peaceful and so healthy and happy – not one sad face.”
Abortion is the greatest evil of our time, and we need to continue to talk about it.
Your first paragraph raises a massive question Bill. It’s way wider than the subject of this article. Of course we all fit into the category potentially, if not actually.
Becoming a disciple of Jesus requires a world view shift, and being open to having the values of the kingdom affect and even change the values of your previously held world view. There are many Christians the world over (it’s certainly not limited to a particular culture!) who claim to follow Jesus but never all Jesus’ values to affect their world view.
Of course we can still disagree with that – none of us should claim to have it ALL right! 🙂 However I agree with you that there is an amazing level of refusal to change one’s world view in the “discipling” process.
Hi Bill,
Notice how they (secularists) try to be as stupid as possible, to the point where THEY CAN’T EVEN RECOGNIZE THE GENDER OF A PERSON.
“Yes God, she hasn’t figured out what species she is yet”!
Bill, I realise you don’t like getting involved with the vaccine debate. But I find your avoidance in discussing the connection with vaccines to abortion confusing. Why haven’t you made any comment regarding this?
Thanks Sarah. But of course I have written on this in a number of articles, eg:
Sorry about that Bill, glad to know you have spoken out 🙂
Sharon, I wasn’t disagreeing with you, I was just surprised the ABC published the link.
One clueless “Christian” who, intentionally or not, gave support for abortions was Jay Bakker (son of imprisoned “Televangelist” Jim Bakker).
In a speech at Cornerstone Festival a number of years ago he was giving a sermon about how Christians should be more “loving”. One of his examples of a more “loving” act was “Why are we (Christians) protesting abortion clinics instead of holding the woman’s hand during the procedure?”. Gee, Jay. Maybe it’s because we don’t want to give tacit support to the murder of an unborn child? (This same Jay Bakker also can be seen on Youtube supporting Gay “marriage”, reasoning, “these people have already been persecuted enough. I’m not going to add to it”, yet when I dared to question his “christianity” I was hammered by all sorts of fans of his. Maybe if they actually checked what he said against scripture…..) Mick Koster
Let me here offer a few of the things these worldly believers have tossed my way as we have had these discussions. They are representative of the shoddy thinking and the complete lack of a biblical worldview that so many of these folks have.
In Genesis 25:21,22 as in many other later Bible verses it takes note of conception and antenatal life –
“And Isaac intreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren: and the Lord was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
22 And the children struggled together within her;”
That which was conceived was called a “child” between the conception and the birth.
That totally proves the Bible does speak about human life occurring, being noticed and managed by God well before birth.
I think this low view of abortion is why Christians also go through IVF, knowing that some of their artificially created children will die naturally and others will be killed.
Bill, can we talk?
I would really like to discuss this subject with you. You are so correct on so many things, especially sexual perversion and Islam.
For starters, you refer to “something so important as the sanctity of human life.” I hope you realize that expression means “all human life,” or if it does not, I would like to be informed how it can mean anything other than all human life is sacred. Can you enlighten me here?
For clearly (the way I see it) the expression is untrue. Human life, per se, is not sacred, because it includes cancers and I don’t think you would want to say they should not be destroyed. Their actual human life should be terminated. Cancers are human because they consist of human cells in human bodies (when they do). Human cancers are human life. Do you deny that?
If you do not wish to discuss this publicly would you be willing to reply to a fellow searcher for truth with an email? Sincerely in Christ, Douglas
Thanks Douglas but this is not rocket science. The phrase “sanctity of human life” is a very common and very well-known phrase which everyone – except you it seems – knows means that every human being is made in the image of God and is therefore worth treating with dignity and respect. I really am not sure why this so hard to comprehend! But thanks for asking.
I would say those “Christians” are Christian in name only, considering that a Christian is meant to be a follower of Christ, but how can you be a follower when you ignore his words? Jesus always condemned sin and told sinners to repent of their sins.
And everyone did what was right in their own eyes. Gee I remember something in the scripture about this, it didn’t turn out very well did it?
Well said. I am constantly amazed at “Christians’ who once they know that aborted foetal tissue is used to derive vaccines (yes even in Australia now) continue to not have a problem with vaccination. This is mind blowing. Yet these same people will tell you they have a problem with abortion itself. Go figure.
Sharon, I found this link on your claim. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/aborted-fetuses-vaccines/story?id=29005539
I am anti abortion but have vaccinated my children. I had not heard about the link before. Bill, what is your take on this?
Hi Bill,
Thank you as always for your comments and your defence of the unborn. Keep up the great work.
Just a thought from my own cogitations; “human life begins at conception” is a concept even the most rabid prochoicer is forced to accept if they support evolutionary theory.
One of the central tenants of evolution is the thought that life began from non-life billions of years ago and that first “replicator” was emensely basic in shape and function. Yet this simple single cell is defended tooth and nail as the origin of all other life and was definitely a life.
Thus if someone agrees that life on earth began in such a simple way and it was definitely life; then it must follow that human life begins at a similar point and no matter how simple it is it is still a life and still a human being. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Either a large portion of what rigorous science identifies as life is not really alive or humans are alive and human from conception.
All the other arguements are essentially just variations on a very ugly form of eugenics or discrimination (ie you are less fully functioning than I think is “normal” so its ok for you to be killed).
So ultimately abortion is still killing a human being if you consistently apply the secularist religion of evolutionary scientism. Let alone those you have itentified above who should know their God better than to justify the holocaust of the innocents.
May God’s justice repay those responsible for their deaths!
Hi Jo,
I am fully aware what the MSM media is saying but if you actually look at the methodology the scientists published when they wrote about their development of vaccines you will find the truth. I too vaccinated my children. I have repented of this.
Here are a few tidbits:
“Explant cultures were made of the dissected organs of a particular foetus aborted because of rubella, the 27th in our series of foetuses aborted. This aborted fetes was from a 25 year old mother exposed to rubella 8 days after her last menstrual period. 16 days later she developed rubella. The fetes was surgically aborted 17 days after maternal illness and dissected immediately. Explants from several organs were cultured and successful cell growth was achieved from lung, skin and kidney. It was then grown on WI-38. The new vaccine was tested on orphans in Philadelphia.”
American Journal Disease of Children;virus Production and Biological control of Live Attenuated Rubella Virus Vaccines, Vol 8Aug 1969; Attenuation of RA273 Rubella Virus; Studies ofImmunisation with Living Rubella Virus; Ach J Dis Child Vol 110 Oct 1965.
“One of my duties as a young student in the laboratory in Stockholm was to dissect human foetuses from legal abortions and send organs to the Wistar Institute. Such material was the source of many important studies of cell lines at the Institute, such as Leonard Hayflick’s study of WI-38 cells… When we collected the organs, this was done immediately after the legal abortions.” Norrby, Erling “Listen to the Music: The Life of Hilary Koprowski (review)”, Perspectives in Biology and medicine – Volume 44 Number 2, Spring 2001 pp 304 – 306 and personal email, from Dr Norrby to DrRene Leiva, Human Diploid Cell Strains, A Brief History of their Origin, 2006
“The isolation and characterisation of human diploid cell strains from fetal tissue make this type of cell available as a substrate for the production of live virus vaccines. ” L. Hayflick and P.S Moorhead, The Serial Cultivation of Human Diploid Cell Strains, Experimental Cell Research, 1961, 25, p 618. or this one… “The cell line developed at Coriell, identified as IMR-90 was the first of several lines planned in support of NIA research programs… The IMR-90 cell line, like WI-38 was derived from the lung tissue of a human female embryo following therapeutic abortion.” Coriell Institutes for Medical Research, Cell Collections, A Brief History of IMR – 90, Christine Beiswanger, PhD, Associate Professof, 2003/2004 Edition.
Another fuller article is this one:
http://www.cogforlife.org/vaccines-abortions/
Very good points, David. Similarity, The Greens will fight for any animal species and their unborn progeny but happily endorse abortion of humans.
Very well said, Bill. After being to abortion actions in the States, I’m startled by the level of complacency among the Aussie Christians concerning abortion. Randall Terry from Operation Rescue said, “If it is murder, then act like it is”.
Bless you in your work, mate
Well put David Gee. The left never want to discuss the science of abortion and homosexuality – because they are on the backfoot.
I’ve been saying for a while – due to pro-abortionists being simple minded – that abortion was under the homicide laws, where the law changed but the science didn’t, therefor, women are still killing babies/homosapiens – just not murdering them.
I have also had to call babies ‘homosapiens’ as the dna at conception is that of a ‘new homospaien’ and therefor, not ‘cells and tissue’ – as the pro-abortionists keep calling it.
Thanks again Bill and all for keeping up the good work. God Bless.
Dear Douglas,
You say the expression that human life is sacred must be untrue because cancers are made up of human cells which destroy human life. However, cancer cells are malignant, unnatural and diseased which some say is a result of modern living with all its pollutants including tobacco. These destroy healthy human organs so how can that be compared to an unborn child [or a fetus if one wants to be precise about it] which is a living, healthy,fully formed human being merely residing in a woman’s womb until it is time for it to be born?You are very confused my friend. I should pray for enlightenment.
Thanks for bringing this issue up again Bill. Never stop doing that.
While I am not suggesting the following is canonical Scripture, the quote below is from a Muslim women around the time she found Jesus and became a Christian:
“As I was seeing right into Heaven, I began to recognize thing sin Heaven. There was no language barrier. I understood angels were saying, “Holy, holy, holy.” I saw a huge crown and people threw it at the feet of Jesus. I saw children under the age of six and they were all worshiping Jesus. Jesus was speaking to me, explaining things to my mind of what I was seeing. Many of these children were babies who died when their mothers got rid of them through abortion. Some died naturally through sickness or were murdered. All of them were at Jesus’ feet and so peaceful and so healthy and happy – not one sad face.”
Abortion is the greatest evil of our time, and we need to continue to talk about it.
Your first paragraph raises a massive question Bill. It’s way wider than the subject of this article. Of course we all fit into the category potentially, if not actually.
Becoming a disciple of Jesus requires a world view shift, and being open to having the values of the kingdom affect and even change the values of your previously held world view. There are many Christians the world over (it’s certainly not limited to a particular culture!) who claim to follow Jesus but never all Jesus’ values to affect their world view.
Of course we can still disagree with that – none of us should claim to have it ALL right! 🙂 However I agree with you that there is an amazing level of refusal to change one’s world view in the “discipling” process.
Hi Bill,
Notice how they (secularists) try to be as stupid as possible, to the point where THEY CAN’T EVEN RECOGNIZE THE GENDER OF A PERSON.
“Yes God, she hasn’t figured out what species she is yet”!
Bill, I realise you don’t like getting involved with the vaccine debate. But I find your avoidance in discussing the connection with vaccines to abortion confusing. Why haven’t you made any comment regarding this?
Thanks Sarah. But of course I have written on this in a number of articles, eg:
https://billmuehlenberg.com/2012/03/07/the-horrific-face-of-the-culture-of-death/
And here: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2012/03/06/pepsi-and-dead-babies/
And here: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2015/04/14/vaccinations-the-public-good-and-big-brother/
Etc.
Sorry about that Bill, glad to know you have spoken out 🙂
Sharon, I wasn’t disagreeing with you, I was just surprised the ABC published the link.
One clueless “Christian” who, intentionally or not, gave support for abortions was Jay Bakker (son of imprisoned “Televangelist” Jim Bakker).
In a speech at Cornerstone Festival a number of years ago he was giving a sermon about how Christians should be more “loving”. One of his examples of a more “loving” act was “Why are we (Christians) protesting abortion clinics instead of holding the woman’s hand during the procedure?”. Gee, Jay. Maybe it’s because we don’t want to give tacit support to the murder of an unborn child? (This same Jay Bakker also can be seen on Youtube supporting Gay “marriage”, reasoning, “these people have already been persecuted enough. I’m not going to add to it”, yet when I dared to question his “christianity” I was hammered by all sorts of fans of his. Maybe if they actually checked what he said against scripture…..) Mick Koster