What I Learned About Abortion & the Adventist Church

[Nic Samojluk]

Kill the heretics! Burn them at the stake.

I guess I am just too American to want to go back to the Dark Ages.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: GreatLakesGramma

A 13 or 14 year victim of incest already has had her life ruined.

Does this mean that one crime deserves another?

The more serious crime is to add insult to the injury by requiring/compelling the victim of rape or incest to carry a pregnancy they do not want and then making them feel guilty if they chose to terminate it.

[Nic Samojluk]

The Adventist church has taken an issue on abortion. Our position is that we are not going to lobby Congress to enforce our morality. Instead we are going to preach the love of Christ and pray that He wins hearts and minds.

Yes, and that stand is wrong. John the Baptist was ready to confront King Herod on a moral issue. Too bad you were not there to advise him not to enforce his morality of the king. Ellen White did advice us about our duty to vote on behalf of good laws and against bad ones. She added that when we vote for bad laws, God will hold us responsible for failing to do our civil duty.

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

Nic Samojluk: You might have heard about Dr. Allred. His dream was to become a SDA minister; but later on he switched to medicine. He graduated from Loma Linda back in 1964 and built a chain of over twenty abortion clinics. He became a millionaire and eventually left the church....

Recently, he retired and sold his lucrative business to another Adventist. One day his daughters with their families perished in an airplane accident.

Is this the doctor:

Quote:

Most recently, Irving “Bud” Feldkamp, owner of the nation’s largest privately-owned abortion chain (17 family planning clinics) and member of the Adventist church made news. His two daughters, two sons-in-law and five grandchildren were killed in a Montana plane crash.

Source: http://arthurandteresabeem.blogspot.com/2009/05/ten-commandments-and-abortion.html

Yes, his name is Edward allred.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

You keep making assertions that aborting the product of rape is murder as though you are speaking ex cathedra (?) yet have not produced one logical or Biblical reason why such a pregnancy cannot be aborted?

The NIV version of the Bible makes the killing of an unborn child deserving the death penalty. Besides, the Bible has many passages condemning the shedding the blood of the innocents. Is the unborn baby guilty of any crime? If the baby is innocent, on what basis can we justify depriving it of life?

Did you read the two conservative commentaries' comment on the passage?

Quote:

Originally Posted By: Gerry

You're against instruments? What if we just used a pill?

Wrong! I am against the violation of God’s Holy Law which was given for our own protection and the protection of the innocents.

Originally Posted By: Gerry

With your position, you are not only doing further damage to the victim of rape by making them feel guilt where there should be none, but want to take away their freedom to choose, impose your own will and compel them to carry something they might not want to do?

True guilt is God’s way of leading us to him in order that we can secure the forgiveness of our sins.

Repeating an untruth that a pregnancy resulting from a violent act is innoicent will not make it true.

Quote:

There is always freedom of choice whether abortion is legal or illegal. The freedom of choice to kill another human being without any legal consequence tends to encourage sinning. Is this what you want?

I take it then that you consider every a fertilized egg a chicken? And every acorn an oak? By what logic, theology, or science?

Quote:

If you are a parent, would you tell your son or daughter: “Your freedom is so sacred that if you steal from me, wreck our car, burn our house or kill your brother, I will not interfere with your freedom of choice. I will protect your freedom to choose no mater what the cost”?

I won't comment on a non sequitor.

[Nic Samojluk]

Sorry, Nic, but none of your references dealt with abortion vis-a-vis rape, incest, or where the mother's life is at stake.

I have already stated early on that abortion on demand for convenience alone is anathema to me.

I seems that you have forgotten that when the pioneers were alive aborion was illegal. Why would they discuss those special cases if abortion was illegal? There was no point in even trying. Had they thought that there were valid exceptions, at least one of them would have said something.

[Nic Samojluk]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

I am not allowed nor invited to preach from the pulpit. I am not a SDA minister. I am a Realtor, and selling real estate is my business. Religion is my hobby and my passion.

Wow! I am not an SDA minister either. Well, I am not an ordained pastor. I guess I could be considered a minister since I am involved with lay ministries. I am invited to preach pretty much as often as I am willing to volunteer. I belong to a large congregation which has two pastors so it is rare that a layman is invited to preach there. However we have a couple dozen small churches within a 30 mile radius that are always needing new speakers and love to have laymen come in. And of course, we have prayer meetings, vespers and Adventist Youth services that are always in need of lay preachers. If someone is not allowed to preach muchless not invited, I would think they either need to consider changing denominations or do some real soul searching.

You guessed wrong. I am not invited to preach because I live in Loma Linda where the majority are infected with the right to choose deception regarding abortion. When I was in Argentina where abortion is illegal, I could have preached almost every week and I was in charge of a congregation for some time in addition to my teaching duties.

[Gerr]

You're against instruments? What if we just used a pill?

Wrong! I am against the violation of God’s Holy Law which was given for our own protection and the protection of the innocents.

I take it that you would charge every girl/woman who has ever used RU 486 or an IUD is guilty of murder?

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Sorry, Nic, but none of your references dealt with abortion vis-a-vis rape, incest, or where the mother's life is at stake.

I have already stated early on that abortion on demand for convenience alone is anathema to me.

I seems that you have forgotten that when the pioneers were alive aborion was illegal. Why would they discuss those special cases if abortion was illegal? There was no point in even trying. Had they thought that there were valid exceptions, at least one of them would have said something.

And why would they even discuss abortion if it was illegal and they agreed with it anyway?

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

I could be wrong on this, but my understanding of the Catholic position which Nic claims has preserved the apostolic view on abortion is that they would prefer the fetus/baby to live when it comes to a choice between the mother and the baby.

You are right on that count and the Catholic position is wrong!

One minute you are lauding the Catholic stand on abortion because you believe they got it from the Apostles. Now you say they are wrong on this point. How do you know they did not get this from the Apostles also?

Originally Posted By: Gerry

If every union of a spermatozoon and an ovum = a human being as you espouse, let me remind you that there are probably thousands and thousands of spontaneous abortions every year many if not most of which a woman many not even be aware of because it happens so early in pregnancy.

Yes, nature also kills through tornadoes, floods, and tsunamis. Does it follow, though, that we have the right to imitate nature?

Apples and oranges!!! Spontaneous abortions are nature's way of screening out serious DNA defects either from the conceptus' or the mother's genetic make-up. Without this, we would probably be close to extinction by now. Natural disasters make no distinctions between the good and the bad, the normal from the defective.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

I am happy to see that Nic allows sacrificing the life of the unborn to save the mother. If this can be done, why then can this not be done in case of rape or for a genetic defect that we know results in severe retardation where no meaningful existence can be expected?

Because the unborn baby has committed no crime. If we let the rapist live, who has committed a heinous crime, how can we execute the innocent and let the guilty free?

Innocent? What do you call invading someone's privacy WITHOUT permission?

Quote:

Who is wise enough to determine when somebody else’s life is meaningful? Do you feel competent to make such decisions? Can we play God with safety?

By and large nature makes the decision by the conceptus' genetic and epigenetic make-up. Since society does not have the unlimited resources that God has, I believe it has the right to determine which of these very severely handicapped it is willing or capable of of caring for.

NO ONE has the inherent right to bring into the world someone so severely handicapped that it becomes a total burden to someone else. If you think there is one, let's hear the Biblical basis for it.

[Gerr]

Quote:

When we are talking about the intentional killing of an innocent human being, I do not see any gray areas except when saving the life of the pregnant woman.

Please, identify your gray areas.

We are discussing one right now. You say it's wrong to abort a pregnancy that is the result of rape or incest. I say, NOT!

Since we cannot agree on which position is correct although we both think we are correct, it must be a gray area.

You say a fertilized egg is a chicken, an acorn an oak, a fertilized ovum as a human being. I say, NOT! Since we and millions of other people cannot agree, it must be a gray area.

Most if not all SDAs believe the 7th day is holy and therefore to be kept as holy. There is a wide range of practice on HOW to keep it. Many gray areas there.

Tithe. Most SDAs believe God requires it. But here again, there is a wide range of practice. Some pay none, some pay on the gross, some on the net and many points in between

Etc., etc, etc.

[Nic Samojluk]

After much study of Scripture, prayer and thoughtful discussion we have taken a position which really is different than any other denomination.

[Nic Samojluk]

Do you see a BOY in every spermatozoon

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

And you are claiming that I did take an extreme case of abortion. Do you realize that you are the one who have done this?

You were the one talking as though ALL abortions are done by poisoning or dismembering body parts! That's why I have asked you twice already, and for the third time ask you again, what if the zygote is aborted at the 4, 8, 64, or 256-cell stage? At an early stage there are no recognizable body parts to dismember yet, and no nervous system yet to feel pain?

Quote:

My opinion is that when in doubt whether you do have a human being or not, you try to err on the side of caution

Caution for whom? How about caution for the rape victim's well-being?

I have already answered that objection more than once. For those who are in doubt, erring on the side of caution is the best approach.

What is your best estimate about the percentage of abortions which are done at the 4, 8, 64, or 256-cell stage? Does it approach the one percent? Would you say that for the sake of said one percent or less the price we paid for the legalization of abortion is justified: fifty million babies deprived of life?

Our social security fund is almost depleted, and we are living on borrowed funds from the Chinese. A significant percentage of those fifty million aborted babies could be by now working to help support the growing number of retirees who can no longer produce. Was the decision to legalize the killing of our future workers a smart one?

[GreatLakesGramma]

Quote:

GreatLakesGramma: A 13 or 14 year victim of incest already has had her life ruined.

Not necessarily, although you're probably right about most instances. It definitely does damage to them, but many of them do go on to live full, well-adjusted lives as adults.

Her life is ruined just as much as having a baby would ruin it. In either case, it can be restored.

I also once worked with 2 girls, both 16 at the time, who were both raped at the age of 12. Both gave birth and kept their sons. One of them was quite talkative, so I know her story. Her sister's husband beat her up and tied her to the bed. He went to prison and her sister divorced him. She kept her son, and she adored him, even though he looked exactly like his father. She talked about him a lot.

The other girl never talked about her experience, but she made it pretty obvious that she hated men. But she also was devoted to her son. At the time I worked with them, they were both in high school, and working part time at a nursing home for mentally and physically handicapped persons. Their mothers were helping them raise their boys.

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

Please, read the NIV version of this passage. It describes the event as "premature birth" thus making the killing of an unborn baby a crime deserving the death penalty. I just posted this above. You can see it if you scroll up.

Here is what the commentators from the Pulpit Commentary have say, a very conservative commentary, I might add.

Ver. 22–25.—Assault producing miscarriage. Retaliation. Women in all countries are apt to interfere in the quarrels of men, and run the risk of suffering injuries which proceed from accident rather than design, one such injury being of a peculiar character, to which there is nothing correspondent among the injuries which may be done to man. This is abortion, or miscarriage. The Mosaic legislation sought to protect pregnant women from suffering this injury by providing, first, that if death resulted the offender should suffer death (ver. 23); and, secondly, that if there were no further ill-result than the miscarriage itself, still a fine should be paid, to be assessed by the husband of the injured woman with the consent of the judges (ver. 22). The mention of “life for life,” in ver. 23, is followed by an enunciation of the general “law of retaliation,” applied here (it would seem) to the special case in hand, but elsewhere (Lev. 24:19, 20) extended so as to be a fundamental law, applicable to all cases of personal injury.

Ver. 22.—If men strive and hurt a woman. A chance hurt is clearly intended, not one done on purpose. So that her fruit depart from her. So that she be prematurely delivered of a dead child. And no mischief follow. “Mischief” here means “death,” as in Gen. 42:4, 38; 45:29. He shall pay as the judges determine. He was not to be wholly at the mercy of the injured father. If he thought the sum demanded was excessive, there was to be an appeal to a tribunal.

The Pulpit Commentary: Exodus Vol. II. 2004 (H. D. M. Spence-Jones, Ed.) (169). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

And from Hutton & Osborn:

Verses 22–25 deal with one law regarding unintentional harm done to a pregnant woman. When men strive together, literally “And when [ki] men quarrel,” is similar to verse 18 but uses a different word meaning the same thing. (The word here is used in 2.13.) And hurt a woman with child means that they “hurt a pregnant woman” (21.22 tev). The word for hurt may also simply mean “hit” (21.22 niv) or “strike” (tot). tan has “pushes,” and reb has “knocks against.” Other ways to express this are “and injure a pregnant woman” or “cause a pregnant woman to suffer injury.”

So that there is a miscarriage is literally “and her children go out.” The Hebrew is not clear whether a miscarriage is really intended or a “premature birth” (Durham). In the case of a miscarriage, the fetus would not survive, so “she loses her child.” But in case “she gives birth prematurely” (21.22 niv), then it is possible that the child (or children) would live. Most scholars understand it to be a miscarriage. (emphasis mine)Translators are advised to follow this interpretation

Osborn, N. D., & Hatton, H. (1999). A handbook on Exodus. UBS handbook series; Helps for translators (507). New York: United Bible Societies.

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: Shane

I am sure I disagree with the policies of many Adventist hospitals, we don't need some central command dictating hospital policies from a distance. We are not Catholics - no Vatican is needed.

One of our Adventist hospitals is killing innocent unborn babies by the hundreds... you see no problem with this?

Please re-read my post and see if you can better word your question.

[Gerr]

Many Adventists are convinced that the Adventists Church can never fail. This was contradicted by Ellen White who made the following statements:

Quote:

The Lord Jesus will always have a chosen people to serve Him. When the Jewish people rejected Christ, the Prince of life, He took from them the kingdom of God and gave it unto the Gentiles. God will continue to work on this principle with every branch of His work. {LDE 59.1}

Quote:

When a church proves unfaithful to the word of the Lord, whatever their position may be, however high and sacred their calling, the Lord can no longer work with them. Others are then chosen to bear important responsibilities. But, if these in turn do not purify their lives from every wrong action, if they do not establish pure and holy principles in all their borders, then the Lord will grievously afflict and humble them and, unless they repent, will remove them from their place and make them a reproach.--14MR 102 (1903). {LDE 59.2}

Quote:

The world must not be introduced into the church, and married to the church, forming a bond of unity. Through this means the church will become indeed corrupt, and as stated in Revelation, "a cage of every unclean and hateful bird." {TM 265.1}

Quote:

In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the sentence: "Found wanting." By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged. . . . {LDE 59.3}

Quote:

We must as a people arouse and cleanse the camp of Israel. Licentiousness, unlawful intimacy, and unholy practices are coming in among us in a large degree; and ministers who are handling sacred things are guilty of sin in this respect. They are coveting their neighbors' wives, and the seventh commandment is broken. We are in danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon, of allowing our churches to become corrupted, and filled with every foul spirit, a cage for every unclean and hateful bird; and will we be clear unless we make decided movements to cure the existing evil? [Ellen White] {21MR 380.1}

If Ellen White made such dreadful statements and such terrible warnings over a century ago, what would she say today upon seeing what is taking place among God’s chosen people—those chosen to issue the last warning to a perishing world? I beg you to consider the seriousness of what is taking place and reconsider your unconditional support for whatever policy the church decides to adopt.

And what do these quotes have to do with abortion?

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: Shane

The best way to reduce abortions is to allow them to be legal but restrict them.

Your reasoning defies common sense and logic!

It is not my reasoning. What I am stating is quantifiable, verifiable and measurable behavior from a variety of countries and states. I once held a position very similar to yours. However I changed my position in the light of an increasing body of evidence that shows banning abortion simply doesn't work. Restricting it does. What makes sense and is logical is to do that which has worked and abandoned that which does not work.

[Dr. Shane]

John the Baptist was ready to confront King Herod on a moral issue. Too bad you were not there to advise him not to enforce his morality of the king.

John the Baptist was preaching repentance to the king. He was not telling the king to use the civil government to enforce religious laws.

[Dr. Shane]

When I was in Argentina where abortion is illegal, I could have preached almost every week and I was in charge of a congregation for some time in addition to my teaching duties.

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: Shane

After much study of Scripture, prayer and thoughtful discussion we have taken a position which really is different than any other denomination.

I have the testimony of one of the members who voted for the Guidelines on Abortion who assured me that exactly the opposite took place.

I doubt it. Don't believe everything you hear and only half of what you see. Especially beware of folks telling you what they know you want to hear.

[Dr. Shane]

Agree with your postings, consistent reasoning! TU

Ok, you may not agree with my postings but I think I have some consistent reasoning too.

[Gerr]

When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, RSV.

22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine.

23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, NRSV

When there’s a fight and in the fight a pregnant woman is hit so that she miscarries but is not otherwise hurt, the one responsible has to pay whatever the husband demands in compensation.

23 But if there is further damage, then you must give life for life. Message

If some men are fighting and hurt a pregnant woman so that she loses her child, but she is not injured in any other way, the one who hurt her is to be fined whatever amount the woman’s husband demands, subject to the approval of the judges.

23 But if the woman herself is injured, the punishment shall be life for life, GNT

Si rixati fuerint viri, et percusserit quis mulierem prægnantem, et abortivum quidem fecerit, sed ipsa vixerit : subjacebit damno quantum maritus mulieris expetierit, et arbitri judicaverint.

23 Sin autem mors ejus fuerit subsecuta, reddet animam pro anima, Clementine Vulgate