RON, SINCE YOU HAVE TAKEN MUCH LABOR TO ESPOUSE THIS POSITION OPENLY, I SHALL TAKE MUCH LABOR TO RESPOND TO IT OPENLY. MY RESPONSE IS IN CAPS. CAPS ARE USED NOT TO SCREAM, BUT FOR CLARITY'S SAKE. I ONLY GIVE SUCH A THOROUGH REFUTATION OF THIS LENGTHY PIECE BECAUSE OF MY RESPECT FOR YOU, RON MCRAE. AND THOUGH YOU DIVIDE WITH OTHER GOOD BRETHREN OVER THIS ISSUE WITH THE HARSHEST OF TERMS, I’LL NOT DIVIDE FROM YOU BECAUSE I DO NOT CONSIDER THIS A MATTER OF SALVATION. NOR DO I NECESSARILY CONSIDER YOUR DIVISIVENESS WITH OTHER BRETHREN ON THIS ISSUE “SIN”, THOUGH IT MAY BE. I DO CONSIDER THE DIVISIVENESS BLAMEWORTHY AND MERITING REPROOF. I ENCOURAGE EACH OF SPF STAFF TO READ THIS, AS THE REPROOF APPLIES TO ALL SIGNERS.
“For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before
for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect,
but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.
by so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament…because he
continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able to save
them to the uttermost that come unto God by him,
seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless…”
Killing little children is such a sin, the magnitude of which the Bible proclaims, moves God’s people to “lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning” that will “not be comforted” (see Matthew 2:16-18). But the Bible gives no lead way that should move a child of God to commit murder over it.
IN YOUR SECOND SENTENCE, YOU BEG THE QUESTION. NO ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE IS SAYING THAT A CHILD OF GOD SHOULD MURDER ANYBODY.
Even before the law (Matthew 2 is still under the law…see Luke 16:16), when governments sanctioned the killing of new born children (Exodus 1), God commended civil disobedience (Exodus 1:17, 21), and even moved His people to extreme measures in their civil disobedience (Exodus 2:1-3), but the disobedience was still civil, and never rose to the level of vengeance seen today in the matter of abortion, where professing Christians bloody the streets in killing abortion doctors in falsely so called “defensive action” for the sake of “the unborn”, thinking they do God a service.
THIS IS AN ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE OF SCRIPTURE. SINCE JESUS NEVER SPECIFICALLY CONDEMNED SODOMY, DOES THAT MEANS HE THINKS IT’S OKAY? NO. THERE ARE OTHER PASSAGES THAT PROVE GOD’S SON CONDEMNS SODOMY, AND THAT IS A SUFFICIENT REBUTTAL, AND THE SAME IS TRUE WITH “DEFENSIVE ACTION.” THERE ARE BIBLICAL EXAMPLES OF DEFENSIVE LETHAL FORCE, AND THERE IS CLEAR JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SAME, IN BOTH GOD’S LAW AND OUR NATION’S CIVIL LAWS.
BY THE WAY, YOU WOULD NEVER MAKE THE ABOVE COMMENTS TO CONDEMN SOMEONE WHO WOULD EMPLOY LETHAL FORCE IN DEFENSE OF ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE. WOULD YOU? WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves
into the apostles of Christ…
whose end shall be according to their works”.
- 2 Corinthians 11:13
Following the righteous execution of the man Paul Hill,
WOULD YOU CALL RIGHTEOUS THE EXECUTION OF A MAN WHO NEVER HAD A FAIR TRIAL, WHO NEVER GOT TO DEFEND HIMSELF AT TRIAL, WHICH CONSTITUTIONAL USURPATION IS UNLAWFUL AND UNJUST, HEIGHTENED IN ITS CORRUPTION BY THE POPULAR NEGLIGENCE OF STATIST OBSERVERS AND TALKERS IN CHRISTENDOM?
who like his followers “profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate” (Titus 1:16), those same vain followers have raged exceedingly against the members of the Fellowship and other good men who took their stand with us against such open depravity, when they preached at the Starke Prison. The reason for the SPF taking the stand we did at Starke, is clearly stated in our news brief of the incident, and posted on the Fellowship’s web page, and we make no apologies to anyone.
DO YOU SPEAK FOR ALL OF THE MEMBERS? HOW ABOUT ONE OF YOUR REGIONAL LEADERS, JASON STORMS, WHO CONDEMNS THE EMBARRASSINGLY DIVISIVE STAND SO MANY OF YOU TOOK IN STARKE AND WHO CONSIDERS LETHAL FORCE IN DEFENSE OF THOSE SLATED FOR SLAUGHTER SCRIPTURALLY AND MORALLY JUSTIFIABLE.
And the SPF will do so again if and when another fool sets aside his “profession of faith” (Hebrews 10:23) for the infamy of being a hell bound murderer instead of an “able minister of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” (2 Corinthians 3:6).
YOU WOULD NEVER QUOTE SUCH A SCRIPTURE TO CONDEMN ONE WHO USED LETHAL FORCE TO DEFEND AN INNOCENT ALREADY-BORN PERSON FROM CERTAIN DEATH. WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
Yet it behooves us still, to make one last admonition to these meaningless followers of Paul Hill, who in these last two weeks have manifested themselves to be “false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage” (Galatians 2:4)
DO YOU SO JUDGE JASON STORMS AND I? BE CAREFUL, LEST YOUR GAVEL SLAM YOUR OWN TOES, FOR EVEN YOU FIND LETHAL FORCE AGAINST ABORTIONIST JUSTIFIABLE (AS LONG AS IT’S ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE BEING DEFENDED).
as they did Paul Hill. In their many posts to us, they have repeatedly cursed and sworn, and taken God’s name in vain, and threatened us with violence, saying, “I would have shot you dead in a field of battle. Make no mistake about it.”
THIS IS A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, ELABORATED IN YOUR NEXT FEW PARAGRAPHS. JUST BECAUSE SOME PROFESSING CHRISTIANS ARE FALSE BRETHREN UNAWARE BROUGHT IN, THAT IS NO REFUTATION OF CHRISTIANITY. I CAN NAME CURSERS WHO THINK PAUL HILL IS A MURDERER – DOES QUOTING THEM REFUTE YOUR ARGUMENT? JUST BECAUSE SOME DEFENDERS OF PAUL HILL ARE WICKED, THAT IS NO REFUTATION OF HIS DEFENSE.
In their posts they have revealed the abundance of their hearts, saying such things as, “According to you, not only must we tolerate them, we must “love” them by tolerating their God d___ed desecration of the death of a martyr”; “D__it! Don’t you get it?”; “when you start showing you give a d__n about the preborn…”; “you are fortunate we stopped Brockhoeft from kicking you’re a__…”; and “You God d___ed liar”. For righteousness sake we delete their complete spellings.
“As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him.”
- Psalm 109:18
The Bible clearly commanding that “a man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject” (Titus 3:10), it necessitates that we offer one final admonition, that on the least part, some who have “swerved and turned aside unto vain jaingling” (1 Timothy 1:6) who did once “run well” but these “did hinder them that they should not obey the truth” (Galatians 5:7), might “recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will” (2 Timothy 2:26). In so doing, we make clear here, that it is the position of the SPF and all its members, that it is abominably sinful to destroy men’s lives for whom Christ died for reasons beyond the New Testament boundaries, and that to teach others so, while cowardly excusing one’s abstinence from such blood shed, amounts to the highest crime of murdering cowardice known thus far to Christianity. Brothers Ruben Chavez, Kevin Deegan, Dean Moore and Paul Payton have extensively drawn from these contradictors and blasphemers that their openly professed doctrinal position for such blood lusts is Roman Catholic in its entirety, and that others who support such “doctrines of devils” (1 Timothy 4:1) have clearly stated to the Director’s inquiries that their salvation is nothing more than a Calvinistic false claim of election prior to birth. And as church history will clearly demonstrate, those who have professed Christ while easily taking up arms to destroy men’s lives over doctrinal beliefs, have infamously been Calvinists, by which teaching they may justify their blood shed in God’s name as being ordained of God as means to destroy those “vessels of wrath fitted to destruction” (Romans 9:22) whom they wish to kill.
“Whose damnation is just.”
In multiple vain postings, wherein these killers have set forth their arguments these past weeks, the bulk of their position is continually drawn from the Old Testament scriptures, which they “wrest, as they do the other scriptures, unto their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). Beyond a vain, and repetitive run around the “love of God” not far removed from any sodomite’s misplaced view of such, these killers have maintained a Catholic-Levitical priesthood dogmatism that a Christian has religio-political authority under the Old Testament law, to execute wrath and corporal judgment upon the ungodly, which they can only support with their private interpretations and philosophical views of Old Testament Law, “understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm” (1 Timothy 1:7). None of these lawless and characterless killers are able to understand that “the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient…for murderers…for manslayers” (1 Timothy 1:9, 10). It is not the purpose of this admonition to further any argument to them, nor repeat such stupendous waste of effort that good men have advanced in hope of turning these killers from the errors of their “darkened understanding” (Ephesians 4:18). Rather, this is a final admonition to repent, or forever be rejected by the Fellowship of open air ministers that have sincerely sought their salvation, or restoration into a ministerial usefulness to God Almighty. In so doing, we have set forth a brief exposition of the material facts and scriptural references relating to their errors as they concern the New Testament Ministry of Jesus Christ, the Biblical Change of the Law, the Christian’s Duty in Physical Defense and Confrontations, and the Pitfalls of Biblical Ignorance Concerning “the Unborn”. There are a few very good preachers, and the Director maintains the belief in their true conversions and call to preach, that have of late been “carried away” (Galatians 2:13/ 1 Corinthians 12:2) with the murderous influence of these killers’ who think it right to “do evil, that good may come” (Romans 3:8), and who have been offended by proxy that the Fellowship would cast them either in the same mold, or label them as cowardly as these self meandering killers in saints clothing. However, it is the firm position of the SPF and its members that we cannot and will not control others’ associations, or the consequences thereof. But we will maintain our fellowship with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, and with all those who walk in the light as He is in the light (1 John 1:3-7). It is our sincere hope, that by this Final Admonition, that those dear Brothers will re-consider there association with killers and those who love such, for as ministers of the gospel of Jesus Christ we will “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Ephesians 5:11), even at the costs of those whose association with those “unfruitful works of darkness” take offense by proxy at open rebuke. We can do no other!
Concerning the New Testament Ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ
The Holy Scriptures are clear, that “the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” (Luke 9:56).
YOU WOULD NEVER USE THIS VERBAGE TO CONDEMN ONE WHO USED LETHAL DEFENSIVE FORCE TO STOP AN ASSAILLANT FROM KILLING ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE. WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
That admonition followed the disciples James and John wanting to “command
fire to come down from heaven, and consume” the Christ rejecting Samaritans
(see vs. 54). This misplaced New Testament zeal and desire to be like the
Old Testament Elijah (see 2 Kings 1:9-12) was quickly and clearly “rebuked”
by Jesus Christ saying, “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of” (vs.
55). And that is the foundational problem of these religious killers
of abortion doctors, and their vain arguments of Old Testament mandates.
They “know not what manner of spirit they are of”. For Jesus Christ hath
made us “able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of
the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” (2 Corinthians
3:6). The ministration of the Old Testament is called “the ministration
of death, written and engraven in stones” (vs. 7). The Bible is very clear
the New Testament ministration of Jesus Christ is “the ministration of
the spirit” (vs. 8), and “the Lord is that Spirit” (vs. 17), and such ministration
is “much more…glorious” than the Old Testament “ministration of death”,
which the Bible states “is done away” (vs. 11) “by reason” of the New Testament
ministration of life (see vs. 7-12).
No one died in the presence of Jesus Christ, not even the thieves He was crucified with (see John 19:32, 33), and they deserved to die (see Luke 23:39-41) under both the Old and New Testaments (Hebrews 9:16, 17). But “God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved” (John 3:17) from the “ministration of death…and condemnation” (2 Corinthians 3:7, 8). The New Testament ministration of life that is given to us, “seeing we have this ministry” (2 Corinthians 4:1) is a ministry of the words of God, for saith He, “the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (John 6:63). That is why, when God calls us “soldiers of Jesus Christ” (2 Timothy 2:3,4), He also makes it very clear that “the weapons…the weapons…the weapons of our warfare are not carnal” (2 Corinthians 10:4), and they are not used to “destroy men’s lives” (Luke 9:56), but rather for “casting down of imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (vs. 5).
YOU WOULD NEVER QUOTE THIS TO CONDEMN ONE WHO USED LETHAL DEFENSIVE FORCE TO STOP AN ASSAILLANT FROM KILLING ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE. WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
The victory over abortion is to utilize the weapons God gave us in the
New Testament ministration to change peoples’ “every thought” (vs.5) about
both the legality and morality of abortion, and the fornication that causes
it. There is no other scriptural means or methods, because Jesus Christ
is not “come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” (Luke 9:56), and
“it is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant
as his Lord” (Matthew 10:25).
And though some men “deny the Lord that bought them” (2 Peter 2:1), God is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9), and has given His own Son as “the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). That includes abortion doctors as well as any murderer, because Jesus Christ clearly stated that “all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven” (Matthew 12:31). The sin of abortion is not the unpardonable sin. It is not the only sin! “All unrighteousness is sin” (1 John 5:17), and the cause of abortion is not the “physicians of no value” (Job 13:4), but the fornication of the mother, and her desire to cover her sin (Proverbs 28:13). Nevertheless, Jesus Christ can still save the mother, her baby, and the doctor that would help her kill the one in the middle!
AMEN! GOD CAN FORGIVE MURDERERS. AMEN! DAVID AND PAUL, CASES IN POINT. EVEN IN THE O.T., GOD FORGAVE MURDERERS AND DID NOT INSIST THE EXECUTION OF THE CIVIL PENALTY BE ENACTED. SUCH GRACE IS NO REFUTATION OF THE DEFENSIBILITY OF INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE.
“There is no sin that God can’t cleanse,
By the blood of His own Son.
It pays for all that I have been,
And all that I have done!
To think God gave His life for me,
For all eternity.
Though mine eyes can’t see
What my heart believes,
He’s the Lamb of God for me!”
“Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world”
(John 1:29). If these wannabe killers who name the name of Christ while
promoting murder would Behold the Lamb of God and get their eyes off other’s
sins, they could see the abortion doctors’ murderous hearts, as just as
depraved as their own blood lust; and that the only hope of both is Jesus
Christ the Son of God!
The Biblical Change of the Law
Not one member of the Fellowship, or any other preacher standing with us at Starke, instituted the ongoing childish strife and disputation over the SPF’s preaching at Paul Hill’s righteous execution for murder. Howbeit, Brothers Ruben, Kevin Deegan, Dean Moore and Paul Payton and the Director, along with other very knowledgeable Christian ministers have scripturally answered their multitudes of accusations, inquiries and just plain stubborn rebellion (see 1 Samuel 15:23) righteously, and have sincerely tried to “convert the sinner from the error of his way” (James 5:20),
WOULD THIS INCLUDE JASON STORMS, REGIONAL SPF LEADER? HAVE YOU CONVERTED THIS “SINNER FROM THE ERROR OF HIS WAY”? OR DOES YOUR SWORD NOT CUT STRAIGHT?
but to of small avail. The cause of such is found in this killer cult’s lost mentality and errant suppositions about the Roman Catholic Jesuit’s dogmatism about the required Catholic stipulations for “a holy and just war”, which is the same dogma for the Muslim’s “holy wars”. Catholics and Muslims both pray their rosary beads and both justify their religious slaughter of millions of souls over the years, arguing the identical dogmas for their “holy wars”, because the Jesuits were the author of both groups’ murderous theology, and such is a well known fact of history. The anti-abortionists’ killer cult follows the same twisted and devilish mentality, with this additional twist, that they are justifiably Christian in their blood shed because of the Old Testament’s many instances of Israel killing its enemies.
I DO NOT DEFEND THIS “WE ARE AT WAR AND THEREFORE KILLING IS JUSTIFIED” ARGUMENT. IT IS MISTAKEN.
They refuse to see or acknowledge Jesus Christ’s ministry as having any changing effect on the Old Testament as it relates to the spiritual ministration of the New Testament (see 2 Corinthians 3:4-4:7/ 10:2-6). Howbeit, Jesus Christ repeatedly corrected the religious Pharisees of His day concerning His fulfillment of the law (Matthew 5:17, 18/ Luke 4:17-21), and thereby implementing a change in both the purpose and the effect of the law as it relates to the New Testament gospel ministry.
YOU WOULD NEVER SAY THIS TO CONDEMN ONE WHO USED LETHAL DEFENSIVE FORCE TO STOP AN ASSAILLANT FROM KILLING ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE. WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
That change effectively corrected Old Testament applications on Judgment unto death as clearly demonstrated by Jesus Christ in John 8:3-11, where the woman taken in the act of adultery was brought to the Lord with this inquiry, “Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?” Jesus Christ did not excuse her sin, but said “go and sin no more” (vs. 11). Yet he refused the Pharisees the right to kill her for a sin the Old Testament mandated death for (Leviticus 20:10), saying “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (vs. 7).
IT WAS NOT LAWFUL FOR JESUS TO EXECUTE THE WOMAN CAUGHT IN THE ACT OF ADULTERY IN JOHN 8. THE LAW SAID THAT THE ADULTERER AND THE ADULTERESS SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH, AND THIS WOMAN HAD BEEN “CAUGHT IN THE ACT”. THE TESTIMONY AND SINCERITY OF THE WITNESSES WAS TO BE JUSTLY CALLED INTO QUESTION. SECOND, THE LAW STATED THAT THE WITNESSES WERE TO BE THE FIRST TO STONE HER, AND THEY DROPPED THEIR STONES AND LEFT, CONVICTED BY THEIR OWN HYPOCRISY. THIRD, JESUS WAS LEFT ALONE WITH THE WOMAN ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, AND SUCH EXECUTIONS WERE TO BE DONE PUBLICLY. FURTHERMORE, GOD FORGAVE MURDERERS IN THE O.T. TOO, SUCH AS THE MURDERER OF URIAH, KING DAVID. SO JESUS DID NOTHING IN THE NEW THAT WASN’T LAWFUL IN THE OLD. LASTLY, THE WHOLE QUESTION OF JOHN 8 THAT YOU BRING UP IS ONE OF RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE, NOT DEFENSIVE ACTION. SO EVEN IF I AGREED WITH YOU OPINION OF JOHN 8, THAT IS NO REFUTATION AT ALL OF THE DEFENSIBILITY OF INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE.
This killer cult of rabid anti-abortionists refuse to acknowledge such, or their unworthiness to meet the standard laid down by Jesus Christ for putting sinners to death in the New Testament. Hey Preacher, if Jesus Christ died as the propitiation for the sins of the world (1 John 2:1,2), what right do you as a sinner have to execute wrath on some other sinner’s misdeeds, when the only difference between he and thee, is he has to date not found the solution for those sins that you have found? If “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23), you are just as worthy of the same condemnation but for the grace of God (Ephesians 2:8,9).
“But if ye forgive not men their trespasses,
neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.”
- Jesus Christ (Matthew 6:15)
EVEN YOU THINK SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE TO MURDERERS. DO YOU PROPOSE THAT YOU SHOULD FORGIVE THEM ALL, LET THEM GO FREE, BECAUSE CHRIST FORGAVE YOU? DO YOU EVEN PROPOSE THAT MURDERERS WHO CONVERT TO CHRISTIANITY WHILE ON DEATH ROW SHOULD GO FREE? WHY THEN THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN, IN YOUR INSISTENCE THAT THEIR ASSAILLANTS SHOULD LIVE WHILE THE ASSAILLANTS OF ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE MUST BE PUNISHED?
“I will also ask of you one question (see Mark 11:29), and answer me”, Who is greater, the only begotten Son of God Jesus Christ the Lamb of God, or the illegitimate son of a Chinese prostitute? When the likes of you and I “denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto them; and killed the Prince of life” (Acts 3:14, 15), the greatest of these cried, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34) even while they crucified Him. He could have prayed “to his Father, and God would have presently given Him more than twelve legions of angels” (Matthew 26:53) to deliver him from such injustice, knowing that “when His Father heard thereof, he would be wroth: and he would send forth his armies, and destroy those murderers, and burn up their city” (Matthew 22:7). Howsoever, Jesus Christ also knew that He came not “to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” (Luke 9:56) “which are lost” (Matthew 18:11). The only reason Jesus Christ refrained from calling for His Father’s wrath on His own killers, is because the Lamb of God knew more about His killers, than they knew about the Lamb of God they were killing. Brethren, do you have any understanding of how many prostitutes’ illegitimate sons die every day in the abortion clinics?
JUST BECAUSE CHRIST ONCE HELD BACK GOD’S WRATH ON EVILDOERS, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNLAWFUL FOR HIM TO DO SO, NOR THAT HE WILL ALWAYS HOLD BACK GOD’S WRATH ON EVILDOERS. JUST BECAUSE GOD FORGAVE A REPENTANT CAPITAL CRIMINAL ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION, AND DID NOT INSIST ON THE EXECUTION BY STONING, WHICH WAS THE PENALTY OF THE CIVIL LAW, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT CAPITAL CRIMINALS SHOULD ALL NOW BE FORGIVEN AND SET FREE. LET ME ADD THAT EVEN IF WE AGREE ON THE APPLICABILITY OF GOD’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AS STATED IN THE O.T. AND TEMPERED IN THE NEW, THAT DOES NOT REALLY ADDRESS THE POINT OF TENSION IN OUR DISAGREEMENT. OUR PRIMARY DISAGREEMENT IS NOT ON RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE, BUT ON DEFENSE FORCE.
“And Jesus answering said unto them,
Suppose ye that these…were sinners above all…
Because they suffered such things?
I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent,
Ye shall all likewise perish.”
- Luke 13:2,3
What Jesus Christ knew about His own killers was “There is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:22, 23). To “kill the Prince of life” while desiring a “murderer to be granted” life (Acts 3:14, 15) stands throughout history as the absolute worst killing to ever be committed on the face of the earth, yet that killing of the “Prince of life” was by the Prince of life’s own words a “manner of sin” that could be forgiven of men (Matthew 12:31). Hence, in His death He prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). That selfless prayer of forgiveness for His own murderers, was only recorded by one gospel writer, and he was a “physician of no value” (Luke 23:34/Colossians 4:14). Which is worse, to kill the Lamb of God, or the illegitimate son of a Chinese prostitute that might grow up into a dope fiend? The author was the legitimate son of Baptist deacon’s wife, who grew up to become a policeman who put the prostitute’s dope fiend son in jail where he belonged. He is now a saved child of God who preaches on the street with a converted illegitimate son of a Chinese prostitute who grew up to be a dope fiend before God saved him. God saved both the policeman and the dope fiend “for there is no difference: for both had sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:22, 23). They preach together because both the converted dope fiend and the converted cop know they both were rotten to the core. Howbeit, they will not continue to preach together if they do not both realize that the “physician” that kills their kind in the womb, is no worse than they that “killed the Prince of life” (Acts 3:15) on the cross. Brethren, the “manner of sin” in the lives of the cop, the prostitute’s son and the abortion doctor make neither the worse, “for there is no difference”. All three are worthy of death under the Old Testament, but all three can be set free under the new.
AGAIN, YOU CONFUSE RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE, WHICH IS THE OBLIGATION OF GOVERNMENT, AND DEFENSIVE FORCE, WHICH IS A LAYMAN’S USE OF FORCE TO STOP AN ASSAILLANT FROM MURDERING AN INNOCENT PERSON.
It behooves the Christian to search the scriptures and find the reason for the change, and the obvious different ministrations between the Old Testament that Christ came to fulfill (Matthew 5:17/ Luke 4:17-21), and the New Testament that He brought into existence.
“And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament.”
- Hebrews 9:15
And that “cause” is spelled out clearly, that the reason Jesus Christ is now the mediator of the New Testament is “that by means of death, FOR THE REDEMPTION OF THE TRANSGRESSIONS THAT WERE UNDER THE FIRST TESTAMENT, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance” (vs. 15), not execution as mandated under the “first testament” (see Leviticus 20). Brethren, “the first testament” ended with a “curse” (see Malachi 4:6), which was pronounced under the Law of Moses saying, “Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them” (Deuteronomy 27:26). And though the Pharisees misquoted and misapplied the passage as “this people who knoweth not the law are cursed” (John 7:49), the curse was on all that “confirmeth not all the words of this law TO DO THEM” (ibid.). Howbeit, Jesus Christ is the “end of the law for righteousness sake to every one that believeth” (Romans 10:4), redeeming those that believe “from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree (Galatians 3:13)…that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ” (vs. 14). And being made that “curse” (ibid.), he is the “propitiation for our sins: and not for our’s only, BUT ALSO…ALSO…ALSO FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD” (1 John 2:2).
That is why the judgment of death under “the first testament” (Hebrews 9:15) was fulfilled in Jesus Christ from the day He began His earthly ministry, on which day the Lord read from the Old Testament, and then “closed the book” (Luke 4:20) and said, “This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears” (vs. 21). He made that proclamation right after his temptation in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13), after which he moved out of Nazareth (meaning “separated”- Numbers 6:2, 3) to the Capernaum (Matthew 4:13…which means “to place of repentance”), which was the first word Christ ever preached (see Matthew 4:17). That change in the ministry was also noted by the Apostle Paul, saying,
“And the times of this ignorance God winked at,
but now commandeth all men every where to repent.”
- Acts 17:30
And the reason for this change is “Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead” (vs. 31). He doesn’t judge the world today by self appointed Christian killers, who think that since God has “appointed a day” to “judge the world”, it might as well be today, and the judge should be them. But cursed be this religious dogma of such groups as Missionaries to the Preborn and the Army of God who justify the killing of abortion doctors as a service to God that every Christian should embrace if they are against abortion.
YOUR CURSE IS A PRONOUNCEMENT ON YOURSELF, FOR EVEN YOU BELIEVE THAT KILLING ABORTION DOCTORS IS JUSTIFIABLE (AS LONG AS THE ABORTION DOCTORS ARE KILLING ALREADY BORN PEOPLE). OF COURSE, UNLIKE YOU, THE MISSIONARIES TO THE PREBORN DOESN’T JUDGE WITH RESPECT TO PERSONS. THEY DON’T DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AN ENTIRE CLASS OF GOD’S PEOPLE ON THE BASIS OF THEIR AGE AND PLACE OF RESIDENCE.
(FYI, THE AOG’S A WEBSITE, NOT A CLUB.)
The Bible is very clear about the change of the New Testament ministry of Jesus Christ and his disciples, “that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (1 Timothy 1:15), not kill them! The latter is the work of the Devil himself, of whom the Bible says “that through death Jesus Christ might destroy him that had the power of death, that is the devil” (Hebrews 2:14).
NOTWITHSTANDING THE CHANGE OF COVENANTS ON WHICH YOU ELABORATE FOR SEVERAL MORE PAGES, EVEN YOU BELIEVE THAT THE GOVERNMENT MUST PUNISH MURDERERS IN SOME WAY. PERHAPS YOU BELIEVE THAT RIGHT AND WRONG FOR GOVERNMENTS IS RELATIVE, DEPENDENT ON THE WHIM OF A GOD-HATING JUDGES, OR THE VOTE OF A CONGRESS, OR THE CONSENSUS OF THE PEOPLE – I DON’T THINK YOU DO. I THINK YOU AGREE WITH THE EXECUTION OF CAPITAL CRIMINALS, BUT REGARDLESS OF WHICH YOU THINK SHOULD BE DONE TO THEM BY THE GOVERNMENT, YOU DO THINK SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE TO THEM BY THE GOVERNMENT, THIS COVENANT TRANSFORMATION NOTWITHSTANDING.
EVEN IF WE DISAGREE ON WHAT GOVERNMENTS SHOULD DO TO CAPITAL CRIMINALS, THE DISAGREEMENT IS IRRELEVANT TO THE POINT OF CONTENTION IN OUR DEBATE. WHAT IS AT STAKE IS WHETHER FORCE USED DEFENSIVELY TO PROTECT INNOCENT PREBORN PEOPLE IS MURDER. EVEN IF WE AGREE PERFECTLY ON WHAT GOVERNMENTS SHOULD DO TO MURDERERS, WE STILL DISAGREE ON THE JUSTIFIABILITY OF DEFENSIVE ACTION FOR PREBORN CHILDREN, AND IT IS ON THIS POINT WE MUST ENGAGE EACH OTHER.
“The thief cometh not, but for to steal,
and to kill, and to destroy:
I am come that they might have life,
and that they might have it more abundantly.”
- John 10:10
Has it ever dawned on you Christian, that if Jesus Christ “is the mediator of the New Testament” (Hebrews 9:15), then who pray tell me is the “testator” of the New Testament??? “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5); who gave himself a ransom for all” (vs. 6). That mediator is clearly defined in Hebrews 9:15, as “the mediator of the New Testament”. But who then is the “testator”? “For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth” (Hebrews 9:17). Christian, the New Testament was written after the death of Christ, after His resurrection, and after the death of every one of the disciples but John (John 21:22-23/ Revelation 1:9, 10).
“For where a testament is,
there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.”
The only Testament in place at the time of Christ’s death was the Old
Testament, the ministration of which the Bible calls “the ministration
of death” (2 Corinthians 3:7), and “the ministration of condemnation” (vs.
8) under the Law of Moses (vs. 7). But “where a testament is, there must
also of necessity be the death of the testator” (ibid.). Christian who
was it? Who is the Testator of the New Testament? And who was the Testator
of the Old Testament? Moses even declared from the beginning of the law,
when he sprinkled the blood of bulls and goats “on the book, and all the
people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined
unto you” (Exodus 24:1-8/ Hebrews 9:19, 20), and that such was “a pattern
of things in the heavens” (ibid. vs.23). Well Christian, who died to enforce
the Old Testament, if “a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise
it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth”?? Jesus Christ the
Righteous died to fulfill the Old Testament “that by means of death, for
the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament”
(Hebrews 9:15) he became the testator of the Old, and the mediator and
heir of the New Testament (vs.15). He died to enforce the Old Testament’s
ministration of death and condemnation on Himself for the sins of the world,
while becoming the mediator of life under the New Testament to everyone
that believeth. That being so, Christian, then who is the Testator of the
New Testament? “For where a testament is, there must…there must…there must
of necessity be the death of the testator” (vs. 16).
Brethren, “neither the first testament was dedicated without blood” (Hebrews 9:18), for Moses “dedicated” the Old Testament when he “sprinkled both the book, and all the people” with “the blood of calves and goats” (vs. 19), saying, “Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words” (Exodus 24:8). And Jesus Christ fulfilled that Old Testament when He began his earthly ministry (Luke 4:20, 21). That was the same “book” Moses had “read in the audience of the people” (Exodus 24:7) before he dedicated it with the blood of bulls and goats. But when Jesus Christ began his earthly ministry, he took that same “book” of the Old Testament, read from it, and then the Holy Spirit clearly noted, “And he closed the book” (Luke 4:20). And before Jesus Christ died, he did the same thing that Moses did, when at the last supper he “took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to his disciples, saying, Drink ye all of it: for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:27, 28). But Brethren, Christ made His disciples drink that bloody cup, not the lost world. “The blood of the new testament, which was shed for many for the remission of sins”, was the very blood of God Almighty (see Acts 20:28), not the blood of sinners. And the cup of that New Testament blood was given to the disciples with this command,
“Drink ye all of it”.
The New Testament was not written when Christ ordered (ordinance) His disciples to drink of that cup. But neither did it have to be written, for He said, “this is my blood of the new testament” (vs. 27), of which Christ had told his disciples “ye shall in deed drink of the cup that I drink of” (Mark 10:39), and without which, “ye have no life in you” (John 6:53). And He defined the drinking of that “blood of the new testament” as “dwell[ing] in me, and I in him” (John 6:57), saying “it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words…the words…the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (vs. 63). That is what is missing in the fight against abortion. Those who wage that warfare, do so “after the law of a carnal commandment” and not “after the power of an endless life” (Hebrews 7:16). And following three decades of fighting a loosing battle, because their preaching is powerless to shut down the abortion clinics, they now must resort to the use of violence, and heretical corruption of the word of God to justify their murder. If those followers of Paul Hill were “able ministers of the new testament” (2 Corinthians 3:6), “the excellency of the power” of their preaching would “be of God, and not of themselves” (2 Corinthians 4:7), and they would never have need to resort to gunfire to stop the abortionists. The abortion doctor does not need to die to stop the sin of abortion. THE CHRISTIAN MINISTER NEEDS TO DIE!!!!
“Always bearing about in the body
THE DYING OF THE LORD JESUS,
that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our body.
For we which live are always delivered unto death
for Jesus’ sake, that the life also of Jesus might
be made manifest in our mortal flesh.
So then death worketh IN US…IN US…IN US, but life in you.”
- 2 Corinthians 4:10-12
The power of an “able minister of the new testament” (2 Corinthians 3:6) is in his manifesting the life of Jesus Christ in his mortal flesh (4:10, 11). That manifestation of God in the flesh is called “godliness” (2 Timothy 3:16), and that is what is missing in these wannabe killers of abortion doctors. Their daily lives do not manifest the life of Christ, because they are not “always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus” (2 Corinthians 4:10). Why is it that you want to work death in someone else, but do not want to work it in your own life? “So then death worketh IN US…IN US” (4:12) not the lost sinner! Time and time again, the New Testament admonishes the Christian, “reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin” (Romans 6:11), and “if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin” (7:10, 11), and “mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth” (Colossians 3:5), being “crucified with Christ” (Galatians 2:20) so they may “die daily” (1 Corinthians 15:31), because “they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts” (Galatians 5:24). But not these falsely so called army of god missionaries to the preborn. They live like the world, dress like the world, look like the world, act like the world, enjoy what the world enjoys, talk like the world, and wonder why they have to chain themselves to the abortion clinic door to stop the sin going on behind it. And the moment some Christian minister looks at their carnal, worldly lives and says, “Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Timothy 2:19), they start whining about ‘legalism’, ‘you’re being legalistic’, ‘you’re putting us under the law’, blah, blah nonsense.
YOU JUDGE FALSELY. TELL ME IN WHAT WAY THE MISSIONARIES TO THE PREBORN LIVE LIKE THE WORLD, DRESS LIKE THE WORLD, LOOK LIKE THE WORLD, ACT LIKE THE WORLD, ENJOY WHAT THE WORLD ENJOYS, TALK LIKE THE WORLD, ANY MORE THAN RUBEN ISRAEL OR JASON STORMS OR DAVID MILLER? BASELESS ACCUSATIONS THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT AND WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO FRIEND AS WELL AS YOUR FOE DO NOT HELP YOUR ARGUMENT NOR DO JUSTICE TO YOUR CHARACTER. A SWORD THAT DOESN’T CUT STRAIGHT ISN’T GOD’S SWORD.
Godliness has always been missing in the ranks of Catholic do-gooders, and proud, arrogant Calvinists reformers of everyone but themselves. Godliness is just godly living. And godly living is just a godly life, where “God is manifest in the flesh” (2 Timothy 3:16) of the child of God by his continual departure from iniquity, and his continual collision with the things listed in 2 Corinthians 4:8 through 12. But that sort of Christian life runs so far behind these days, that those who would think to serve God by stopping abortion, are so powerless, they have to bomb the clinics, blockade the doors or shoot the doctor to stop it!
“Whereof I Paul am made a minister;
who now rejoice in my sufferings for you,
and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ
in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church;
Whereof I am made a minister.”
- Colossians 1:23-25
Christian, “our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us able
ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for
the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” (2 Corinthians 3:6). And
that ministry is called the “ministration of the spirit”, and “the ministration
of righteousness” (vs. 8, 9), of which the Bible says “we have this ministry…in
earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not
of us” (4:1-7). And Brethren, that ministry does not work death to the
lost sinner, but death to the Christian.
“We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed;
we are perplexed, but not in despair;
persecuted, but not forsaken;
cast down, but not destroyed;
Always bearing about in the body
the dying of the Lord Jesus,
that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our body.
For we which live are always delivered
Brethren, we do not deliver the sinner to death…WE DIE!!
THOSE SAINTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE IN THIS DISAGREEMENT WOULD AGREE
TO THIS. NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT SAINTS SHOULDN’T DIE TO SIN, NO ONE
IS ARGUING THAT SAINTS SHOULDN’T PREACH THE GOSPEL, NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT
SAINTS SHOULD ONLY PROTEST ABORTION AND DO NOTHING ELSE FOR GOD’S KINGDOM.
IF BY THOSE ARGUMENTS YOU’RE TRYING TO REFUTE ANYTHING WE BELIEVE, THEN
THEY ARE STRAW MEN ARGUMENTS BECAUSE WE AGREE WITH THEM!
We which live are always delivered unto death
for Jesus’ sake, that the life also of Jesus
might be manifest in our mortal flesh.
so then death worketh in us, but life in you.”
-2 Corinthians 4:8-12
Paul Hill did God no service when he murdered Dr. Britton and his 74 year friend. The life of Christ is never manifest to the world by a Christian killing a lost sinner, regardless of how depraved.
YOU WOULD NEVER SAY THIS TO CONDEMN ONE WHO USED LETHAL DEFENSIVE FORCE TO STOP AN ASSAILLANT FROM KILLING ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE. WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
The single most definitive verse in the New Testament for manifesting
the life of Christ in the child of God dictates that the Christian must
“always bear about in his body the dying of the Lord Jesus”. That is what
godliness is all about. “Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest
in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16). Well ditto for the Christian. Godliness
is God being manifest in the flesh of the saint of God, so the world and
angels know God is inside the body of the child of God. And the only New
Testament verse on that ministration in the believer’s life is 2 Corinthians
4:8-12, and Jesus Christ is never manifested in the Christian’s life by
his murdering the lost and dying, regardless of how depraved, for “all
manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men” (Matthew 12:31).
The change in the ministry wrought that hope for all mankind in Jesus Christ
alone. Those same sinners in all manner of sin, just need a minister (1
Corinthians 3:5/ Romans 10:14) instead of an executioner (Hebrews 2:14).
When the child of God performs the former, he serveth God well. When Paul
Hill did the latter, he served Satan himself (2 Corinthians 11:13-15/ John
10:10) and died for his own sin.
Brethren, Jesus Christ is only the “mediator of the New Testament” (Hebrews 9:15). He is not the testator of the New Testament. He gave that position to the body of Christ, whose body we are (1 Corinthians 12:27/Ephesians 5:30/ Colossians 2:11-19), saying “this is my body, which is broken for you” (1 Corinthians 11:24). Howbeit, the body refuses to be broken that it might be a blessing (see Luke 9:16/ 24:30), and there are some who refuse to die to self, refuse to die to sin, and refuse to die to the world (see Galatians 6:14). And accordingly, they are powerless in preaching the gospel or the New Testament.
“For a testament is of force after men are dead:
otherwise it is of no strength at all
WHILE THE TESTATOR LIVETH”.
There is something tragically wrong with a Christianity that will not
die to sin or self, but wants to kill the sinner, because the child of
God’s Christianity is powerless to deliver that sinner from his life of
sin and misery.
The Christian’s Duty in
Since the tragic, but very righteous execution of the man Paul
Hill, his vain and often foul mouthed supporters have continually heralded
what they call in their philosophical arguments, “Defensive Action”. Naturally,
this term does not occur in the Bible, and is a vain attempt to coin a
military term, to lend weight to an empty supposition of error embraced
by the dreamers who make up what is called “The Army of God”. It is neither
an army, nor is it “of God”. In this vain argument, these oft foul mouthed
and swearing supporters of Paul Hill seek to justify killing abortion doctors
as an act of armed defense of the defenseless “unborn” babies that are
being aborted in the clinics. Their position, briefly stated is mere philosophy
(see Colossians 2:8/ Acts 17:18) with a Bible twist (see “wrest” in 2 Peter
3:16) that demands that Christians should use whatever physical force necessary
to defend their neighbor as themselves. They then make the philosophical
argument that the prostitutes “unborn” baby is your neighbor, and that
you are duty bound to risk your life, and all duty to support your own
family to rescue the “unborn” neighbor from being killed by the abortion
doctor, even to taking a shotgun and blowing the doctor’s head slap off,
for which you will die in the electric chair and never have to support
your family again, or preach the gospel! To this stupendous heresy, the
“Whose damnation is just.”
- Romans 3:8
THIS IS A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, BECAUSE NEITHER I NOR THOSE I CONSIDER REPUTABLE DEFENDERS OF DEFENSIVE FORCE FOR PREBORN CHILDREN ARGUE THAT ANYBODY IS DUTY BOUND TO USE SUCH FORCE. “PROVE ALL THINGS”, BROTHER RON MCRAE. WHO USES SUCH ARGUMENTS THAT SAINTS ARE DUTY BOUND TO USE FORCE TO STOP ABORTIONS? YOU DON’T EVEN HAVE TO GIVE THE QUOTE. I’LL MAKE IT EASY FOR YOU. JUST GIVE THE NAME, AND I’LL CONTACT THE PERSON AND GET THE QUOTE MYSELF. TELL ME WHO HAS ARGUED THAT WE ARE DUTY BOUND TO USE LETHAL FORCE TO STOP ABORTION? TELL ME, AND I AS WELL AS EVERY OTHER NOTABLE BROTHER WHO BELIEVES THAT DEFENSIVE FORCE IS JUSTIFIABLE WILL JOIN YOU IN REFUTING HIM. THAT BEING THE CASE, YOUR’S IS A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT
However, repeated requests for these “false teachers” (2 Peter 2:1) to produce one New Testament verse for doing so has been ignored for want of being able to find such a verse. In absence of a New Testament verse for killing abortion doctors, or any sinner that a Christian deems worthy of death, these religious killers, not far removed from Muslim ideologists, have instead of supporting their position with the New Testament, all chanted in unison for proof in the New Testament for not doing so, while professing to believe it is right to use force to protect your family.
SO I SUPPOSE YOU CAN GIVE A N.T. VERSE PROVING THAT USING LETHAL FORCE TO PROTECT ALREADY BORN PEOPLE FROM A MURDERER IS JUSTIFIABLE WHILE USING LETHAL FORCE TO PROTECT PREBORN PEOPLE FROM ASSAULT IS NOT? THAT’LL BE INTERESTING. PLEASE, GIVE YOUR REFERENCE TO JUSTIFY YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IS CLEAR THAT FETUSES ARE PEOPLE TOO. I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO GIVE A STUDENT OF SCRIPTURE REFERENCES FOR THAT, BUT WILL IF YOU INSIST. I DON’T THINK THAT YOU WOULD DEBATE THIS POINT. THAT BEING THE CASE, THE SAME SCRIPTURE PASSAGES YOU MIGHT EMPLOY TO PROVE THAT DEFENSIVE FORCE OF BORN-PEOPLE IS JUSTIFIABLE ALSO APPLY TO PREBORN PEOPLE.
Hence, we offer the following in final admonition.
The New Testament clearly demands of Christian men that “if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Timothy 5:8). From the gospel example, part of what the head of household is to “provide…for his own, and especially for those of his own house” is protection, safety and security.
“When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.”
- Luke 11:21
When Jesus Christ admonished his disciples just prior to his crucifixion, that “he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one” (Luke 22:36) because “the things concerning me have an end” (vs. 37), it is clearly understood that the things concerning him that came to an end included turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:39), as well as letting the thief take more than he was after (vs. 40, 41). Nevertheless, the New Testament did not remove all restraints or limits to the use of that sword. The New Testament sets down requirements for the use of such force. We say force, in that Jesus Christ did not admonish the disciples to buy a rod, or bow and arrows. He specifically named a “sword”, which is not utilized for hunting, trapping, or plowing the garden. Howbeit, the sword places Biblical stipulations that also should be noted. Christ did not say a “spear”, or “bow”. Therefore, distance between the bearer of the sword and the assailant come automatically into the play. Additionally, the Lord acknowledged that two swords were enough among 12 men for that present distress (Luke 22:38), and Jesus Christ for all eternity certified that it was wrong to use it to defend another, against a person that was not attacking violently, because the disciples “saw what would follow” (Luke 22:49) if “defensive action” was not taken (see Luke 22:47-51/ Mark 14:46, 47/ John 18:10-11).
“Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place:
for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.”
- Matthew 26:52
The men that took Jesus Christ and bound Him were themselves armed with “swords and with staves” (Mark 14:48), but it did not justify Peter attacking the servant of the high priest. You see, anyone who is trained in the use of weapons (soldiers/law enforcement) are not at all like these wannabe religious killers. Professional men, trained in the use of force, and well armed in real life know the timing, and distance, and threatening force regulations that define the line between “Offensive Force” and “Defensive Force”. They are both force, but are justified by different required actions on the part of the assailant, and the person using the force against the assailant. The high priests servants were sinning against God Almighty, and were armed while doing so. But they were not attacking the disciples with those “swords and staves”. United States Green Beret Sgt. Bob Walker is the most decorated soldier in U.S. history, the winner of numerous purple hearts, and Medal of Honors which he earned for heroism under fire. Walker was a soldier in the S.O.G. during the Viet Nam war. Once in his many feats of valor, he was seriously wounded and lay unconscious on a hill side, over run with Viet Cong. When he awoke, standing within 15 feet of him was a Viet Cong soldier with a flame thrower, which the VC was using to burn the dead bodies of allied soldiers. Walker rose to his knees, and pulled the pin on his last grenade just as the VC saw him rise into a defensive position. Walker shook the grenade at the VC and verbally threatened him to “go ahead you ________, because we’re both gonna die right here!” However, the VC just turned and walked away, and Bob Walker decided not to kill him, because the enemy had yielded, and tossed the grenade away to explode so as not to harm the enemy.
THIS PROVES NOTHING. WOULD YOU HAVE CONDEMNED A SOLDIER WHO SHOT
THE ARMED VC ENEMY WHO WAS 15 FEET AWAY FROM HIM? IN WAR, IT IS JUSTIFIABLE
TO KILL THE ENEMY WHO IS ENGAGED IN BATTLE AGAINST YOU, EVEN IF HE IS FLEEING.
EVEN COLLATERAL DAMAGE (THE DEATH OF INNOCENTS) IS JUSTIFIABLE IN A JUST
WAR THEORY AND IN SCRIPTURE.
“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather
give place unto wrath: for it is written,
Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
- Romans 12:19
On the morning that Paul Hill murdered Dr. Britton and his 74
year old volunteer “escort”, and wounded the 68 year old wife of the escort
and vain boast of a body guard, neither were armed, or attacking anyone,
including babies. According to witnesses, Paul Hill arrived at the Pensacola
Ladies Center at 7 a.m. on July 29, 1994. At that same time, volunteer
“escorts” Jim Barrett, 74 and his 68 year old wife June Barrett were picking
up Dr. Britton from the Pensacola International Airport. Traveling in Jim
Barrett’s pickup truck, Barrett drove, and Dr. Britton road in the front
passenger side; while Barrett’s wife sat in the back seat of the extended
cab truck. Arriving at the Ladies Center parking lot, Barrett had to maneuver
his pickup truck around Paul Hill, standing in the driveway to the parking
lot. Driving to the rear area of the parking lot, Barrett parked his truck
and started to get out. The 68 year old June Barrett watched out the rear
window of the truck, as Paul Hill followed on foot into the parking lot,
and then crouched down behind another vehicle, and began aiming “an object”
toward their truck. Mrs. Barrett testified that she remembered thinking,
“Oh look, Paul Hill is pretending that he’s going to shoot us!”
Suddenly, shots rang out, and she was thrown forward into the floor of the back seat as double 00 buckshot shattered the morning air. Jim Barrett was just stepping out of the driver’s side door, when he was shot in the back and in the back of the head by Paul Hill’s first shots, killing him instantly, with blood, bones and brains blown all over the truck door and parking lot. The Calvinistic Presbyterian Paul Hill fired three times, and then reloaded as he walked toward the truck. With Jim Barrett dead on the parking lot, and blood splattered all over the truck, Paul Hill stepped around the truck to the front passenger’s side and aimed his shotgun at the front windshield where Dr. Britton sat terrified, screaming to Mrs. Barrett if she had her husband’s gun. Neither had bothered to bring any weapon, and now all three were helpless to do anything to stop the carnage exploding all around them. Paul Hill fired four more times into the pickup, killing Dr. Britton instantly, blowing apart his face and head. Hill’s gun fire also struck the 68 year old grandmother in the chest, back and arm seriously wounding her as she sat trapped in the back seat of the cab.
With blood, brains and bones blasted all over the parking lot, and shattered glass glimmering in the morning sun, both Jim Barrett and Dr. Britton’s bodies jerked and kicked in the their last spastic death throbs, their throats filling with blood, gurgling their last death rattle’s breath. With the whimpering cries of the 68 year widow, bleeding profusely in the back seat floor board, the murderer Paul Hill threw down his shotgun and walked out of the parking lot, and started down the sidewalk, with his arms raised away from his side, with his palms turned upward, so the first policeman to arrive would see that he was unarmed now, and not shoot him like he had just done to three lost sinners, sending two of them ahead of him to damnation in hell. Being followed by witnesses, Paul Hill was arrested a short distance away, giving no resistance, and no testimony nor evidence that Jesus Christ was anything to Paul Hill. Paul Hill’s entire motive for shooting the three pro-abortion citizens was because he knew “what would follow” (Luke 22:49), yet neither victim was attacking either Paul Hill, or anyone else at the moment.
I CANNOT DEFEND PAUL HILL’S KILLING OF THE SECURITY GUARD, AND ON THIS I DEPART FROM SOME OF MY PEERS. I CANNOT SEE THAT KILLING THE SECURITY GUARD CONTRIBUTED TO THE PROTECTION OF THE INNOCENTS PAUL HILL SAVED THAT DAY. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE THE JURY HEAR PAUL HILL’S DEFENSE OF THAT ACT. PERHAPS PAUL HILL KILLED THE SECURITY GUARD IN SELF-DEFENSE – THAT MAY HAVE BEEN JUSTIFIABLE. KNOWING THAT IF HIS JURY COULD HEAR HIS DEFENSE, WHICH WOULD HAVE RESTED ON THE HUMANITY OF THE PREBORN CHILDREN THAT DR. BRITTON WAS PREPARING TO MURDER, THEN ROE V. WADE COULD HAVE BEEN OVERTURNED VIA JURY NULLIFICATION AND THOUSANDS OF LIVES COULD HAVE BEEN SAVED, PERHAPS PAUL HILL SAW THE NECESSITY OF PROTECTING HIMSELF FROM A GUARD WHO HAD AFORE STATED THAT HE WOULD “SHOOT FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER” IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES. THE JURY NULLIFICATION OF ROE VERSUS WADE MIGHT HAVE RESTED ON WHETHER PAUL HILL SURVIVED TO TRIAL.
KEEP IN MIND, THAT EVEN YOU WOULDN’T CONDEMN SOMEONE WHO USED A SWORD TO STOP AN ABORTIONIST FROM KILLING AN ALREADY-BORN PERSON. THE ONUS IS ON YOU TO JUSTIFY YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST GOD’S CHILDREN IN THE WOMB, IN DENYING THEM THE SAME RIGHT TO LIFE AND DEFENSE THAT YOU GRANT TO BORN PEOPLE.
“Put up again thy sword into his place:
for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.”
Brethren, no Christian or lost man is justified killing someone who is not at that very moment using violence against them, their family, or nearby associates.
WHAT MAKES THE LETHAL DEFENSIVE ACTION DEFENSIBLE IS NOT THE PROXIMITY TO THE CRIME, BUT THE CERTAINTY OF IT. IF PAUL HILL KNEW THAT HIS CHANCES OF STOPPING DR. BRITTON FROM KILLING THOSE INNOCENTS WERE UNLIKELY IF THE BABY-BUTCHER GOT INTO THE CLINIC, WISDOM WOULD HAVE LED PAUL HILL TO ACTION SOONER THAN THE VERY MOMENT BRITTON STARTED CUTTING UP BABIES. COLLATERAL DAMAGE MIGHT HAVE BEEN MUCH GREATER IF PAUL HILL ACTED TO DEFEND THOSE LITTLE ONES AT THE MOMENT OF THEIR DEATH. PAUL HILL’S CHANCES OF SUCCESS WOULD BE SIGNIFICICANTLY LESSENED IF PAUL HILL RESERVED HIS FORCE FOR THE MOMENT OF THOSE BABIES’ DEATHS. THERE ARE MANY HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS I COULD GIVE YOU TO PROVE THIS. SUFFICE IT TO SAY, IF PAUL HILL STOPPED A DOC WHO WAS KILLING ALREADY BORN-PEOPLE INSIDE THAT CLINIC, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE CONDEMNED HIM. ERGO, YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN SURFACES AS A TRAGIC ERROR IN YOUR REASONING.
I HAVE AN IMPORTANT QUESTION FOR YOU: WOULD YOU HAVE JUSTIFIED PAUL HILL IF HE HAD RESERVED THAT LETHAL FORCE FOR THE VERY MOMENT DR. BRITTON WAS TO START VIOLATING THOSE LITTLE BABIES’ BODIES? IF SO, I FIND YOUR POSITION MUCH MORE REASONABLE THAN THAT WHICH YOU APPEAR TO ESPOUSE THROUGHOUT THIS ARTICLE. IF NOT, THEN YOU DISAGREE WITH YOUR OWN POINT ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF THE DEFENSE AND YOU REFUTE YOURSELF. IF YOU DISAGREE, SHOW ME HOW.
These vain boasts from the supporters of Paul Hill, are the cacophony bellows of men who know nothing from either experience or wisdom. In 1977, as a young zealous police officer for the City of Ft. Worth, the author chased an armed robber in a stolen car into a residential development on the East side of the city. The suspect bailed out of the car, and ran toward the open car port garage of a darkened house. When the robber bailed out of his car, the author could see a blue steel revolver sticking out of his left rear pant pocket as he ran from the two officers. The author cut around the front of the garage, yelling to his partner “J.D. he’s got gun!” The author then entered from the front just as the suspect entered from the side between two parked cars. At that moment the author drew his service weapon and ordered the robbery suspect to halt and raise his hands. For a split second the young teenage black youth hesitated, and the author placed his gun sights on the young man’s chest about 5 inches down from his neck and began to squeeze the trigger, while ordering him to again give it up and raise his hands. When the suspect’s hands went up, the pressure on the trigger eased, and allowed the hammer to slowly fall back into safe position. Yet before anything else could be said, the young armed robber began to lower his left hand down, and back towards his gun, and immediately, without thinking the author’s right thumb cocked the hammer back with a final warning, and his finger firmed against the trigger in what seemed an eternity. Every emotion in the author’s heart was screaming, “Shoot! Shoot!”, and the training manual authorized deadly force without another warning; and even the author’s partner was yelling, “He’s going for it! Shoot!” Yet the author yelled one more time, “Don’t do it, Man! Give it up!”
WOULD YOU GRANT THE SAME RESPECT FOR THE PRO-LIFER WHO RESERVED THE PULLING OF THE TRIGGER FOR THE BABY-BUTCHER AT THE MOMENT THE BABY-BUTCHER STARTED UTILIZING HIS INSTRUMENTS OF DEATH AGAINST GOD’S LITTLE CHILDREN? OR DO YOU ONLY RESPECT THOSE WHO KILL ASSAILLANTS IN DEFENSE OF ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE?
“I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also
bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost…
that I am pure from the blood of all men.”
- Romans 9:1/ Acts 20:26
Christian, the New Testament sets clear standards for the use of physical
force in defensive action for anyone honest enough to abide thereby.
1. The New Testament gives us no more room or distance for defense than a sword would offer (Luke 22:36, 37/ c.f. 1 Samuel 18:10, 11). In modern criminal statutes, this is referred to as “space to retreat”. That is why police officers are charged with a more stringent level of duty than the normal citizen. The policeman is bound by law not to retreat.
THIS APPLIES TO SELF-DEFENSE ONLY, NOT DEFENSE OF OTHERS. IF A GUNMAN FLED YOUR FLOOR AT WORK WITH THE STATED INTENT TO KILL YOUR COLLEAGUES ONE FLOOR UP, YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO RETREAT FROM HIM NOR TO STAY WHERE YOU ARE. FOLLOWING THE ASSAILLANT AND KILLING HIM BEFORE HE COMPLETES HIS MISSION – ESPECIALLY IF HE RESISTS NON-VIOLENT PERSUASION - IS CONSISTENT WITH A COMPASSIONATE, DEFENSIVE MOTIVE AND CHRISTIAN CHARITY.
2. It does not allow defensive action of the brethren even at close quarters, where no violence is being used against you or them (Matthew 26:51-53). In modern legal terminology this is called the “equal force doctrine”. You are only allowed to use that amount of force required to stop the force being used against you. If your assailant is not using deadly force against you, you are not allowed to use deadly force against him…that simple! Only a law enforcement officer is allowed to use more force than is being used against him. As policeman are taught, “If he uses his mouth, you use your radio. If he uses his fist, you use your club. If he uses a club, you use your gun!” In Matthew 26, the servants of the high priests were displaying weapons, but were not using them. Peter was granted no right from Jesus Christ to use his sword against only the display of theirs! Even police officers order suspects to drop their weapons, and do not fire until the weapon is aimed at them, or another. Only these vain, dreamland toy soldiers of “christianity” that have never been in life and death situations talk arrogantly foolish, where other people’s lives are defined so cheap, that unjustifiable force is boasted of as an easy tool in the “Christian arsenal”.
I AGREE THAT NO MORE FORCE THAN IS NECESSARY TO STOP THE CRIME IS JUSTIFIED. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CONSCIENCES SO RESTRAINED THAT THEY ATTEMPTED TO INJURE THE BABY-BUTCHER (SHELLY SHANNON, FOR INSTANCE). TILLER THE KILLER WENT BACK THE WORK THE NEXT DAY AT HIS WITCHITA KILLING CENTER WITH A BANDAGE ON HIS BICEP BULLET WOUND AND SHELLY GOT A COUPLE DECADES BEHIND BARS. JAMES KOPP CLAIMS THAT HE ATTEMPTED TO INJURE BERNARD SLEPIAN, IN AN ATTEMPT TO USE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF FORCE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO STOP THE BABY-BUTCHER’S KILLING AND PROTECT THE INNOCENT ONES SLATED FOR SLAUGHTER. AS YOU KNOW AS A FORMER POLICE OFFICER, ATTEMPTS TO INJURE A MURDERER TO PROTECT HIS VICTIM MIGHT FAIL AND YOU AND THE VICTIM’S LIFE MIGHT BE UNDER GREATER DANGER. USING THE SAME REASONING, SOME CONSCIENCES MIGHT BE CONVINCED THAT THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE CRIMES FROM TAKING PLACE WITH CERTAINTY IS TO APPLY LETHAL FORCE.
3. The New Testament does not grant you any right to use violence against lost people based solely upon the fact that you can see “what would follow” if you do not use the violence to stop their sin (see Luke 22:49-51).
NOT TRUE, IF THE “SIN” OF WHICH YOU SPEAK IS AN ACT OF VIOLENCE AGAINST AN INNOCENT PERSON. EVEN YOU WOULDN’T CONDEMN A MAN WHO USED LETHAL FORCE TO PROTECT ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE FROM SLAUGHTER.
4. Violent defensive force to protect yourself or others within your care, is not scriptural when used against assaults made upon you for the sole cause of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, or for “righteousness sake”, or for being a Christian (1 Peter 3:14-18/4:16/ Romans 12:19, 20).
A POINT WITH WHICH I WILL NOT PRESENTLY DISAGREE.
5. A Christian disobeys the clear New Testament command when he uses deadly force against anyone in such a manner as would result in him “suffering as a murderer” (1 Peter 4:15).
THIS WOULD NOT APPLY TO THOSE WHO SUFFER FALSELY AS A MURDERER. TO ASSUME THAT IT APPLIES TO THOSE WHO USE LETHAL FORCE TO DEFEND INNOCENT PREBORN LIVES FROM CERTAIN DEATH IS TO BEG THE QUESTION.
6. Murder in the Bible requires one or more of the following elements
a. Intent to kill (Numbers 35:11, 15), marked by his being “aware” that his actions will likely cause death prior to acting.
b. The assailant intentionally assaults another person by either smiting him with his hand, throwing something at him, or thrusting him with an instrument, stone or weapon capable of killing him (vs. 16-18, 20, 21), in which the assailant did either of the following.
c. He plots, premeditates, or lies in wait to harm the individual in a manner capable of inflicting death (Exodus 21:12-14).
d. His motivation for the assault was prior enmity or hatred (Numbers 35:20, 21) towards the individual.
e. His motivation is to remove the individual as an obstacle to the murderer’s own sinful life (2 Samuel 11:14-17).
f. His intention is to kill the person out of the murderer’s personal belief that the victim was himself guilty of murder in a killing that the law in force at the time deemed justifiable (see 2 Samuel 3:23-27, 28 and 29/2 Samuel 2:12-23/ c.f. 1 Kings 2:31-34).
YOUR POINT “F” CONFUSES ONCE AGAIN RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE, WHICH PUNISHES MURDERERS, WITH DEFENSIVE FORCE THAT IS CALCULATED TO PROTECT AN INNOCENT PERSON FROM CERTAIN ASSAULT AND DEATH.
When the lost Presbyterian Paul Hill fired his shotgun into the back of Jim Barrett’s head, he saw all the blood and gore being sprayed into the air, in an explosion of bone, blood and brains that literally make strong men sick. Then after witnessing this mayhem of his own making, this falsely so-called saint, reloaded and fired again into the face of Dr. John Britton, blasting his brains all over the now 68 year old widow in the back seat. This murderous religious nut literally blew away the face and head of Dr. Britton, and then pumped three more rounds into a 68 year old woman trapped in the back seat. Paul Hill had planned the attack, went out and bought the new 12 gauge shotgun, and actually went to the rifle range to practice, so that he could aim and hit the target he intended to kill that morning. Christian, do you have any love of God inside of you to be able to understand how horrible a thing this sorry excuse for a Christian minister perpetrated that morning?
APPEAL TO HUMAN SENSIBILITIES AND SENTIMENT IS NO REFUTATION OF HIS
DEFENSIVE MOTIVE. IF YOU WOULD HAVE KILLED THE BLACK YOUTH IF HE
DID PULL HIS GUN AND FIRE AT YOUR PARTNER IN THE POLICE FORCE, WOULD MY
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE KID’S BRAINS ALL OVER THE SIDEWALK BE A JUST
REBUTTAL OF YOUR DEFENSE?
“The thief cometh not, but for to steal,
and to kill, and to destroy.”
O how deceitful is the heart of man! In supporting this horrendous
act of carnage in the name of Christ, these self deceived religious killers
trumpet over and over the only New Testament verse they can present for
justifying their murderous dogma. “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”
(Matthew 5:43/ Luke 10:27). Only the devil himself misapplies scripture
so blatantly off base (see Matthew 4:6), and only naïve religious
sloths refuse to even check “whether these things be so” (Acts 17:11).
Brethren, that Bible premise is written nine times in the New Testament,
and only a liar, or a religious fool would think of quoting it in support
of killing abortion doctors, without ever reading the nine times it is
written, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”. The very first time
that saying is quoted in the New Testament is in Matthew 5:44, and it is
the last part of Christ’s correction of the Pharisees teaching in verse
43, which says, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love
thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies…”
Ditto for the murderer Paul Hill, for that is exactly what motivated him to kill Dr. Britton. He professed to be loving his neighbor (the “unborn” child), while killing the enemy!
IF BY “ENEMY” YOU MEAN THE TORMENTER AND SLAYER OF THE INNOCENT NEIGHBOR, KEEP IN MIND THAT EVEN YOU WOULDN’T CONDEMN DEFENSIVE FORCE TO PROTECT ALREADY BORN PEOPLE FROM SLAUGHTER. YOU WOULD NOT FIND SUCH AN ACT INCONSISTENT WITH CHRISTIAN CHARITY.
If the protection of the “unborn” was love, what was the shotgun blast that blew apart Dr. Britton’s head? Brethren, true Bible based love is always “without dissimulation” (see Romans 12:9). It “abhors that which is evil” and “cleaves to that which is good”. And true Bible love is more than a claim, having this test of common sense reasoning;
“For he that loveth not…….whom he hath seen,
how can he love…whom he hath not seen?”
- 1 John 4:20
The Street Preachers’ Fellowship, or any God fearing Christian will never be convinced that any professing Christian can truly love a neighbor “whom he hath not seen”, and kill another neighbor in cold blood “whom he hath seen”.
DO YOU SPEAK FOR ALL OF SPF? HAVE YOU EXCOMMUNICATED JASON STORMS YET?
And the reason is clearly seen in this one saying, “Love worketh no ill to his neighbor” (Romans 13:10). Brethren, that verse follows Romans 13:9, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Every quotation of that Biblical principle on neighborly conduct is doctrinally placed in the New Testament as the Tenth Commandment of the Old Testament. Every occurrence of “love thy neighbor as thyself”, is the New Testament explanation of the Tenth Commandment of the Law of Moses (see Matthew 19:19/ 22:39/ Mark 12:31/ Luke 10:27/ Romans 13:9/ Galatians 5:14/ James 2:8). And the Tenth Commandment of the Law says, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife…nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s” (Exodus 20:17). Scripture with scripture, “loving your neighbor” means not “coveting” anything that is his. It has nothing to do with a killer’s self justifying claim of “Defensive Action”. You cannot love your unseen neighbor (the child in the womb), and kill the neighbor whom you do see.
“And who is my neighbour?”
- Luke 10:29
EVEN YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN LOVE YOUR UNSEEN NEIGHBOR (GOD AND TEENS HIDING BEHIND BENCHES IN THE MALL) AND KILL THE NEIGHBOR WHOM YOU DO SEE (THE MAN BUTCHERING TEENS IN THE MALL WITH A MACHINE GUN, FOR INSTANCE.) TOO FREQUENTLY YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE SELF-REFUTING, AND TOO FREQUENTLY THEY’RE BASED UPON AN UNJUSTIFIED DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN.
Well the good Samaritan found his neighbor lying in his own blood, on the road to Jericho one day. The man did not live anywhere near the Samaritan. Thieves had stripped the man of his raiment, and wounded him, and left him “half dead” (Luke 10:30). The Samaritan’s neighbor had “fell among thieves”. The man wasn’t drug there, he just “went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves”. His fault alone! He wound up there on his own, just like any woman headed into an abortion clinic. She just fell one day, like any sinner falls. The priest passed on by the wounded sinner, as did the Levite. Both went by “on the other side” (vs.31, 32). But thank God, “a certain Samaritan…came where he was: and…had compassion on him” (vs.33). And though he proved his neighborly love for the fallen sinner, HE DID NOT KILL THE THIEVES that left his neighbor half dead. And he did not kill the religious crowd that refused to help his neighbor who was attacked by the thieves!
IF HE HAD USED FORCE TO DEFEND THE BATTERED NEIGHBOR FROM THREATENING THIEVES WHO HOUNDED AND ABUSED HIM, WOULD YOU HAVE CONDEMNED HIM? NO, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE. HENCE, YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN.
QUESTION: Ever seen a fallen woman, after she has had an abortion? They
all look “half dead” (vs.30)!
QUESTION: Ever seen an aborted baby? They all ARE DEAD!
QUESTION: Ever seen an abortion doctor after performing an abortion? They are all “dead while they live” (1 Timothy 5:6).
BUT THERE IS NO RIGHTEOUS CAUSE TO KILL EITHER OF THEM!
“For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save
The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master,
and the servant as his Lord.”
- Luke 9:56/Matthew 10:24, 25
And the God Authored irony of it, was that to prove such, Jesus Christ allowed the men he came to save, to torture and kill Him. And strange as it may seem, though He was a man (see John 19:5/ Mark 15:39), the Holy Scriptures for all eternity record God Almighty’s view of the killing, that it was against His “holy child Jesus” (Acts 4:27). When Jesus Christ died on Calvary’s Tree, the Ancient of Days (Daniel 7:9-22) was but a “holy child” in His Father’s eyes, and Heaven heard that child cry,
“Father, forgive them;
for they know not what they do.”
- Luke 23:44
I REFUTED THIS NONSENSE EARLIER. EVEN YOU WOULDN’T ARGUE THAT MURDERERS SHOULD ALL BE FORGIVEN. YOU’RE MORE MERCIFUL THAN GOD, IF SO.
The religious crowd, the self-righteous herald’s of God’s Law
had killed God Almighty’s “holy child” (Acts 4:27), His “only begotten
Son” (John 3:16). Why you think they would do such a thing is immaterial
to the fact of scriptures. Their motives were easily seen by intelligent
men, for even Pilate “knew that for envy they had delivered him” (Matthew
27:18). But Jesus Christ “knew all men, and needed not that any should
testify of man: for he knew what was in man” (John 2:24, 25), and while
hanging on the cross of Calvary, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin
of the world declared about His murderers, “They know not what they do.”
They were killing a “holy child” (Acts 4:27), “the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:16), an innocent Lamb. Not a Ram, not a sheep, but an innocent Lamb. And Brethren, all the innocent blood shed in every abortion ever committed in this country, does not equal one tiny drop of blood shed by Jesus Christ for the sins of all mankind. And the blessed Lamb of God called Jesus, could hang in the balances of death and hell, with nails tearing his hands and feet as He hung dying for the likes of Paul Hill, and Dr. John Britton, and Jim Barrett, and each of us, and still cry to God for His murderers,
“Father, forgive them;
for they know not what they do.”
Ever met any of God’s murderers? They are just like His drunkards, liars, fornicators, adulterers and religious bigots! “They know not what they do.”
THEY KNOW WHAT THEY DO. UNLIKE THE KILLERS OF CHRIST WHO DIDN’T KNOW THAT THEY WERE SLAYING THE MESSIAH FOR THE SALVATION OF THE WORLD, BABY-BUTCHERS LIKE DR. BRITTON KNOW THAT THEY ARE KILLING INNOCENT HUMAN BEINGS. IT’S IRRELEVANT, REALLY, FOR EVEN IF DR. BRITTON WAS CONVINCED THAT HE WAS NOT KILLING INNOCENT HUMAN BEINGS, DEFENSIVE LETHAL FORCE WAS STILL JUSTIFIABLE IF INDEED IT WAS INNOCENT HUMAN BEINGS BEING DEFENDED.
The Pitfalls of Biblical Ignorance
“Good were it for that man
if he had never been born.”
-Jesus Christ (Mark 14:21)
HERE YOU BEGIN TO JUSTIFY YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE UNBORN. FINALLY, WE GET TO THE ROOT OF YOUR MISJUDGMENT.
Jesus Christ made clear that the way some people will be raised, and what they will wind up living like and doing, it is as Judas Iscariot, “good…for that man if he had never been born.” Comfortable, Laodecian Christianity, with its shallow understanding of the word of God or the realities of life, can never comprehend that statement. Neither can they grasp how miserable some folks can be, or how wicked, that the truth of God’s word would ever class them in a category as Job would learn to say, “Let the day perish wherein I was born” (Job 3:3). Job would wisely observe what many rabid anti-abortionists refuse to understand, that had he “died…from the womb”, or had “given up the ghost when he came out of the belly” (Job 3:12), then “I should have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest” (vs. 13). The reason these covert, and rabidly unscriptural supporters of Paul Hill take the overtly murderous stance in support of stopping abortion at all costs, is simply their humanistic ideology that human life amounts to more than God’s word says.
PATENTLY FALSE. CAN YOU “PROVE” THIS? THE BASIS OF THE DEFENSIBILITY OF HUMAN LIFE AND THE BLAMEWORTHINESS OF YOUR DISCRIMINATION OF THE PREBORN IS SCRIPTURE.
Job was “a perfect and an upright man, one that fear[ed] God, and eschew[ed] evil”, and there was “none like him in the earth” (Job 1:8), yet he said “my life is wind” (7:7). Isaiah the prophet said of mankind, “Behold, ye are of nothing” (Isaiah 41:24). The Bible leaves the unborn child not a little better, when it says of the wisdom of age that, “mine age is as nothing before thee: verily every man at his best state is altogether vanity” (Psalm 39:5). Man in his best state is “vanity” (nothing), and in his worse state, man is “wicked…and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually” (Genesis 6:5). Outside of the new birth in Jesus Christ, “good were it were it for that man if he had never been born” (Mark 14:21).
“For what is your life?
It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time,
and then vanisheth away.”
WOULD YOU HAVE USED THESE ARGUMENTS TO CONDEMN ONE WHO USED LETHAL FORCE
TO STOP THE KILLING OF ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE? WOULD YOU HAVE SAID THAT
“THE VICTIMS WERE ALTOGETHER VANITY” ANYWAY AND SO THAT LETHAL FORCE TO
PROTECT THEM WASN’T JUSTIFIED? NO? DIDN’T THINK SO. WHY
THEN THIS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN?
The wisest man to ever live, was born after his brother died shortly after child birth (2 Samuel 12:15-24). His brother died as a result of God striking the baby in judgment on its father’s adultery (vs.15).
“And the LORD struck the child
that Uriah’s wife bare unto David,
and it was very sick.”
Brethren, it was GOD that “struck the child” because of the adultery of its mother and father. Did you see that? Did you read that verse? God Almighty struck an innocent child, and killed him because his father and mother conceived him in adultery! Now place all your religious emphasis on the child, and concentrate solely on the worth of the child and see where it gets you with God! Brethren, have you so forgotten God (Psalm 9:17) that you think you know more about the unborn child than God knows?
GOD CAN KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE AND IT’S NOT MURDER, BECAUSE GOD GAVE LIFE AND HE CAN TAKE IT AWAY WITHOUT REVEALING HIS REASONS AND WITHOUT ANY BLAME. BUT IF MAN SHEDS INNOCENT BLOOD, APART FROM A JUST WAR OR A DEFENSIVE MOTIVE OR A MANDATE FROM GOD, THEN MAN HAS BECOME A TRANSGRESSOR OF GOD’S LAW AND AN OBJECT OF GOD’S WRATH. HE HATES THE HANDS THAT SHED INNOCENT BLOOD, AND PREBORN BABIES HAVE INNOCENT BLOOD JUST AS MUCH AS ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE. GOD ALSO KILLED INNOCENT ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE IN SCRIPTURE. SO THAT GOD KILLS BABIES DOES NOT PROVE THAT THEY ARE NOT WORTHY OF DEFENSE AS YOU ALREADY BELIEVE ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE TO BE.
“For the children being not yet born,
neither having done any good or evil…
It was said unto her…
Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”
God knows more about “children…not yet born” than these rabidly murderous supporters of the dead man Paul Hill. A good portion of these wannabe killers for God are Calvinistic anarchists,
“PROVE ALL THINGS”, BROTHER RON. NAME ONE WHO’S A CALVINIST ANARCHIST. IS “ANARCHIST” A DESCRIPTIVE TERM OR A DEROGATORY TERM. DO YOU THINK ALL CALVINISTS ARE ANARCHISTS, OR JUST THE ONES WHO THINK THAT FETUSES ARE PEOPLE TOO?
and you would think their heretical theology would have found that New Testament verse! In their numerous postings to the Fellowship, they refer to “babies…the babies…the babies”, and repeatedly call them “the children of God…the children of God”. Romans 9:8 says, “They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God”.
THIS IS CLASSIC “WRESTING” FRIEND. “THE CHILDREN OF THE FLESH” ARE JEWS IN THIS PASSAGE, NOT GENTILES AND CERTAINLY HE’S NOT REFERRING TO ALL PREBORN JEWS AND GENTILES. YOU MAKE THE PASSAGE REFER TO SOMETHING THAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT INTEND. THE CONTEXT MAKES THIS SO CLEAR AS TO NOT REQUIRE ANY FURTHER ELUCIDATION.
And the verse’s context is counted from the moment Rebecca “conceived”
(vs. 10). And from the moment of conception, God could look at those “children…not
yet born, neither having done any good or evil” (vs. 11) and say, “Esau
have I hated” [past tense].
In 2 Samuel 12:15, God struck an innocent baby and it died for the sin of its mother and father. But following the death of Solomon’s baby brother (vs. 19-24), Solomon grows up to sit on the throne of his father David, and becomes the wisest man to ever live. But no one remembers the little baby that God killed because of his father and mother’s adultery! The baby boy was never named (2 Samuel 11:27), was never known beyond his adulterating father’s week-long prayer meeting in hopes of saving his life (12:16-18), and most Christians do not know he ever lived. But his brother grew up to be one of the most well known writers in the history of mankind. His brother wrote this admonition, “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life” (Proverbs 4:23).
And the issue of abortion is one that has proven absolutely to be the most error filled pitfall in the history of this nation. The entire issue is one error in judgment after another. The woman errs in her fornication and finds herself pregnant. The father of the child errs in fooling with a woman that cares no more about her child, than he cares about her. This country’s wisest judges erred in allowing two fornicators to get around the recompense of their error by killing their baby without being labeled murderers. The medical profession erred in ever allowing their profession to be made the weapon of choice among legalized murderers. And worse, now the Christians are erring exceedingly in giving into their frustration at not being able to stop the nonsense, and so fall victim to their own ignorance of the Bible to err so seriously as to kill the middle man in this tragic human waste of judgment.
“Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures,
nor the power of God.”
Never before in the history of this nation, or in Christianity, have so many people drawn strong opinions about something so serious as the life of a baby, when none of those opinions are supported by facts of scripture, or medical science. On either side of the abortion issue, those who would pass as experts, and to whom so many on either side listen, support their position in this vital life and death issue, not by facts of science on the medical side of allowing the butchery, nor by facts of Holy Scripture on the religious side that would prevent it. Both sides have forsaken the search for the truth, and given into the science falsely so-called of Philosophy.
“Avoiding profane and vain babblings,
and oppositions of science falsely so called:
which some professing have erred.”
-1 Timothy 6:20
”Beware lest any man spoil you
through philosophy and vain deceit.”
And so the death knoll continues, and the blood flows, and babies die, while doctors pretend to heal and help at great costs, and Christians pretend to pray and preach with a hopeless energy of another lost cause, then fire their guns into the heads of the “physicians of no value” (Job 13:4) “thinking that they do God service” (John 16:2). Those who promote abortion do so with the sick logic of “science falsely so called”, and professing Christians argue against it with the spoiled and weakened ideology of “philosophy and vain deceit”. Medical science cannot factually prove when life begins and morally and legally ends,
YES, MEDICAL SCIENCE CAN. A DISTINCT HUMAN LIFE COMES INTO EXISTENCE WHEN THE SPERM AND OOCYTE UNITE. AFTER THIS POINT, THERE’S GROWTH, METABOLISM, EXCRETION OF WASTES, MATURATION OF ORGANS – DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS. AFTER FERTILIZATION, ALL THAT IS NECESSARY FOR THIS GENETICALLY UNIQUE HUMAN BEING TO CONTINUE TO ADULTHOOD IS TIME AND NUTRITION. I CAN QUOTE FROM BIOLOGY TEXTBOOKS, EXPERTS, AND SCIENTISTS IF YOU LIKE. IT IS NOT CONTRAVERSIAL AT ALL IN MEDICAL SCIENCE WHEN LIFE BEGINS, AND THE TEXTBOOKS ARE CLEAR ON THIS. BABIES IN THE WOMB HAVE REM MOVEMENT AND DREAM (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), THEY SMILE (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), THEY RESPOND TO THEIR MOTHER’S VOICE (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), THEY SUCK THEIR THUMB (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), THEY HAVE HICCUPS (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS). NEED I GO ON?
but neither can the Christians prove the same spiritually.
IT CAN BE PROVEN FROM SCRIPTURE, AND YOU KNOW THE PASSAGES SO I NEED NOT QUOTE THEM AT LENGTH. THE SAME HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS USED TO DESCRIBE ALREADY-BORN PEOPLE ARE ALSO USED TO DESCRIBE INTRAUTERINE PEOPLE. THEY LEAP (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), GET FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), TWINS FIGHT IN THE WOMB (DEAD THINGS DON’T DO THIS), AND MOMS ARE “GREAT WITH CHILD” (NOT MONKEYS OR FISH OR ANY SUCH THING).
Both theorize suppositions that contradict their own positions in an
endless debate that each ultimately waits upon the Courts to determine,
while both sides protest against the Court’s acceptance of the other’s
vain suppositions. And in the end, the pro-life side sues and the Christians
throw acid, blow up buildings, and murder doctors.
“For they know not what they do.”
IF THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO, THEN YOU KNOW NOT WHAT YOU SAY.
It is not the position of the Fellowship, nor the Director to dictate doctrinal positions for the membership, beyond that which is contained in our charter, for ours is the preaching of the cross of Christ in a fellowship that binds us to the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ (1 John 1:1-6) for the furtherance of the gospel of salvation to all who believe. However, it has become increasingly clear, that the ignorance of both medical science and the worst and best of Christianity has ultimately created an illogical war over suppositions about the most fundamental issues pertaining to human life. And that being, When does life begin? It is beyond the imagination that abortion was legalized in this country without medical science even attempting to answer that foundational question of when life begins, without the answer of which no one can positively know when it likewise ends.
LUCKILY, THE COURTS DIDN’T ASK HELP FROM SUCH AS YOU TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION, FOR THEY WOULD HAVE ONLY BEEN SECURED IN THEIR FALSE VIEW THAT NO ONE, NOT SCIENTISTS NOR THEOLOGIANS, IS SURE WHEN LIFE BEGINS. IT’S CONFUSION LIKE THAT WHICH YOU ESPOUSE ON THIS ISSUE THAT SET THE MORAL TONE TO BE SILENT IN THE FACE OF SUCH A HOLOCAUST OF 42 MILLION PEOPLE.
IN THE PAST FEW PAGES, WE HAVE GOTTEN TO THE ROOT CAUSE OF YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN. YOU HAVE DEHUMANIZED THEM. IT’S SO SOOTHING TO THE CONSCIENCE TO DEHUMANIZE THOSE WHO ARE LEGALLY SLAUGHTERED ALL AROUND US. TELL ME THIS, RON MCRAE. HAVE ANY OF YOUR CHILDREN BEEN ABORTED WITH YOUR PERMISSION? IF SO, HAVE YOU CONFESSED THIS TO BE SIN AND REPENTED? I DON’T WANT TO ASSUME THAT THIS IS THE CASE, BUT VERY OFTEN SUCH CONFUSION OVER SUCH A CLEAR ISSUE AS WHEN HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AND WHEN THAT LIFE SHOULD BE PROTECTED COMES ABOUT BECAUSE OF A MORAL FAULT THAT ONE JUST CAN’T BRING HIMSELF TO FACE. BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF AND WITH GOD. IS THERE ANY BLAME WITH REGARD TO ABORTION THAT PRECIPATES THIS KIND OF BLATANT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THOSE CREATED IN GOD’S IMAGE?
Even more stupendously vain, is the attempt of Christianity to fight
such errant suppositions without any Biblical authority or proof that Christianity
has anymore facts than science!
It is therefore of necessity that the SPF offer the following Biblical facts, and allow each to draw their own conclusion about the about the application of those facts within the arguments surrounding abortion.
OBVIOUSLY, SPF IS NOT CONTENT TO SIMPLY STATE THE FACTS AND LET OTHERS DRAW THEIR OWN CONCLUSION. RATHER, YOU HAVE VIGOROUSLY CONDEMNED THOSE WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING BUT DISAGREE WITH YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN CHILD, OR WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING BUT REFUSED TO CONDEMN THOSE WHOM YOU CONDEMN IN YOUR DISCRIMINATION AND IGNORANCE OF THE HUMANITY AND VIABILITY OF HUMAN LIFE FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION.
It shall always be the position of the SPF that the truth just needs
to be stated, and those who love it will find it, and apply it righteously,
while others “wrest it, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their
own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). It is our intention to leave the drawing
of conclusions arising out of these facts to the readers, with this admonition,
that there is only one “truth” to be concluded (John 14:6). Therefore,
let the reader beware, lest he waver in his mind when confronted with facts
that do not agree with his own suppositional rhetoric, or the long embraced
philosophy of his friends and/or church. The Bible makes no mistake in
clearly stating the following facts of life, as they concern the origin
of the soul and spirit, the nature of human life, conception, birth, the
killing of unborn children, and the judgments of God on national whoremongering.
FACTS RELATING TO ABORTION
1. God does kill some babies at birth over the fornication and adultery
of the baby’s mother and father (2 Samuel 12:15-24).
2. Rape and incest involving family members does not receive the same treatment from God upon the illegitimate baby (Genesis 19:30-36), though the recompense is a corruption of the family lineage forever (vs. 37, 38, c.f. Deuteronomy 2:9-19/ 23:2,3).
3. God clearly judges a “land that hath committed great whoredom, departing from the LORD” (Hosea 1:2) by giving them preachers that do the same (vs. 2-9/2:1,2/ 3:1-3), and then declaring that “your daughters shall commit whoredom, and your spouses shall commit adultery” (Hosea 4:13), and God “will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredom, nor your spouses when they commit adultery” (4:14).
4. But God does kill the offspring of such fornication and adultery (Hosea 9:11-17), and does so “from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception” (vs. 11). His judgment upon whoredom against the babies conceived out of whoredom is so exact, that He will “give them [the whores] a miscarrying womb and dry breasts” (vs. 14, first trimester), and if that fails, “though they bring forth, yet will God slay even the beloved fruit of their womb” (vs. 16), and then take those babies and “will cast them away” (vs. 17). Get mad and throw your tantrum, but you had better get what God just said!
GOD IS JUST IN PUNISHING PARENTS BY SLAYING THEIR CHILDREN, BORN AND UNBORN. THAT IS A PUNISHMENT UPON THE PARENTS, NOT THE CHILDREN, WHO PERSONALLY JUDICIALLY INNOCENT OF CAPITAL CRIMES.
I DON’T THINK YOU’RE ARGUING THAT ABORTION IS GOD’S WILL, ARE YOU? JUST BECAUSE GOD SLAYS SOME CHILDREN OF WHORES IN SCRIPTURE, THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT WHEN ANY WHORE SLAYS HER CHILDREN THAT SHE’S DOING GOD’S WILL OR THAT WE SHOULDN’T PROTEST IT OR DEFEND HER INNOCENT CHILDREN FROM HER ASSASSIN’S KNIFE. CAN YOU SAY WITH CERTAINTY THAT ABORTION IS NOT GOD’S WILL, RON MCRAE?
“Brethren, be not children in understanding:
howbeit in malice be ye children,
but in understanding be men.”
- 1 Corinthians 14:20
Can you not see that abortion is not targeting God’s people (Exodus 1:15-22)? Nor is abortion a singular attempt of one unruly despot to target God’s people in a particular community in hopes of killing one child by murdering “all the children” already born, “from two years old and under” (Matthew 2:16). And all abortions do not kill children that are already born and living on their own. Can you not see that there is a difference between a baby that is “capable of living on its own but isn’t”, and “a baby that is living on its own”?
THE BIBLE ALSO MAKES IT CLEAR THAT FETUSES ARE PEOPLE TOO, THEIR AGE, STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, PLACE OF RESIDENCE, AND DEPENDENCE UPON THE COMPASSION OF OTHERS TO SURVIVE NOTWITHSTANDING. YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN ON THE BASIS OF THEIR WEAKNESS AND HELPLESSNESS IS CRUELTY AT ITS BRAVEST.
The difference is major as it concerns a Christian’s duty and responsibility to use violence in protecting the child (see Exodus 21:22-25).
THE PASSAGE MAKES IT CLEAR THAT KILLING AN UNBORN CHILD IS A CAPITAL OFFENSE: “LIFE FOR LIFE” IT SAYS. WHAT’S YOUR POINT IN CITING IT?
THE BIBLE ALSO MAKES IT CLEAR THAT FETUSES ARE PEOPLE TOO, THEIR AGE, STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, PLACE OF RESIDENCE, AND DEPENDENCE UPON THE COMPASSION OF OTHERS TO SURVIVE NOTWITHSTANDING. YOUR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE PREBORN ON THE BASIS OF THEIR WEAKNESS AND HELPLESSNESS IS CRUELTY AT ITS BRAVEST.
Brethren, you cannot make things identical that are only similar! And you err exceedingly in making things the same that are clearly different. The differences are Biblical and material facts of life that only blind opinions ignore! You see, both sides of the abortion issue have drawn their stupendously ignorant arguments on the line of when does the baby inside the womb become like the baby outside the womb living on its own! The stupid medical profession, though they can see simple facts supporting a difference, they ignore major concerns of their own position, and just argue from the premise that ‘until the baby is out of the womb, they are different, and you can kill the one, but are oath bound to protect the other’. Though they support there is a difference until the baby is outside the womb, they reverse their logic and say there is no difference in how far “from the womb” (see Job 3:10, 11/ Luke 1:15) the baby has to be, and now head first partial birth abortions are okay too! Howbeit, the anti-abortion side just ignores everything, and refuses to see the differences between the baby inside the womb at any stage being different from the baby outside the womb at any age.
THIS IS PATENTLY FALSE. NAME ONE ANTI-ABORTIONIST WHO DOESN’T ACKNOWLEDGE THE BIBLICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE BABY IN THE WOMB AND OUT? JUST BECAUSE WE DON’T DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE INNOCENT HUMAN BEING ON THE BASIS OF THOSE ARBITRARY DIFFERENCES, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE DON’T ACKNOWLEDGE THOSE DIFFERENCES.
5. There are differences between the baby inside the womb at every stage,
and the baby outside the womb, both scientifically (“observable, demonstrative
and producible facts”) and Biblically. Those small differences have enormous
consequences and impact on what both sides do to either kill or protect.
a. The major difference, and the most clearly seen difference, is that one baby is inside the womb (Psalm 139:13/ Ecclesiastes 11:5), and the other baby is outside the womb (see Job 3:10, 11/ Genesis 38:28-30).
b. The bones grow inside the womb from nutrients supplied from the mother’s intake of food (Ecclesiastes 11:5). Outside the womb they grow from the nutrients supplied by its own body’s intake of food (Genesis 21:8/ 1 Kings 3:21/ Psalm 131:2/Isaiah 7:15/ Lamentations 4:4/ Luke 1:80).
c. The baby inside the womb is not breathing air through its nostrils or mouth, but its blood is re-supplied from the mother’s oxygen via the umbilical cord.
d. Babies inside the womb feed off of nutrients not food, and therefore do not purge themselves (Mark 7:19). The only babies that do so in the womb are large over due babies, that the stress of the mother’s labor causes such to occur just prior to delivery, and is the major cause of blue births in full term deliverieS
6. BIBLICAL FACT: There is a difference between a lost person and a saved person (2 Corinthians 4:3, 4/Ephesians 2:2-8/ Luke 16:19-26/ 1 Corinthians 10:32/ 1 Thessalonians 5:4, 5/ 1 Peter 4:8).
7. BIBLICAL FACT: There are different Biblical regulations governing marriage between two saved people concerning children produced by that saved marriage, and one saved person married to a lost person concerning the children born from that unequal yoke (see 1 Corinthians 7:14). GET MAD AND ACT LIKE A CHILD! But the Bible is very clear that God puts so much of difference between children born to two saved people that God would dare say,
“For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife,
and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband:
ELSE WERE YOUR CHILDREN UNCLEAN…UNCLEAN…UNCLEAN;
But now are they holy.”
-1 Corinthians 7:14
THE CHILDREN OF SINNERS ARE UNCLEAN IN A SENSE AND THE UNSAVED CHILDREN OF BELIEVERS ARE CLEAN IN A SENSE. YET, WOULD YOU USE THIS ARGUMENT TO CONDEMN ONE WHO WOULD USE LETHAL FORCE TO PROTECT KIDS FROM A TERRORIST IN THE MALL, BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, THOSE KIDS ARE “UNCLEAN”? WHAT RELEVANCE DOES THE COVENANT OF A CHRISTIAN FAMILY HAVE IN WHETHER THAT HUMAN LIFE BEING ASSAULTED CAN BE JUSTLY DEFENDED OR NOT?
Let the falsely so called “Missionaries” to the preborn, and the laughable
army of god rage, but God calls certain children “unclean” except He sanctify
the unbeliever by the saved spouse. Draw you own conclusion, but ignorance
of what God clearly said, has made the issue of abortion one that has grown
into an illogical and unscriptural fight that only the gospel of Jesus
Christ can combat.
8. When God puts two saved children of God together as husband and wife, He does so “that he might seek a godly seed” (Malachi 2:15), and the entire matter of that “godly seed” pertains to “your spirit” (vs.15), for in joining two saved people as “one” (vs.15), there is a union beyond “flesh joining flesh” (Genesis 2:24/ Matthew 19:5,6) that involves “the residue of the spirit” (vs. 15). That is why God gives this warning about “dealing treacherously against the wife of your youth” (vs.15, 16), and it is not a warning about the soul, or the body.
“Therefore take heed to your spirit.”
9. Human life consist not of just a body, but a “spirit and soul and
body” (1 Thessalonians 5:22/ Hebrews 4:12).
10. When a person dies, his body goes to the grave and turns back to dust from which it came (Luke 16:22/ John 11:34-39/Genesis 3:19).
11. When a person dies, his “spirit…goeth upward” (Ecclesiastes 3:21), because he hath no “power over the spirit to retain the spirit” (Ecclesiastes 8:8).
12. When a person dies, his soul either goes to hell (Acts 2:27, 31/Jonah 2:2, 7), or to heaven (Revelation 6:9-11).
13. When a person is saved, their “spirit” is “born again” of the Spirit of God (John 3:6). Neither the soul nor the body is born again. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” DON’T MISS EITHER ONE OF THOSE!!!
14. At the moment of salvation the soul is converted (Psalm 19:7/Luke 22:32) by the law of God Almighty, the Father being the “I AM” (Exodus 3:14), the ego, the “soul” of the Godhead (Psalm 11:5). It is always the soul that the Bible refers to as being converted (see James 5:19, 20), and it is the soul that the Bible always refers to as being saved (Hebrews 10:39/ James 5:20). That conversion follows the hearts understanding of the gospel (Matthew 13:15/ John 12:40/ Acts 28:27/ 1 Samuel 13:14).
15. At the moment of salvation the body dies because of sin (Romans 8:10) being “crucified with” Christ’s body (Galatians 2:20/6:12-17) as both “members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones” (Ephesians 5:30), and is then “quickened” by “the Spirit of God” (Romans 7:9-11), who becomes “the life which you now live in the flesh” (Galatians 2:20) “because of righteousness” (Romans 7:10). Jesus Christ being God’s body, he becomes “the saviour of the body” (Ephesians 5:23).
16. And as much as the body, soul and spirit are not effected the same by salvation, nor go to the same place at death (see 2 Corinthians 12:1-4), neither are they created at the same time and in the same place, or in the same manner.
“For I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”
17. It is clearly obvious that a human being’s body begins its existence
in the womb of the person’s mother (Ecclesiastes 11:5/ Psalm 139:13).
18. However, the person himself, the soul, the ego, the ???, the ???? (psyche/psychology…study of the soul) is “curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth” (Psalm 139:15). Never mind your traditional religious upbringing, or the nursery school stork with a receiving blanket in his mouth, or the reformed catechism, or what you have opinions about concerning “the breasts, and of the womb” (Genesis 49:25). Psalm 139:15 clearly says,
“My substance was not hid from thee,
when I was made in secret,
and curiously wrought
in the lowest parts of the earth.”
Well Brethren, whatever that substance is, it isn’t your body!
Verse 16 clearly says about the body and its members that “as yet there
was none of them.” Your body has its beginning in your “mother’s womb”
(John 3:4), where your “members…in continuance were fashioned” (Psalm 139:16)
as “the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child” (Ecclesiastes
19. The body’s “members were written” in God’s “book” “when as yet there was none of them” (Psalm 139:16).
20. In a godly birth, God knows you before he “formed thee in the belly” (Jeremiah 1:5). Well draw your own conclusion, but if your body was not formed yet, what part of you did he know before he “formed” your body in the womb (1:5)?
21. And God can sanctify your body for his service “before thou comest forth out of the womb” (Jeremiah 1:5).
22. If God authors the birth, he will cause the womb to bring forth (Isaiah 66:9). Brethren, you answer God’s question, “Shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? Saith thy God.”
23. BIBLICAL FACT: God shuts some women’s womb so they cannot bring forth (1 Samuel 1:5, 6) and He opens others so they can (Genesis 29:31/ 30:22).
24. He gives other women “miscarrying wombs” (Hosea 9:14) and they bring forth something that is dead, which is “carried from the womb to the grave” (Job 10:19) And the Bible speaks of that dead baby as “though they had not been” (vs. 19).
25. BIBLICAL FACT: The spirit of man is not the body of the man!
26. BIBLICAL FACT: Neither is the spirit of man his soul!
27. “The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the belly” (Proverbs 20:27). Well if you are a true Bible Believer, do you believe that verse? Then you draw your own conclusion, but whose spirit is searching the inward parts of the baby’s belly, while inside the mother’s belly (Job 3:10, 11/ Jeremiah 1:5)?
28. BIBLICAL FACT: Man began, both male and female with Adam (Genesis 1:26/ Genesis 5:1, 2/ 1 Corinthians 11:8).
29. The first man Adam, did not have a mother’s womb, but was made out the dust of the earth (Genesis 2:7). [Hence: “mother earth”].
30. Adam had his body before he “became a living soul” (Genesis 2:7) and the New Testament said “Adam was made a living soul” (1 Corinthians 15:45).
31. Though he had a body, Adam did not become “a living soul” until after God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 2:7).
32. “Man (it did not say Adam)…man became a living soul” after God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 2:7).
33. Though Adam was “formed…out of the dust of the ground” (ibid.) and not born from a womb, all of his children were born from their mother’s womb (Genesis 4:1-3/ Genesis 5:1-3), and the Bible said they also had in their “nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 7:22) that made their grandpa a “living soul” (Genesis 2:7).
34. God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 2:7), and the Bible identifies that “breath” as “the spirit of God” [little “s”] (Job 27:3). NEVER MIND YOU OPINIONS, GO BY WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS!
35. Men die when God “takest away their breath” (Psalm 104:29), and in the same passage when God “sendest forth his spirit, they are created” (vs. 30). FACT: In the context, all who verse 30 says “are created” are born from their mother’s womb!
36. BIBLICAL FACT: Never mind medical science, the Bible clearly says that when man’s “breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish” (Psalm 146:4).
37. BIBLICAL FACT: Never mind medical science, the Bible clearly says that a man’s heart can “die within him” and the man not actually die for ten more days (1 Samuel 25:37, 38).
38. Job was born from his mother’s womb (Job 3:10, 11), and the Fellowship does not profess to know how smart you are, but God Almighty said that Job had “spoken of me the thing which is right” (Job 42:8). In so saying, God acknowledged that Job was right when he said,
“The Spirit of God hath made me,
and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.”
Get mad and curse and swear while you maintain your own stupid ignorant opinion when you think life begins. Go ahead and insist that life begins at conception. God Almighty said Job was right when he said “the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.” And though he was born of woman, God said Job was right when he said, “The Spirit of God hath MADE ME.” The Bible is very clear when God breathes that breath into a man.
39. Job also said that “if God set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit and his breath; ALL FLESH SHALL PERISH” (Job 34:14, 15). NOW WAS JOB RIGHT? Or is your stupid opinion right? There is no comma between “spirit and breath”. The verse is speaking of the same entity.
40. Draw you own conclusion, and figure it out for yourself. But the Bible says that every life form on earth except a fish, has in their “nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 7:21, 22), and Brethren that life is their breath. It is called “THE BREATH……OF LIFE.” Can you not see that? And that breath is synonymous with their spirit (Hence: ‘spirit’…??????, pneuma, as in pneumonia [problem breathing], or pneumatic [air tools].
41. BIBLICAL FACT: [Medical science will never catch up regardless of how close they come to the truth] The Bible says “the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels” (Ezekiel 1:20, 21) which look like gigantic atoms (Ezekiel 1:16-18) around the throne of God, one for each level of life (Man, domesticated animals, undomesticated animals and fowl, 1:10-15). Brethren, draw your own conclusion where the spirit of man comes from.
42. BIBLICAL FACT: “The body without the spirit is dead” (James 2:26), either before birth or afterwards.
43. BIBLICAL FACT: That same spirit is called “the spirit of man” and it “goeth upward” at his death (Ecclesiastes 3:21) to “return unto God who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7), because “no man hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power in the day of death” (Ecclesiastes 8:8).
44. BIBLICAL FACT: When a man takes his first breath (Genesis 2:7), the Bible says that God “formeth the spirit of man within him” (Zechariah 12:1), because God Almighty says of the earth that “he giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein” (Isaiah 42:5).
45. BIBLICAL FACT: Spirit is like wind (John 3:8), and “breath” (Luke 24:38, 39).
46. BIBLICAL FACT: A soul can die (Ezekiel 18:4, 20) but it cannot be killed (Matthew 10:28), though its abode in the body can be severed before death (Hebrews 4:12/ Colossians 2:11, 12) in the Christian, and destroyed after death with the lost sinner (Matthew 10:28).
47. BIBLICAL FACT: There are souls that have lived in the body, and are no longer in the body after the body is murdered (Revelation 6:9), who can still talk (vs. 10), and wear clothes (vs. 11), and “rest a little” (vs. 11).
48. There are souls in hell after their bodies are in the grave (Luke 16:22, 23), and there are souls in heaven with their bodies, whose bodies did not die (Genesis 5:24/ 2 Kings 2:11).
49. BIBLICAL FACT: Death comes to a human being when their breath/spirit is taken from them (Psalm 146:4/ Job 34:14, 15). Then their soul departs from the body (Genesis 35:18). There are two incidences where God raises a child from the dead in very similar circumstances involving Elijah and his Bible student Elisha. In each the man of God stretches himself upon the child and their soul comes back into their body (see 1 Kings 17:20-22/ 2 Kings 4:32-35) and the “flesh of the child waxed warm” (2 Kings 4:34) as the soul comes back into the body (1 Kings 17:21, 22). When this occurs, the child breathes again suddenly as if chilled in the cold (2 Kings 4:35) causing him to sneeze, and “the child opened his eyes” (ibid.).
50. And Brethren, there is a certain kind of woman in the Bible of whom God accuses of “trimming” her “way to seek love” (Jeremiah 2:33) and of teaching the “wicked ones” her ways (vs. 33). And whatever God meant by saying “Why trimmest thou thy way” (vs. 33) resulted in her staining her skirts with “the blood of the souls of the poor innocents” (Jeremiah 2:34). Now Brethren, you draw your own conclusion, but we Bible Believers take the Bible to mean what it says, and say what it means. In that verse there is a woman who likes being “trim” to seek love, or she would not do something that God calls “trimming her way”. But whatever the trim job accomplished, it left in her skirts blood. And not just the blood of innocents, but the Bible clearly said, “the blood of the souls of the poor innocents” (Jeremiah 2:34). The verse did not say “living souls” (Genesis 2:7), but it did say those souls had blood, that could stain a woman’s skirts. And the verse clearly said it was “the blood of the souls of the poor innocents”, and the Bible laid the blame squarely on the woman who owned the skirts, saying “I have not found it by secret search, but upon all these” (vs. 34), an obvious plural reference to the woman’s “skirts” (plural). Brethren, history is replete with women of this depravity, long before legalized abortion. Before Roe vs. Wade, it was back alley butchers with or without a medical degree. Before the back alley butchers, women used kitchen knives and knitting needles to do the job, and those trade secrets have been long passed down the ranks of worthless whores. And are used every day in homes across this country to do what the woman of Jeremiah 2 doesn’t want to pay the licensed physician to do in the clinic. But regardless of how crude, or sterile the trimming utensil, there have always been low rate women who had in their skirts “the blood of the souls of the poor innocents”. God knows, what only the gynecologists see, and depraved mothers secretly understand, but there are a lot more deliberate abortions being performed each day, than those reported in the clinics. Go ask questions. Go do your own research. Talk to the medical doctors about the thousands of miscarriages where there is no explanation for the abrasions and lesions in the womb of her that unexpectedly lost a child for the second and third time, and then try to blame the doctor! There are thousands of babies drowned in toilets of public bathrooms by young, worthless ‘mother-in-denials’, who throw the dead child in the trash can on their way out the door, but you don’t blame the janitor that empties the child dead or alive into the outside dumpster. God blames the wretched woman with the blood of the soul of that poor innocent child staining her skirts when she walks out the door. Why put all the blame onto the physician just because he has a license to run a legalized killing clinic. Roe vs. Wade was not started by a medical doctor, but by one of the women of Jeremiah 2:24 with innocent blood stains in her skirts. This stupid nonsense of justifying a falsely so called Christian murderer because the doctor’s license does not give him the right to kill an unborn baby; hey man, the physician’s license doesn’t give him the right to commit adultery either! One of these supporters of the dead man Paul Hill is a Christian medical doctor. He has a medical license that allows him to fondle other men’s wives in private, and touch little girls’ private areas that without the license would be adultery and child molesting. Does Dr. Patrick Johnson’s medical license give him the right to circumvent 1 Corinthians 7:1, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman”? Is it right to shoot Dr. Johnson because his license doesn’t give him the right to touch other women besides his wife in private? Is he an adulterer because his license allows him to do these things? Which ever way you answer about Dr. Johnson, then apply the same reason to the abortion doctor, hypocrite!
DO YOU CONDEMN A SURGICAL REPAIR OF VAGINAL CANCER JUST AS YOU WOULD CONDEMN ABORTION? IT SEEMS YOUR CHARGE OF HYPOCRISY IS BASED UPON THIS COMPARISON. IF SO, WHAT FOLLY! CARING FOR A WOMAN’S VAGINAL CANCER IS CONSISTENT WITH CHRISTIAN CHARITY, WHILE ABORTING AN INNOCENT HUMAN BEING FOR SELFISH REASONS IS NOT. (DUH)
Brethren, can you not see that there are so many Biblical facts listed above to take into consideration, a Christian has to be a fool to think it is Biblical to add more blood shed to the equation to stop the sin!? It is not the position of the Street Preachers’ Fellowship to have its members conform to a single doctrinal statement on birth, and never shall be. However, it is very clear in the scriptures, that there is more sin involved in abortion than murder and shedding of blood. We are a ministerial fellowship and standards institute for Bible Believing street preachers, and we are going to remain that for God. However, we are not going to walk any further with anyone who believes it is okay to murder someone to stop abortion. Neither are we going to debate the matter (see Romans 1:29), or argue further with any of the supporters of the dead man Paul Hill. To kill an abortion doctor to stop abortion is heresy. It is a sin against God Almighty and the power of the gospel.
“A man that is an heretick after the first
and second admonition reject.”
Accordingly, this final admonition is proffered in hopes of salvaging
some few good men, snared by their sincerity in trying to help in a cause,
that thus far has been defeated by lack of knowledge, and the attempts
to rally support to combat being frustrated by the unrighteous and criminal
acts of lost Catholics and religious nuts that have never found peace a
day in their miserable lives. Snared in this quagmire of stupendous ignorance
are once very active street preachers, who not long ago preached everywhere
for Jesus Christ. However, they have innocently fallen in with religious
zealots, Catholics and anarchical Calvinists who are powerless to stop
abortion by the
Spirit of God and the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
HOW ABOUT SPF REGIONAL DIRECTOR JASON STORMS? WE BOTH FIND A SCRIPTURAL AND REASONABLE DEFENSE OF DEFENSIVE ACTION TO SAVE THE PREBORN.
These lost depraved religious zealots have to chain themselves to doorways, lying down on sidewalks like dumb dogs that cannot bark (Isaiah 56:10), they blow up buildings, and burn down clinics, throw acid on people and gun down doctors in their cars and homes. THEY ARE UNSAVED, POWERLESS, WEAK PERSONALITIES that have never experienced the power of God a day in their lives.
NOT A DAY IN THEIR LIVES? WHAT FOOLISH PRESUMPTION AND IDLE WORDS GONE AWRY!
They actually believe that a pipe bomb, or a rifle and shotgun are more powerful, and better weapons than the “sword of the Spirit” (Hebrews 4:12).
ANOTHER STRAW MAN ARGUMENT. NO ONE THAT JUSTIFIES DEFENSIVE FORCE TO SAVE BABIES FROM BEING ABORTED BELIEVE THAT CARNAL WEAPONS ARE MORE POWERFUL THAN SPIRITUAL, ANY MORE THAN YOU BELIEVE THAT CARNAL WEAPONS ARE MORE POWERFUL THAN SPIRITUAL WHEN YOU PICK UP A SPOON TO EAT A PUDDING OR GET IN YOUR CAR TO DRIVE TO PREACH OR PULL YOUR WEAPON TO DEFEND YOURSELF FROM A VIABLE THREAT.
They profess to believe the word of God, but cannot use it to stop the sin of abortion even in their own home towns. But now that the SPF has come out against them, they want to use the Bible to support their laying it down to pick up a shotgun! Their tactics of these rabid anti-abortion killers have done much harm to the cause of Christ. The last three major cases before the Supreme Court that effectively limited free speech on sidewalks, residential areas and before abortion clinics were singularly and solely caused by this criminal element in the anti-abortion movement. And they have so messed with the minds of these once sound street preachers, that they are on the verge of sacrificing all fellowship with the saints and Jesus Christ to embrace open murder. May God Almighty help them! But the SPF and its members will not walk any further with them.
“Can two walk together,
except they be agreed?”
It is not our desire to treat any weak brother as an enemy, but we admonish you as a brother to repent, and forsake this evil, before it consumes you in unrighteous anger, criminal culpability, and out right murder, knowing that “no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15). We have no intentions of going any further with the issue, nor are we going to abide with any vain threats of violence toward our members, or stupid insistence that we preach elsewhere. The SPF will preach anywhere God leads, and we will do so or their supposed corner or ours, and preach again at the next public execution of a religious murderer, that thinks he does God a service. And make no apologies for doing so. The supporters of the dead man Paul Hill are wrong, and they will always be wrong! Most we count as lost, fowl mouthed blaspheming Catholics and anarchical Calvinists worthy of no more time or regard. Those who are saved, we admonish one last time to repent and forsake this way of death, and the SPF will help you any way we can to recover your usefulness to God and the ministry of Jesus Christ. But except ye repent, we will no longer walk with you or preach with you, but rather against you and the murder you support! We can do no other.
By the grace of God Almighty alone,
Street Preachers’ Fellowship World Wide
Assistant Director Western United States
New York Statewide Director
North Carolina Statewide Director
IN CONCLUSION, YOU ARE IN ERROR IN YOUR REASONING. YOUR SERMON IS FULL OF LOGICAL ERRORS AND IRRELEVANT RAMBLINGS THAT RARELY TOUCH ON THE ACTUAL POINT OF CONTENTION: THE JUSTIFIABILITY OF DEFENSE FORCE FOR PREBORN JUST LIKE THE BORN. YOU FREQUENTLY BEG THE QUESTION, AND SPEND MUCH TIME ARGUING POINTS WITH WHICH YOUR OPPONENTS IN DEBATE WOULD NOT DISAGREE. YOU FREQUENTLY PROPOSE STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS, CONDEMNING SOMETHING THAT YOUR OPPONENTS IN DEBATE WOULD ALSO CONDEMN. SECOND, YOU LUMP INTO ONE GROUP THOSE WHO WOULD ACTUALLY USE LETHAL FORCE TO STOP ABORTIONS AND THOSE WHO WOULD SIMPLY HESITATE TO CONDEMN THEM. AS BRUCE MURCH POINTED OUT, YOU EVEN GO SO FAR AS TO LUMP PEACEFUL ANTI-ABORTION PACIFISTS WITH THOSE WHO WOULD JUSTIFY PAUL HILL. THIS IS POOR REASONING AND AN INDICTMENT ON YOUR SINCERITY. YOU FREQUENTLY CONFUSE RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE WITH DEFENSIVE FORCE AND ASCRIBE MISTAKEN MOTIVES TO YOUR OPPONENTS, WHICH IS AN EASY MISTAKE FOR A NOVICE BUT AN OMINOUS ERROR FOR ONE WITH EXPERIENCE AND AUTHORITY SUCH AS YOU. IT SEEMS INCREDIBLE TO ME THAT YOU WOULD EMBARK ON SUCH A LENGHTY ARTICLE WITHOUT MORE THOROUGHLY FAMILIARIZING YOURSELF WITH THE SOUND ARGUMENTS OF THOSE WHO DEFEND THE USE OF FORCE TO SAVE LIVES. PERHAPS YOU’RE READING TOO MUCH OF THE FOUL-MOUTHED EMAIL NONSENSE THAT TRUE SAINTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE WOULD CONDEMN AND NOT ENOUGH OF THE SCHOLARLY ARTICLES AND BOOKS BY PASTORS SUCH AS MICHAEL BRAY AND MATT TREWELLA, AND BY ATTORNEYS WHO HAVE WRITTEN EXTENSIVELY ON THIS SUBJECT. IF YOU WANT TO “FINE TUNE” YOUR ARTICLE, PERHAPS YOU SHOULD GET MICHAEL BRAY’S BOOK, “A TIME TO KILL”, AND THE LAW SCHOOL THESIS OF ATTORNEY HIRSCH WHO WAS INVITED TO DEFEND PAUL HILL AND WAS DISALLOWED BY THE JUDGE. EVEN IF YOU’RE RIGHT IN YOUR CONCLUSIONS, YOU DO YOUR CONCLUSIONS A DISSERVICE WITH YOUR ILLOGIC. IT WOULD SERVE YOU WELL TO KNOW YOUR OPPONENTS’ ARGUMENTS BETTER AND AVOID IRRELEVANCE, STRAW MEN, AND BEGGING THE QUESTION.
FURTHERMORE, YOU’RE IN ERROR IN YOUR JUDGMENTS OF THOSE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE. YOUR STRAW MEN REFUTATION OF OUR ARGUMENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE IMMORAL, FOUL-MOUTHS OF SOME OF THOSE WHO DEFEND HILL ARE INHERENTLY AND SELF-EVIDENTLY FAULTY. YOU CONDEMN AS HERETICS AND APOSTATE THOSE WHO BELIEVE AS I AND SPF REGIONAL DIRECTOR JASON STORMS. ARE YOU PREPARED TO STICK TO YOUR JUDGMENT, OR DO YOU WISH TO TEMPER YOUR DIVISIVE WRATH WITH PEACE NOW THAT YOUR FRIENDS HAVE BEEN BATTERED? IT’S ALL TO EASY TO CONDEMN BRETHREN WITH WHOM YOU ARE NOT IN RELATIONSHIP, BUT IT PRICKS THE CONSCIENCE TO CONDEMN FRIENDS IN THE LORD FOR NOTHING MORE THAN DIFFERING OPINIONS ON THE HUMANITY OF THE FETUS AND ITS RIGHT TO LIFE AND DEFENSE. YOU CLAIM THAT WE HAVE CAUSED DIVISION BY EMBRACING THIS IDEA THAT FETUSES HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS BORN PEOPLE, AND CERTAINLY SOME OF THOSE ON MY SIDE OF THE AISLE HAVE BY THEIR REJECTION OF YOU AND YOURS. NEVERTHELESS, I FIND THIS DIVISIVENESS BY ALL WHO HAVE REJECTED AS BRETHREN THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM ON THIS ISSUE AS MORE BLAMEWORTHY THAN ERROR ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN: THE ERROR OF THE UNJUSTIFIED DISUNITY IS MUCH MORE SEVERE AND DEBILITATING TO GOD’S KINGDOM THAN ERROR ON THIS ISSUE OF WHETHER FETUSES HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS BORN PEOPLE.
PERHAPS KEVIN, RUBEN, AND DEAN SHOULD MORE THOROUGHLY READ THE ARTICLE TO WHICH THEIR NAME’S ARE ATTACHED BEFORE THEY CONSENT TO ITS CONTENTS. RUBEN, KEVIN, DEAN, ARE YOU CONFUSED ABOUT WHEN LIFE BEGINS AS WELL? DO YOU THINK THAT EVANGELISTS CAN “COME TO THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS” ABOUT ABORTION, OR ARE YOU DOGMATIC ENOUGH TO SAY THAT IT’S MURDER? ARE YOU CONFUSED ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT ABORTION’S MURDER BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, GOD DID KILL BABIES IN THE O.T.? ARE YOU UNAWARE OF THE SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE THAT HUMANS IN THE WOMB ARE PEOPLE TOO? DO YOU DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE PREBORN WITH SUCH BRAZENNESS? DO YOU, RUBEN, CONDEMN JASON STORMS AND I AS APOSTATE HERETICS?
Back to Army of God homepage.
To contact by e-mail: Glory2Jesus@ArmyofGod.com
Or write to: Rev. Donald Spitz
Glory to Jesus Ministries
P.O. Box 2876
Chesapeake VA 23327