Communications

Abortion is Murder

Dear Bro. Don,

I read with dismay the article on abortion by Sis. Connie Wiede man in the May Tidings. Abortion is a topic that will inevitably produce strong feelings. Everyone is entitled to his or her own views, but let us not impose those opinions upon others. No sister would consider an abortion lightly, without much prayer and counseling. There are many serious issues that may cause her to reluctantly consider the possibility: medical concerns regarding physical or psychological problems, or a malformed fetus, to name but a few. [Note: Sis. Pat is a nurse.] In these extraordinary cases to call the removal of a fetus in the early stages of pregnancy “murder” and “sinful” might be seen by some as extreme.

Regarding the various scriptural passages such as: “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee…” (Jer. 1:5) — the omniscient God, who knows the end from the beginning, may have plans for someone even prior to conception and He would be aware of the growth and development in the womb. This does not mean, however, that a few proliferating cells clustering together to form an embryo is a viable human being.

A major factor that can cloud the issue in the abortion debate is the stance of the Roman Catholic Church, which teaches conception is the result of holy spirit action, thereby imbuing

the fetus with a soul. Logically, for those who hold this doctrine, abortion during any stage of the pregnancy is considered to be murder. As Christ­adelphians, such misunderstanding should not encumber us.

Now to the delicate of issue of Onan spilling his seed on the ground (Gen. 38:9). Did God kill Onan because he, in effect, murdered millions of potential persons in his sperm, or was it not rather the fact that he deliberately disobeyed the command to father a child for his brother? I suspect the latter.

Perhaps I could be accused of being pedantic in my opinions, but it comes from concern for the plight of sisters who, after struggling and agonizing with the decision to have an abortion, may have read Sis. Connie’s article. To be labeled as being sinful and guilty of murder may apply to an indiscriminate, thoughtless abortion of convenience, but it may also compound the stress that often lasts a lifetime following this surgical procedure, when, perhaps, extreme circumstances prevail.

Patricia Bartle, Picton, Ontario

Dear Bro. Don,

Although Sis. Wiedeman’s view on abortion simplifies the moral problem, her reasoning involves some very special pleading. For example, is it likely that Onan was executed because he was considered to have murdered a child he refused to conceive?

We must not confuse abortion with miscarriage. [Note: Bro. Alan is a medical doctor.] Abortion is deliberate, miscarriage is accidental. The provisions in Exodus 21:22-25 are concerned with compensation for accidental injuries. So if a woman becomes involved in a fight between two men and has a miscarriage, she may sue for redress ‘as the judges determine.’ If there is permanent damage, then compensation should be based on equivalence, i.e. the value of a life for the loss of a life, the value of an eye for the loss of an eye, and so forth.

While it is true that life begins at conception, this does not mean that a person begins then. The fertilized egg is a genetic programme from which a person develops. The personality only starts to be formed under the influence of the parents and, most importantly, the influence of the Word of God. This follows logically from the fact that if we do not honour God we are no better than wild beasts (Ps. 49:11), which have no freewill and are programmed solely by their genes.

What are we to make of passages quoted by Sis. Connie, such as Genesis 25:22 and Isaiah 49:1, that seem to give personality to the unborn foetus? When Rebekah was disturbed by a lot of foetal activity, God told her that this presaged the lifelong conflict between Jacob and Esau. This does not mean that the foetuses had personalities at that time. This prediction was only possible because foreknowledge enabled God to ascribe personality to the children before they were born.

Similarly, it was only possible for Isaiah to claim that God had called him from the womb because God knew how he would develop even before he was conceived. The fact that God foreknows the destiny of every foetus does not make every foetus sacred.

Abortion is a complex subject to which scripture gives no direct answers — probably because in Bible times large families were valued and numbers were restricted by natural means such as prolonged suckling and disease. Circumstances alter cases. At creation, Adam was encouraged to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth (Gen 1:18). Now that the earth is over­filled with mankind, this injunction does not apply and we can accept that contraception has a legitimate role. What then is the moral difference between preventing an egg from being fertilized and destroying the egg after it has been fertilized?

Furthermore, what conclusions do we draw from the fact that about 30% of fertilized eggs are spontaneously aborted (most in apparently normal ‘periods’) and that in spontaneous abortions serious abnormalities are found in only about 45% of the embryos? Since God is the author of ‘nature’, what do these facts tell us about the value of the embryo? I suggest that these are matters on which everyone should be ‘fully convinced in his own mind.’

Alan Fowler, Bridgend, UK

Cyclone at St. Lucia Dear Bro. Don,

I have just read the article by Bro. John Bilello concerning the devastating cyclone called Domoina on 31, January 1984, in the April, 2005, edition pp. 157 and 161. This flood actually happened at St. Lucia in Natal on the east coast of South Africa, about 200 miles north of Durban. [Bro. Bilello has confirmed his original source was incorrect and the fact will be corrected when the series appears in book form, Lord willing.] I live in Durban and we caught the edge of the cyclone which caused much damage to life and property. I have kept several newspaper cuttings dated from the 1st of February that year showing the devastation when 542 mm of rain fell in one day = 21.68 inches.

Cyclones are common in Macambique which is about 400 – 500 miles north of Durban which occur almost every February. This one strayed a little too far south from its normal pattern. About four years ago in one of these cyclones there was an African woman who climbed to safety in a tree and then gave birth to her child. Pictures and stories of this went around the world as she was rescued by a military helicopter.

I want to take this opportunity to thank you for the excellent magazine which you produce, and I look forward to its arrival every month. I read magazines from Australia, England and America and each country has its own peculiar problems with which they must grapple.

We pray that the Lord will be here soon to bring an end to this age of violence and corruption as in Luke 17: 26 and Genesis 6: 11.

Keith Worthington, Durban, SA

Bro. Thomas on Genesis 3 Dear Bro. Don,

I would like to discuss the answers to the Caribbean sister’s questions on the ideal in marriage in the April, 2005, Tidings.

Firstly, the question of the opinions

of Bro. Thomas all being scripturally correct was answered sensitively: thank you for those comments. We are grateful for Bro. Thomas’ legacy left to us, although we can recognise some differences of opinion.

I also appreciated what was said in the answer about the “exquisite” creation of Adam and Eve, as sexual beings, with the command to multiply.

There is no doubt we need to focus on the one flesh ideal of marriage in Genesis 2, in all our discussions on the subject of marriage. In that ideal we can ever look to that first united and perfect union to which we might all aspire in our marriages. However, as we have no indication of the intensity of the desire for each other, either before or after the fall, I think it was brave of you to offer an opinion. Intensity of desire is directly related to the childbearing years and there was the commandment to multiply before the fall, and a consequence of multiple conceptions after the fall.

In a good marriage, sexual desire moves to an all encompassing desire to love one’s partner as Christ loved the church. For those who model their marriages on Genesis 2, their roles are complementary, Christlike and lifetime roles.

I was sorry you linked desire and nakedness to the disobedience. Surely nakedness with that one flesh marriage ideal is not a sin. I know it was, and sometimes still is, contemplated as sin in the context of sex is sin. I think we need to reassure Godly people that nakedness and sex is not sin within a sound marriage, and that such a relationship can be a valid, enobling and yes, still an “exquisite” (great word, thank you) relationship in Him. So it is worth reaching up to the example of Genesis 2.

The fact Adam and Eve exper­ienced “shame” at being naked was because angels were in the area and approaching them. With their new knowledge of good and evil, they rightly tried to cover themselves. They now knew their nakedness was only for themselves in the sexual expression of their love. Nakedness is not a shame in marriage, but it is, if practised outside the marriage state. [Note: Interestingly, nakedness becomes a figure from this time onward of sin and disobedience, Ex. 32:25; Rev. 3:18, etc.]

Sex and nakedness were not sinful; the disobedience of eating of the tree was. A sexual relationship within marriage is a command, “Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth.”…But because nakedness is mentioned in God’s inquiry of Adam and Eve, some assume sex is also under discussion.

The nakedness Adam and Eve covered after the disobedient sin is nothing more than that their married intimate relationship should be private between themselves, and is an encouragement for each married couple to keep the ideal, and to exclude others from the view of it.

[Note: Sex is one of God’s greatest gifts to mankind within the context of marriage. It is a form of adhesive which binds the marriage together because of its pleasure and mutual interdependence. To limit this gift only for the purpose of procreation is to reject God’s gracious provision and limit a powerful element which can bind a marriage and assist it to face the vicissitudes of life that test the  strength of a marriage.]

The punishment for the disobedient sin is noted in verse 23, when Adam and Eve were put out of the garden. The consequences of the disobedient sin are explained in Genesis 3:15-19.

To read it all as a consequence is to see what Adam and Eve heard from the Lord, and is rightly true for all of us. The husband “ruling” his wife has certainly often been a cruel consequence for all time, until the New Testament offered a better and more Godly way.

The one flesh ideal in marriage for which we should all strive is submission to one another; that is, submission by both parties to each other (Eph. 5:21). The encouragement to submit to each other and to love one another is paramount, (not wives to submit, and husbands to love, which some seem to emphasize, which skews the relationship).

I think the word “equality” in marriage is to miss the ideal. The word “complementary” is more appropriate, I feel. Our roles in a sound marriage are complementary, with submission and love each for the other.

Those roles are never equal because time, place and circumstance offer different opportunities to each partner. Attributing roles is not helpful in the marriage relationship, when the “one flesh” ideal is being striven for, because differing roles then become a disunited front, instead of a united presentation in Christ. We also need to emphasize that a woman is only in subjection to her own husband…She is not in submission to other brothers, only in the communal sense of ecclesial submission to one another.

Your comments read: “The woman is to support and enhance the man;” but surely also, as well, the man is to support and enhance the woman. For what is the Christian role but to enhance each other so that all of the male and female members of “the ecclesia support(s) and enhance(s) the role of its Savior head”? It is not only the brothers, who, supported and enhanced by the sisters, support and enhance the role of the Savior. Sisters do that as well for the Savior as ecclesial members, for they are “joint heirs” and have access to God’s grace in their lives as well. They also need to be supported and enhanced by their husbands and brothers.

The greatest gift to the ecclesia (and ultimately to the Father) by all of us, and for all of us, is the mutual supporting and enhancing of each other (in all our relationship roles), where none outstrips others in their own endeavors, but we all rise together toward perfection.

It is difficult to know how we can overcome the problems in marriages that are not sound, if we give assent to the roles of men being elevated, that is, supported and enhanced above sisters.

It is essential that we give an ennobling ideal of a united one flesh marriage to our young people so that they can begin their married lives with the highest goals. And we can all overcome our marriage difficulties if we reach for the perfectly united and holy ideal of Genesis 2.

Bev Russell, Sydney, Australia

Calling all Parents

Dear Bro. Don,

I applaud your June editorial entitled Calling All Parents. It is my belief that so many Christadelphian

parents can be lulled into a complacency and an idleness with their children. I believe that we as a community have a huge, and often overlooked, problem with our young people concerning drugs, alcohol, materialism, pornography and sex. But in addition to these eternal behaviors, I believe that we also have a REAL underlying issue.

Godliness is defined as something more than keeping a list of behaviors (the received lists of do’s and don’ts that a lot of Christian communities embrace, which combines biblical injunctions and prohibitions with many man-made standards of conduct). True godliness flows out of the heart and produces fruit in a young person’s life.

I believe that the heart of the matter and the sad reality of it all is that many Christadelphian young people do not have a heart for God. They profess to be followers of Christ but they are worldly in the way they approach life. There is little evidence in their day to day living of a hunger for God.

Our children are not consciously denying God, but other things have replaced Him. The love of God has been replaced by things. Even though they are not overly rebellious, in the heart there is a greater love for the world than for God.

This is the root of all the other problems that you mention (promiscuity, drugs, profanity, and adopting worldly values). Most of us are content with our children’s consistent attendance at meeting, weekly Bible classes, gatherings, etc., and can be led to believe that the child/children are good little Christadelphian children.

There is more to consider here, however. Many of our children are attending public or private schools and are inundated with profanity, worldly values and standards, provocative clothing, etc. Think about it: the average child/teen attends school an average of 6 hours a day, or 30 hours a week. This does not even include extracurricular activities after school. The negative influences can be overwhelming when compared to functional awake time at home.

Many Christadelphian children are going through the motions of their ecclesial responsibilities. There is a checklist mentality for so many of these youths. They are attending ecclesial functions but have been highly influenced by the negatives of school.

Deuteronomy 6:4-9 reads: “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. IMPRESS them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.”

God’s intention is for us and our children to walk the talk. We need to be role models, mentors and examples for our children as Christ is/was to the ecclesia. When these words are written on their hearts, they WILL walk the talk, they WON’T go through the motions. God’s word and expectations are ingrained, they are practiced. These are issues that need to be addressed. If His word is in their hearts, they will conduct their lives in accordance with His commandments and not go through a series of checks and balances.

A teen’s pursuit of God will make itself known by the behavior he demonstrates, the company he keeps and the activities in which he engages. We need to be fully engaging and interactive with our immediate families. I’m not saying that the ecclesial family is not important. I am saying that immediate families need to take time to discover one another and enjoy one another’s company without outside influences. Get to know one another, develop a trust and rapport with our children and constantly engage them in conversation about their day, problems, concerns, hopes, and dreams for the future. Make the kingdom and his part in it real!!

We can’t begin these relationships when they are 15 or 16. It is gradual, a lifelong process. Without trying to get too personal, some parents came up to me and my husband at our oldest son’s high school graduation last weekend. Both mothers had boys in our son’s class and both of their sons had had their share of problems and brushes with the law. They wanted to know how and why our boys were so close and open with us. Hoping not to sound condescending, we told them that our relationships began when the boys were tiny. Just because they developed friendships outside of our family didn’t mean that our relationship had to suffer or our conversations had to dwindle.

If we constantly seize moments to teach our kids about God’s expectations, His word will be written in their hearts. You simply cannot mentor, pastor, disciple or develop children whom you are seldom around. Begin when they are tiny seeds, and water until God gives the increase.