Voting Pro-Life?

While it is disheartening to me to see so many who self-identify as evangelicals open to the notion of voting for Democrats, the silver lining in that blue cloud is found here- that many evangelicals, aghast at this development as they should be, have responded by vehemently insisting they would not vote for anyone who wasn’t pro-life.

As always, however, the rub is in defining our terms. Suppose a man took the position that late term abortions should be illegal. Sex selection abortions should be illegal. Down syndrome abortions should be illegal. Abortions of babies conceived by a husband and wife should be illegal. But he also takes the position that some abortions should be legal. Babies who are conceived in the context of a crime, rape or incest, their murder should be protected by law. Is this really a pro-life position? Isn’t this, properly speaking, pro-abortion with exceptions? This hypothetical candidate, however, isn’t hypothetical. It describes the position taken by every Republican nominee and President going back to Nixon. That, in case you are wondering, includes Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Donald Trump.

This is not my first rodeo, and so I know what to expect. Comes now every argument as to why Christians should have cast their votes for each of the above listed men. And the same people making those arguments will insist that Donald Trump get our votes this election. It is not my intention here to argue that point one way or another. I have no desire to deny that President Trump has done much for the cause of life, more than his predecessors. Praise God. My question is this- why would we think this is voting pro-life?

Again, not my first rodeo. I’m aware that there are those who seek to justify voting for Democrats on the grounds that “pro-life” needs to be broader than merely being “anti-abortion,” that pro-life encompasses being opposed to capital punishment, and being in favor of the welfare state and that with a broad enough definition, one could argue voting for this Democrat or that is voting pro-life. That’s not at all what I’m suggesting. I find such arguments disingenuous, ignorant and just plain silly.

Rather, when I use the expression “pro-life,” and I suspect when most use it, we mean, “Believes the state should protect the right to life of all unborn children.” Isn’t that what the term means? And since that is what the term means, what business do we have using that term to describe politicians who expressly deny that the state should protect the right to life of all unborn children, who in fact expressly affirm that the state should protect the “right” of some parents to murder some unborn babies?

If Christians want to take the view that the biblical way to vote is to vote for candidates who would legally protect the “rights” of some parents to murder their babies but who would legally protect the “rights” of fewer parents to murder their babies than their opponents would, then why not say so? Why pretend that pro-abortion with exceptions, which is what each of these Republican nominees have been, means pro-life?

What is worse, how many Christians over the past few months have had the audacity to argue that voting for a candidate who is pro-abortion is proof said voter isn’t a Christian, have voted, each and every election cycle, for a candidate who is pro-abortion with exceptions. Didn’t Jesus say something about being judged by the same standard we judge others?

To re-iterate. I haven’t ever voted for a Democrat, and don’t expect I ever will. I believe it is wrong to do so. I believe men of good will can disagree over whether or not we should vote for the Republican who wants to protect the legal right to murder only tens of thousands of babies a year rather than a million. I’m not angry at anyone for voting for the Republican. All I am saying is that don’t kid yourself into thinking you are voting pro-life. Don’t paint yourself in a corner. And those of you so quick to declare that “No Christian could ever vote for a Democrat,” don’t be surprised when some are willing to doubt your salvation, since you vote for candidates who promise to protect the murder of some babies.

What to do? On how to vote, I don’t have counsel. My counsel above is about what not to say. Let’s think before we speak, especially before we speak about the condition of the souls of others who name the name of Jesus.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, church, ethics, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Mr. Deeds; Grey Areas in God’s Mind? & More

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in Biblical Doctrines, ethics, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, RC Sproul JR, theology | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mr. Deeds; Grey Areas in God’s Mind? & More

Ask RC- Does God want everyone to be healthy and wealthy?

Yes, and no. I have often said that one thing the prosperity preachers have right that so many of us miss is this- because of Jesus our heavenly Father delights to bless us. What they have wrong is they have too narrow a view of what blessing means. Can it include health and wealth? Of course it can. There too the prosperity preachers have got something right we too often have wrong- they agree with God that health and wealth are good things. Where they err is in thinking they are the only good things.

The Bible tells us, as does my blessed experience with Lisa, that finding a good wife is a blessing from God. The Bible also tells us that being single is a blessing from God. The Bible tells us that God sends trials to bless us, and the Bible says God rescues us from trials to bless us.

What God wants for us is to grow in grace and wisdom. That may come through the blessing of strong and healthy bodies. Or it may be brought to us through thorns in our sides, a life in a wheelchair, or eyes growing dim. When that journey is complete, when we pass through the vale we receive the blessing of moral purity and perfection. And when our Redeemer returns, we receive the gift of resurrected bodies which will know neither sickness nor death.

What God wants for us is to inherit the world. That may come through prudent investing, hard work, serving well the needs of others, all of which can bring prosperity. Or, it may come through bitter financial hardship, through monumental losses. What we have, however, either way, is that which we would joyfully trade all the wealth in the world for, the Pearl of Great Price. We are already immeasurably wealthy. When we die our spirits will go to where our Treasure is. And when our Redeemer, the one with whom we are joint heirs, returns, we will indeed inherit the earth, an earth remade, reborn into perfection.

What God wants from us is joy and gratitude. He wants trust and patience. He wants us to believe that the Husband He has given us loves us perfectly, in sickness or in health, in plenty or in want. That we have already been given more than we could want or ask, and that what lies ahead of us is too much for our minds to imagine. He wants us to set aside our grumbling and to take up the mantle of praise. He wants us to acknowledge our dependence on Him, and to give thanks for His perfect care, whatever circumstances He calls us to walk through.

A day is coming when by the standards of this world, all of us who are in Christ will enjoy perfect health and immeasurable wealth. This day, and every day between now and then, however, all of us who are in Christ enjoy perfect standing in the eyes of God and irrevocable possession of the Pearl of Great Price. We have much to give thanks for.

Posted in apologetics, Ask RC, assurance, Biblical Doctrines, church, grace, kingdom, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

God is Near to the Hurting; Sharon Bertram, Hero; God’s Moral Law

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in assurance, Biblical Doctrines, Heroes, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, prayer, RC Sproul JR, theology, Westminster Shorter Catechism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on God is Near to the Hurting; Sharon Bertram, Hero; God’s Moral Law

Compassion on the Cheap

We all think in shorthand. That is, we carry with us sundry mental shortcuts that move us from one thought to another swiftly. These give us license to dismiss some ideas quickly so that we might be free to mull over others. Which is why these shortcuts, when they are wrong, can be so wrong and destructive. This in turn explains why we are called to be deliberate in our thinking.

Consider this nugget of conventional wisdom: Free markets are fueled by greed, whereas socialism (sometimes called social justice, progressivism, leftist thought) is fueled by compassion. It is bad enough that non-Christians think in these terms. Christians, however, too often find themselves caught up in this folly. We, after all, in submission to our Lord, rightly oppose greed. We, in submission to our Lord, rightly cultivate compassion. Given a sound heart on greed and compassion, and a misguided mental shortcut we will find ourselves turning into the ditch every time. Perhaps we should take a closer look at this nugget, to see if perhaps it might be fool’s gold.

First, is it true that free markets are fueled by greed? No, not true. I am more than happy to concede that one can find greedy people where one finds free markets. On the other hand, one will also find greedy people in controlled markets. Greed exists not because of this economic system or that, not because of great wealth, but because of sinful hearts. In short, the problem is in our hearts. Getting rid of liberty, or getting rid of wealth will not rid the world of greed. Only ridding the world of us will do that. A free market is not fueled by greed, but by service. That is, the only way to succeed in a free market is to serve your customers better than others serve them. You can only win insofar as you help your customers win, by meeting their needs and desires.

But what of compassion and socialism? Don’t they go together? Nope, not in the least. Here are three simple reasons. First, taxing one group of people to give the money to another group of people is bad for the people who receive the money. When Paul says, “If anyone will not work neither shall he eat” (II Thessalonians 3:10) he isn’t being mean, but gracious to those who would not work. When we subsidize not working we get more of it. And when we don’t work we become less what we are made to be as God’s image bearers. It is also harmful to the recipient because it is damaging to the economy, which hits those on the lowest rungs first.

Second, taking from one group to give to another fails the compassion test because it is not compassionate to those who are having their wealth taken. We tend to be okay with this, however, because of the shortcut we’re examining. We think it’s okay to not show compassion to the person with more than us because their having more than us is a sure sign that they are greedy. But we are all wealthy compared to someone. If we want to keep what is ours, being understanding of others would mean we would want them to keep what is theirs, no matter how much they have.

Finally, and most importantly, asking the state to take from one group to give to others isn’t compassionate because we are not the ones making the sacrifice. I am not demonstrating a giving heart if I steal my neighbor’s car, and give it to a struggling single parent. You can’t, in short, be compassionate on someone else’s dime. Christians are called to be compassionate, which means we give what is ours, not what is our neighbors’. We give in the name of Jesus, not in the name of Uncle Sam. Christians are those who sacrifice themselves, not who use the state to sacrifice others.

The next time you are tempted to take this mental shortcut, remember that the Bible is our map. It says we all struggle with greed. And it says we are called to give of our own wealth, not the wealth of others. This in turn, leads to prosperity, for those who have less than we do, for us, and for those who have more.

Posted in Biblical Doctrines, church, Devil's Arsenal, Economics in This Lesson, ethics, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Compassion on the Cheap

Columbo, Apologist, 10th Commandment, Bradbury’s Martians

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in 10 Commandments, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, Books, evangelism, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, on writing well, preaching, RC Sproul JR, wonder | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Columbo, Apologist, 10th Commandment, Bradbury’s Martians

New Theses, New Reformation

Thesis 41 We must not discipline our children in anger.

Paul encourages fathers to raise their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. He then warns us not to provoke our children to wrath. The serpent would have us believe that the first command is that we would encourage our children to be obedient, and the second is a warning that we not take it too far. If we’re too strict, psychologists tell us, we will only encourage rebellion. The psychologists ought to know a fair bit about rebellion, because here they are in rebellion against God’s Word. It is a failure to raise our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord that leads to rebellion, not being too strict.

That failure, more often than not, flows out of our own sinful motives in how and why we discipline our children. When our Father in heaven disciplines us, He does not do so to punish us, to even the scales of justice. That punishment happened nearly 2000 years ago. While retribution has its place, it is not a part of family discipline within the church. God’s goal with His children is what ours ought to be with ours, to see them grow in grace and wisdom. We punish for the purpose of sanctification.

When we punish in anger, however, we are merely pulling rank. We are merely asserting our greater power over the child. When we punish in anger we communicate to the child, “You have wronged my royal person, and you must be made to pay.” If we would raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, we would already know this about ourselves- we’re dead. We’ve died to self. As such, we cannot be wronged. If our child mistreats us our concern, if we are dead, isn’t that we have been mistreated, but that the child that we love has given opportunity for sin. Our concern is that our child hasn’t yet put to death his or her sin nature. When we are wronged, (and this is true of the whole body of Christ, not just true in our individual families) our concern should be more for the one doing the wrong, rather than ourselves.

We are called to discipline our children. We are told by God that the rod will drive folly far from a child (Proverbs 22:15). Our desire for them is that it would go well for them in the land. God tells us that this will come to pass as they learn to honor their fathers and their mothers. If, however, we use the rod in anger, we not only will not drive folly far from the child, but will drive it into the child. Our folly will provoke our children to wrath. And if we drive them to wrath, we can rest assured that it will not go well for them in the land. If we would bless our children, we must treat them as blessings, and teach them to seek the blessings of God by honoring those in authority over them.

Posted in 10 Commandments, Biblical Doctrines, kingdom, RC Sproul JR, Theses | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on New Theses, New Reformation

Lisa- A Purpose Driven Wife + Heroism & More

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in Biblical Doctrines, church, Heroes, ism, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, Lisa Sproul, Purpose Driven Wife, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lisa- A Purpose Driven Wife + Heroism & More

Ask RC- Did Jesus suffer the Father’s wrath for all sinners, or just for the elect?

Just for the elect. This truth is hard for some people for what seems like a good reason- It shows God treating people unequally. If Christ’s atoning work covers only some people, doesn’t this somehow make God unfair, treating one group of people one way, and another group of people another way? If people end up in different places, some in heaven and some in hell, then we can either attribute the difference to how God acts in our lives, or in how we act in ourselves. The latter choice has a great deal going for it. It absolves God of the charge of treating people differently. And no one in hell, of course, can complain about being there. They are there by their own doing.

The first choice, however, has three things going better for it. First, it means some people will actually go to heaven. Given the scope of our sinfulness, were God merely to make our salvation possible, (which is itself a limitation of the atonement) and then dependent upon our natural obedience to His call, none would come. Dead people do not respond to the call to repentance, unless they are first made alive.

The second advantage is that this is what the Bible teaches. Consider, for instance, Jesus’ High Priestly prayer. If it is incumbent upon God to treat all men the same, would it not be incumbent on Jesus to pray for all men the same way? What, then, are we to make of this- “I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours” (John 17:9). Here Jesus explicitly denies praying for those who are not His, while affirming that He prays for those who are His. Now if Jesus is unwilling to pray for those who were not chosen, on what grounds can we claim that He suffered the wrath of the Father for the sins of those for whom He would not pray? Remember that God explicitly affirms His liberty to treat some people differently than others- “For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion’” (Romans 9:15). What we try to free God from, the accusation that He treats some people one way and others another God proudly affirms.

There is a third serious problem with the notion that Jesus died for all sins of all people. Hell. If Jesus atoned for all sins, just for what are the sinners in hell suffering? Those who seek to “protect” God’s integrity by arguing He must treat us all the same end up, accidentally, affirming that God punishes the same sins twice, once on Calvary and again in hell. Some might object in turn that the sinners in hell are being punished for their unbelief. But that too is a sin, and thus would have already been punished. If all sins have been atoned for, they can’t be punished.

God owes man nothing save damnation. What He chooses to give, outside of damnation, is all of grace. Which means in turn that He treats His elect one way, and the reprobate another. All to the everlasting praise of His glory. The value of the atonement, of course, is infinite. The purpose of the atonement, however, is specific.

Posted in apologetics, assurance, Biblical Doctrines, church, Doctrines of Grace, evangelism, grace, prayer, RC Sproul JR, Reformation, theology | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Pelosi & Arrogant Elites; BiFM, Judges

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything

Posted in Bible Study, church, covid-19, ethics, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, RC Sproul JR, scandal | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Pelosi & Arrogant Elites; BiFM, Judges