SivartM Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I was using "if" as in, "IF you really do think that it's wrong...", not as if I were unsure. I know that abortion is wrong. The reason it is not illegal is because most non-Christians disagree with that, not because God says it is all right. The majority does not rule if they are against God's law, which clearly says not to murder. Do you not have a problem with babies being intentionally killed? Quote "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde�Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets." - Jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Chibibis Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Actually it was a small group of non elected men who decided that abortion should be legal. The fact that it is legal should not be a determining factor for the SDA church. It is not illegal to break the Sabbath. Does that mean Sabbath breaking is OK? The fact that billions of people sincerely believe that abortion is murder, should be enough to stop providing abortion services in our hospitals and clinics. In 1Cor chapter 8 Paul warns that something as innocuous as eating meat that was offered to idols is wrong if it is a stumbling block to others. The only thing that is preventing a public relations nightmare for the SDA church is that neither the majority of members of the church nor the public at large are aware that Adventist Hospitals perform abortions. Then there is that pesky little verse in 1Thess. 5:22. "Abstain from all appearance of evil." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 The only thing that is preventing a public relations nightmare for the SDA church is that neither the majority of members of the church nor the public at large are aware that Adventist Hospitals perform abortions. I think you're right about that Pete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Originally Posted By: pkrause I think your putting words in Redwoods post. If you read his prior posts he said he was against abortion, did he not. So I don't see that in what he said. But like most here I've read that they are against abortion but are for choice. Again you can't place abortion with the stealing, honoring your parents, or any of the others. Abortion as far as I know is not illegal. Morally it could be considered wrong. And besides its between God and the individual not you and them, or me and them. pk But if it's wrong... it's just as wrong as any of those things. And we should take as strong a stand against abortion as stealing, honoring your parents, etc. If you believe that abortion is wrong, then there is no excuse for keeping quiet about it as it is "between them and God". Should we tell people that adultery is wrong? That stealing is wrong? That dishonoring your parents is wrong? Would you then support forced legislation on all Americans to obey each one of the ten commandments? Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug yowell Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Oooh Tom,Did you really call me a hypocrite because I am a death penalty advocate?? That wasn't very nice!! And I'm very disappointed that you don't respect my free,moral right to be a war monger! But,maybe war mongering is no longer legal so perhaps you're right after all.And do you think you can supply us with an accurate estimate on the number of abortions performed in China over the past 30 years or so? Thanks, Your Pro-life Brother (so called) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SivartM Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Originally Posted By: SivartM But if it's wrong... it's just as wrong as any of those things. And we should take as strong a stand against abortion as stealing, honoring your parents, etc. If you believe that abortion is wrong, then there is no excuse for keeping quiet about it as it is "between them and God". Should we tell people that adultery is wrong? That stealing is wrong? That dishonoring your parents is wrong? [/quote'] Would you then support forced legislation on all Americans to obey each one of the ten commandments? I would support legislation to prevent abortions, but not all ten commandments. The first four mean nothing to non-Christians. But I think that politics is a waste of time. People need to actually interact with the women who may get abortions. Show them that they care. Tell them that God has given them a blessing. Quote "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde�Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets." - Jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members phkrause Posted October 12, 2009 Members Share Posted October 12, 2009 No one is saying that that is not what we should do. Its that we that were created beings have a choice to do what ever we want. But if our choices are wrong like murder, stealing, disobeying than we will have to pay for those choice's. That's all I'm saying, and so is everyone else. pk Quote phkrause By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near. {5T 451.1} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I think your putting words in Redwoods post. If you read his prior posts he said he was against abortion, did he not. So I don't see that in what he said. But like most here I've read that they are against abortion but are for choice. Again you can't place abortion with the stealing, honoring your parents, or any of the others. Abortion as far as I know is not illegal. Morally it could be considered wrong. And besides its between God and the individual not you and them, or me and them. pk Pkrause, Yes, there is a difference between stealing and killing your own baby. Stealing is illegal while killing your own baby is legal. For two thousand years it was illegal and the Hippocratic Oath prevented physicians from offering abortion services to their patients. This atrocity became legal in 1970 in the State of Hawaii and in 1973 in all the states of the U.S. When the state of Hawaii legalized abortion, our Adventist Church didn’t know what to do. Half of the staff at our Castle Memorial Hospital who were non-Adventists demanded the right to offer abortion services to their patients. The Adventist doctors protested. This was elevated to the North American Division, and the church caved in to the pressure fearing the loss of income would cripple the finances of the institution. This means that our Adventist Church, the one who had preached for over a century the importance of the Ten Commandments to the world, became a leader in the legalization of what the Lord had forbidden: the killing of innocent human beings. You call this “choice” while the Adventist pioneers called this “murder.” Take your choice, Call it what you want, but remember that what God wrote with his own finger cannot be broken with impunity. The Adventist Church will have to reap what it has been sowing. No wonder the Adventist Church is not growing in North America while it is growing by leaps and bounds in many countries where abortion is still illegal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 The issue is far from being so simplistic as you might try to present it. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug yowell Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 The issue is far from being so simplistic as you might try to present it. Redwood, Why? Why has the killing of an unborn human being, for no other reason than the exercise of "choice",become such a complex issue? And can you explain why it was so apparantly simplistic 100 years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Would you then support forced legislation on all Americans to obey each one of the ten commandments? Redwood, No, I wouldn’t! The government’s duty is to protect the lives and property of all the human beings under its jurisdiction. Telling people that they must worship God on the seventh day of the week had nothing to do with the protection of human beings or the protection of their property. Protecting the lives of human beings regardless of their size from harm is the duty of the government. Do not forget that Scott Peterson was charged with double murder because he killed his pregnant wife. There were two victims involved, Lacy and her baby Connor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Good point Nic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 The issue is far from being so simplistic as you might try to present it. Redwood, What is so complex about God’s command to respect the life of other human beings? The shedding of innocent blood is one of the sins most often condemned in Scripture. Anyone who is willing to obey what God commands will find this prohibition clear and simple. The issue becomes complex when we decide to go against the holy will of God. Jesus gave his own life that we might live. Those who choose abortion kill in order to avoid nine months of inconvenience. A man rapes a young woman. Society lets the criminal live, but executes an innocent baby. Is this the kind of justice you would defend? A woman is faced with an unwanted pregnancy. She feels mentally depressed. The church says: killing the innocent baby is the best solution, forgetting that the best alternative is adoption. Choosing adoption as the right solution to the problem blesses an infertile couple and blesses the mother of the baby who can be free from the guilt associated with the killing of her own child. What is so complex about this? One definition of sin is not doing what is right. Refusing to choose the best alternative is treated by the Bible as sin. The church tells the woman that if she chooses to kill her own baby she is doing no wrong under the circumstances. The woman listens to the church and has an abortion. She feels no need to ask forgiveness for her sin because the church told her she did nothing wrong. She is deprived of the blessing of being forgiven. She lives the rest of her life laden with depressed guilt for her crime. To the woman caught in adultery Jesus said: “Neither do I condemn you.” Nevertheless, Jesus did not stop there. He added: “GO AND SIN NO MORE.” This is where the church is failing. The church, instead of saying: “Go and sin no more,” says “You have done no wrong.” Is this the mission of the church? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Redwood, Why? Why has the killing of an unborn human being, for no other reason than the exercise of "choice",become such a complex issue? And can you explain why it was so apparantly simplistic 100 years ago? Doug, Well said! For two thousand years when the Hippocratic Oath required from physicians and the prohibition against abortion ruled the day the issue was quite simple. It is still quite simple in many countries where abortion is still illegal. It got complicated when society decided that another of God’s commandments was a relic of the past. The sexual revolution which voided God’s prohibition against fornication, adultery, and sexual impropriety paved the way for the mass genocide of the unborn. The result is so far the death of fifty million of innocent members of humanity in the U.S. alone. Society will have to pay a heavy price for this revolt against God’s Law. The Baby Boom Generation is retiring, and the fifty million who should be now working to provide for those retirees is dead. The government Medicare program and social security funds are depleted, and Obama doesn’t know how to solve this financial crisis. Sixty years ago, the U.S. was the greatest creditor in the world, but now we are the greatest debtor. We are on the verge of bankruptcy and Washington has no viable solution for this financial crisis. Borrowing from our grandchildren seems to be the only viable option. We have our printing presses going full speed, our mighty dollar is sinking, and foreign countries are thinking about dumping our currency. If somebody tells you that dumping God’s Law gives our nation a free ride, don’t believe it. There is a price to pay for ignoring God’s will for us. We reap what we have sown. The church needs to wake up and sound the trumpet. Ignoring our sacred responsibility regarding his issue will make our church as irrelevant as all those reform movements which preceded our own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Chibibis Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Good points Nic. I read just this morning that it is projected that in 25 years the number of people in the US who are eligible for Social Security will have doubled to 72 million. I don't think there is the slightest chance that there will be money enough to provide benefits to those people, even if the SS program still exists, which probably isn't very likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 This is all very typical. For some ... EVERYthing is in black and white. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted October 13, 2009 Moderators Share Posted October 13, 2009 Richard & Nic: You ask a question: Is the Adventist church really pro-life? The answer, as is typically defined in the popular public today is: No. Yes, some would say that it is pro-life. But, to do so one would have to re-define what "pro-life" means. One can respond to the question and the debate as to whether or not it is could stop. Quote Gregory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 That question was pretty much answered in the OP, so I don't think that is what is being debated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug yowell Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 This is all very typical. For some ... EVERYthing is in black and white. What's wrong with that,Redwood? Didn't Jesus say," He that is not for me is against me"? Didn't Paul say,"That which is not of faith is sin"? Wouldn't a logical,reasoned,Biblical explanation clear up a lot of these confusing,and complex black and white issues and allow some of us slower ones to more easily comprehend why they are inescapably grey? And please give credit where credit is due, at least we're not viewing them thru rose colored glasses!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Perhaps I should have said ... the problem I have with the attitude displayed is it is "I'm right and you are wrong". "So there is no need for discussion" Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rich Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Hey Pete, perhaps the people who projected what you wrote have never read Revelation. They sure will be surprised when God kills a third of mankind. The SDAs that I know believe a woman should make the choice herself. Then they turn around and say they are pro-life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Good points Nic. I read just this morning that it is projected that in 25 years the number of people in the US who are eligible for Social Security will have doubled to 72 million. I don't think there is the slightest chance that there will be money enough to provide benefits to those people, even if the SS program still exists, which probably isn't very likely. Pete, Yes, the future is rather bleak, unless drastic changes are implemented to avoid the slow movement towards the extinction of the Christian world as we know it. Yesterday I watched a video describing the trend towards the eventual take over of Europe and North America by the Moslem world. The argument is very simple: Demographic requires that the average woman bears 2.1 children in order for a society to survive. Statistics show that in Italy, France, Russia, Japan, Canada and the U.S. the average woman has between 1.3 and 1.6 children. This means that while the population in these countries is shrinking, Moslems are expanding. This is why Khadafy made the following prediction: Moslems are going to rule the world without a fight and without the need for terrorism. The Lord said to Adam and Eve: Be fruitful and multiply. Not long ago, Pastor Randy Roberts lamented the fact that the Adventist Church is not growing in our country. How can it grow if we, like the rest of the society, have been deceived into believing that it is morally acceptable to kill our own children under a variety of circumstances? How can it grow if some of our own church members own a large number of abortion clinics? As a church we need to wake up. Hitler killed six million innocent human beings and our church cooperated with his regime. Now our own government has facilitated the genocide of fifty million, and we seem to be siding with the enemy. I believe that our hospitals should stop offering abortion serviced to their patients. The God-given duty of our physicians is healing instead of killing. Aren’t we called to be the Remnant of God who keeps God’s Commandments? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Didn't Jesus say "suffer the little children to come to me." How then is murdering the child allowing this to happen? God gave the gift of life and only God has the right to take it. If you are a medical professional and you think you have this right, then you have placed yourself in the place of God. Mark Quote The best wisdom is always second hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Richard & Nic: You ask a question: Is the Adventist church really pro-life? The answer, as is typically defined in the popular public today is: No. Yes, some would say that it is pro-life. But, to do so one would have to re-define what "pro-life" means. One can respond to the question and the debate as to whether or not it is could stop. Gregory, Yes indeed. Some years ago while visiting the Philippines the president of the General Conference publicly was asked whether the Adventist Church was pro-life. His answer was: “Yes, with strict guidelines.” If you read our official “Guidelines on Abortion” you will discover that the killing of the unborn is justifiable under a variety of circumstances including rape, incest, malformation, when the pregnant female is a minor, and even when the unexpected pregnancy is affecting the mental health of the woman. Well, have you ever seen a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy who will not experience temporary mental depression? All such a woman needs to do is to find an abortionists willing to agree with her that her mental health is being impacted. Do you think that she will have a hard time finding such a provider of abortion services? The result? Another innocent human being will be killed with the blessing of God’s church. To avoid nine months of inconvenience, the life of a kicking baby is sacrificed when the baby could have been given up for adoption. Can we believe that such a set of abortion guidelines fits the pro-life definition? How can we describe such guidelines as “strict” if they allow for the killing of innocent babies under such a variety of circumstances? And let’s not forget that said guidelines are not prescriptive, but rather suggestive. Our hospitals are free to design their own guidelines. This is why a few years ago it was reported in our “Ministry” magazine that five of our hospitals were offering elective abortions to their patients. Elective means, or course, that there is no need to prove that the pregnancy was the result of rape, incest, that the pregnant female is a minor, that there is malformation, or that the mental health of the woman is a factor in the decision to abort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Didn't Jesus say "suffer the little children to come to me." How then is murdering the child allowing this to happen? God gave the gift of life and only God has the right to take it. If you are a medical professional and you think you have this right, then you have placed yourself in the place of God. Mark Mark, Yes indeed; Jesus did say that, and he also stated that our eternal destiny will be determined by the way we treat “the least.” Can we imagine any other groups of human beings deserving the “the least” label? We prefer to focus our sight on our attitude towards the Sabbath forgetting that this is not enough. Those who crucified the Son of God were very particular about Sabbath observance, and after killing the Author of life they rushed to keep the Sabbath. Now we allow our own hospitals and our own members to engage in the killing of innocent human beings whom Jesus identified with and rush to make sure we worship the Lord on the correct day of the week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.