Is Jesus Pro Life or Pro Choice?
March 30th 2011 22:19
I wonder if Jesus would be 'pro-life' or 'pro-choice' if living on earth in our era? I know that sounds like an obvious question, but if you truly think about it, it's not that easy.
While I do believe that Jesus Himself is definitely 'pro-life' in the fact that He could never support the intentional death of a child, I also don't believe He would be comfortable taking on that politically natured title. I also think the issue would have been much deeper for Him than we want it to be in our lives. Imagine if the Good Samaritan had come across a woman suffering complications after an abortion. What would he have done? What would most 'pro-life' supporters do? I can't say for sure, but judging from their reputations, their activities, their picketing, and the like; I don't think they would be such 'good-samaritans'.
On the other hand, Jesus is very pro-choice. Not the politically incorrect christian version of pro-choice, but the 'freedom of humans to choose sin' version. I am pretty sure He was 'anti-apple' in the Garden, but He didn't legislate that. He said, 'that one you must not eat "OR"'. He clearly laid out His desires and the consequences, but He left the choice up to them. I think He would be of the mind of "As for abortion, you must not take part in the sacrifice of your children OR"......the consequences are pretty obvious. Devalutation of human life, increase in the use as birth control, later and later term abortions, much lower birth rate, and the destruction of self in the process.
But, personally, I don't see my Jesus picketing. I don't see Him shouting at the sinners. Not the homosexuals, abortionists, alcoholics, crack heads, or any other label we can come up with to make our sins look smaller and theirs look worse. Jesus actually seemed to reserve His shouting for those who called themselves believers but did not love. Those who upheld law over love. Those who claimed to be saved, but then enacted all sorts of rules to make it more difficult for others to enter the Kingdom. The Pharisees, Saducees, Rabbis, and even the poor rich man who walked away from Jesus because he couldn't part with his wealth, all claimed to be serving the 'church' or 'God'. They believed they were doing God's work and keeping His 'church' pure and helping believers to live Holy lives. In reality, they were trying to legislate godliness.
It doesn't work. That was the whole idea of the law: to prove that we could not DO anything worthy of godliness other than humbly submitting our lives to God. In both the Old and New Testaments nothing is revered other than faith. Abraham believed and it was credited as righteousnes. David was a man after God's own heart. Moses found favor in God's eyes. Yet each of them were Murderers. Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son for God, he deserted a woman and her child (also his child) and left them in the wilderness to die. David killed a man to cover up his adultery and in doing so 'caused' the death of his child. Moses killed a man in cold blood out of anger. They were not Godly men. They were Godly 'believers'. They believed in God's ability to redeem them from their sins, not their own abilities to avoid them or help others avoid them. One thing that I think can keep us from sin is a 'Godly' example of someone who sinned and turned it over to God. As Paul says, that does not justify sinning, it just makes it evident that we are sinners who can do nothing about it other than admitting that and asking; and then letting, God make us into His image. Making murder, theft, and adultery illegal didn't stop it in the Bible. It won't today. The purpose of the laws was to point out the "or" and draw them to Christ. You can live according to the law and enjoy some benefits, but even that poor rich man who came to Christ and said he had kept every single law, felt the need to ask, "what must I do to be saved". He obviously didn't think that all that law keeping did him much good. It had brought him wealth, but had not made him any 'holier' or 'more saved' than all the gentile sinners coming to Christ.
So, Christ would never support abortion, but He would also never choose to be part of the earthly 'pro-life' movement. His pro-life was of a completely different sort. He preached the Gospel not the Law. Making abortion illegal won't 'save' anyone's life. They will all still die one way or the other. The only 'choice' we have is whether or not we will help bring them to Jesus, or be Pharisees who seek to label them and make it harder for them to attain the freedom, forgiveness and love of living in Christ. Are we the Good Samaritans, coming to their aid while they lie in the gutter beat up by the world and their own sin? Or are we the Pharisees, walking past with picket signs and pamphlets until someone else actually touches their lives and brings them, shows them, lives with them, the love of Christ? That in itself would deal a severe blow to the number of abortions performed in our country. But changing the law would make us feel better, feel like we were making people (and our country) somehow more 'christian', without having to give up our own wealth. As with the poor rich man, we don't want to give up our comfortable lives to actually follow Him into the trenches.
Just my opinion.
While I do believe that Jesus Himself is definitely 'pro-life' in the fact that He could never support the intentional death of a child, I also don't believe He would be comfortable taking on that politically natured title. I also think the issue would have been much deeper for Him than we want it to be in our lives. Imagine if the Good Samaritan had come across a woman suffering complications after an abortion. What would he have done? What would most 'pro-life' supporters do? I can't say for sure, but judging from their reputations, their activities, their picketing, and the like; I don't think they would be such 'good-samaritans'.
On the other hand, Jesus is very pro-choice. Not the politically incorrect christian version of pro-choice, but the 'freedom of humans to choose sin' version. I am pretty sure He was 'anti-apple' in the Garden, but He didn't legislate that. He said, 'that one you must not eat "OR"'. He clearly laid out His desires and the consequences, but He left the choice up to them. I think He would be of the mind of "As for abortion, you must not take part in the sacrifice of your children OR"......the consequences are pretty obvious. Devalutation of human life, increase in the use as birth control, later and later term abortions, much lower birth rate, and the destruction of self in the process.
But, personally, I don't see my Jesus picketing. I don't see Him shouting at the sinners. Not the homosexuals, abortionists, alcoholics, crack heads, or any other label we can come up with to make our sins look smaller and theirs look worse. Jesus actually seemed to reserve His shouting for those who called themselves believers but did not love. Those who upheld law over love. Those who claimed to be saved, but then enacted all sorts of rules to make it more difficult for others to enter the Kingdom. The Pharisees, Saducees, Rabbis, and even the poor rich man who walked away from Jesus because he couldn't part with his wealth, all claimed to be serving the 'church' or 'God'. They believed they were doing God's work and keeping His 'church' pure and helping believers to live Holy lives. In reality, they were trying to legislate godliness.
It doesn't work. That was the whole idea of the law: to prove that we could not DO anything worthy of godliness other than humbly submitting our lives to God. In both the Old and New Testaments nothing is revered other than faith. Abraham believed and it was credited as righteousnes. David was a man after God's own heart. Moses found favor in God's eyes. Yet each of them were Murderers. Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son for God, he deserted a woman and her child (also his child) and left them in the wilderness to die. David killed a man to cover up his adultery and in doing so 'caused' the death of his child. Moses killed a man in cold blood out of anger. They were not Godly men. They were Godly 'believers'. They believed in God's ability to redeem them from their sins, not their own abilities to avoid them or help others avoid them. One thing that I think can keep us from sin is a 'Godly' example of someone who sinned and turned it over to God. As Paul says, that does not justify sinning, it just makes it evident that we are sinners who can do nothing about it other than admitting that and asking; and then letting, God make us into His image. Making murder, theft, and adultery illegal didn't stop it in the Bible. It won't today. The purpose of the laws was to point out the "or" and draw them to Christ. You can live according to the law and enjoy some benefits, but even that poor rich man who came to Christ and said he had kept every single law, felt the need to ask, "what must I do to be saved". He obviously didn't think that all that law keeping did him much good. It had brought him wealth, but had not made him any 'holier' or 'more saved' than all the gentile sinners coming to Christ.
So, Christ would never support abortion, but He would also never choose to be part of the earthly 'pro-life' movement. His pro-life was of a completely different sort. He preached the Gospel not the Law. Making abortion illegal won't 'save' anyone's life. They will all still die one way or the other. The only 'choice' we have is whether or not we will help bring them to Jesus, or be Pharisees who seek to label them and make it harder for them to attain the freedom, forgiveness and love of living in Christ. Are we the Good Samaritans, coming to their aid while they lie in the gutter beat up by the world and their own sin? Or are we the Pharisees, walking past with picket signs and pamphlets until someone else actually touches their lives and brings them, shows them, lives with them, the love of Christ? That in itself would deal a severe blow to the number of abortions performed in our country. But changing the law would make us feel better, feel like we were making people (and our country) somehow more 'christian', without having to give up our own wealth. As with the poor rich man, we don't want to give up our comfortable lives to actually follow Him into the trenches.
Just my opinion.
| 10 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous
I had a lot of the same thoughts you had. It's nice knowing that someone else had the same thought.
I was just saying to myself last night that if God was against choices then he would NOT have created the tree of knowledge in the first place. There would of been no choice to eat the apple. What you said about the good Samaritan was very healing since I was yelled at by a paramedic for attempting suicide while pregnant. Apparently it's selfish to be Bipolar when you're pregnant. Thank you for your article.