The Baptist Faith and Message contains, in Article XV: The Christian and the Social Order, the following admonition:
We should speak on behalf of the unborn and contend for the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death.
I have seen Southern Baptists use this statement as an argument against capital punishment (see here and here), and I have seen Southern Baptists characterize the argument that life begins at conception as “moralistic and quaint” (here).
But I have never read a more poignant, hope-giving treatment of this subject than this letter from a husband to his grieving wife after the death of their unborn child.
Wes,
Thanks for another important post. An employee of mine has just been presented with a new son, a true gift of life from our Lord. So this post is very refreshing and the letters attached are very touching a point to a very important matter of life…..that is the image, or translated into the Latin “imago Dei”.
The saints that make up the church of our living Lord need to be acquainted with this truth of “being made in God’s image”. David Fouts, an OT scholar, and I were on a plane to San Diego this past week getting ready for the ETS conference in San Diego. This subject of “image” came up during our four hour flight…….and needless to say, it was a blessing to spend several hours considering how that God made us as representatives, yet did not leave us to represent ourselves very long. He provided the greatest redeeming representative in Christ Jesus!
Thank God that the SBC has seen fit to publish a reminder to the churches of the significance of “imago Dei”, and I hope that the leadership in the churches bring this to the surface of their teaching as they edify their respective congregations.
Thanks Again,
Blessings,
Chris
The Spam may hit the fan for those in the pew when they find a certain women’s study professor @ SWBTS drawing parallels between contraceptives and abortion:
http://www.dorothypatterson.info/Contraception.cfm
Jack,
The second sentence in the essay to which you have linked reads, “Complex issues go beyond superficial questions, making the task of accepting or rejecting parenthood a challenge.”
Rather that simply dismissing Mrs. Patterson’s view by saying others will not like it, why don’t you offer your thoughts on this complex issue?
wes,
some people just want to fight and stir up trouble. it’s amazing to me when people can just nitpick something to death in order to try to hurt someone else.
wes, God bless you, and thanks for a good post.
david
Jack,
And well it should……
It is about time that someone is concerned enough to tell young women the truth. I am certain young women and older women alike will not like the message, but that should not stop the older women from teaching the younger. There is a biblical mandate for older women and Mrs. Patterson is simply making a good point…. “However, a new political agenda calls for revising this definition to mean anything that prevents implantation of the blastocyst, which occurs six or seven days after fertilization. Conception then becomes “the onset of pregnancy marked by implantation of the blastocyst,” blurring the distinction between what would prevent fertilization and what would prevent an already fashioned week-old embryo.
My daughter and I were discussing this very issue last night, ….as she is home from the University of Tennessee where she is studying to be a nurse. Believe me, the University of Tennessee will never speak to the truth of conception in the same manner as Patterson. My daughter is writing a bioethics paper today on this very issue…..and thankfully her point of view is parallel with Patterson.
I don’t always agree with the Patterson’s, but this one is a no-brainer….
Blessings,
Chris
SBCToday,
Thanks, guys, for this post. At Thanksgiving, the peace in my life and my family comes from faith in an Almighty God who is the Maker of Heaven and Earth and knit us together in our mothers’ wombs. I thank God for my wife and my two boys. Our Father’s sovereign, providential hand at work cannot always be explained, but we have no greater hope than this…God is good all the time.
Sola Gratia.
“contend for the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death.”
My experience has convinced me that we “play God” when we frustrate natural death with our machines and we surrender to God’s will when we turn them off.
If we had perfect foresight we would be better but we don’t. So we just do the best we (with God’s help) can.
Bennett Willis
Brother Bennett,
Would you agree that as we “contend for the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death.” it means that we insert a feeding tube? Or do you feel that this may be a measure that we use to “frustrate natural death with our machines”?
I know it depends on the situation. However, it appears that you may have issued a blanket statement. Just wondering.
Blessings,
Tim
My father starved without a feeding tube. When the lymphoma made things taste really bad he stopped eating. It was his decision and I stand with him on it. My wife died with one. I hoped that since she had mild mechanical damage that the nerves might regenerate, but it did not happen. That may have been more my decision than hers and I stand with it too.
I’ve spend a reasonable amount of time reviewing both cases. My conclusion is that I have no advice to give to anyone even though I have a fair amount of experience. And it causes me some concern that any of us feel that we are entitled to second guess someone’s decision.
If I had a blanket, I might wrap up in it. We do the best we can. I won’t question anyone’s decison about feeding tubes–in or out. You pray, look at the information that you have, pray, make a decision and move on.
Bennett Willis
Brother Bennett,
My father died with a feeding tube in him. He did not want it and you could tell after he came around from the procedure to place the tube in him. He died the next morning.
You definitely have more experience that I when it comes to these kinds of decisions with family. I believe my beginning point is that I do all to promote life, as I believe that to be yours also.
As we both agree blanket statements concerning these issues is not something that one can develop.
Blessings,
Tim
http://www.abpnews.com/2876.article
This is a link to another story on the issue–seems interesting but probably not much really new.
They do make the point that we need to be gentle with our “preaching” on this point. There are more of us who have been there and made hard decisions than we think.
Interestingly, I’ve found that when you have a problem and talk about it, you find many who have had similar problems. If you don’t talk about it, you never find them. I have an acoustic neuroma that we treated with x-rays–my research on the net and my decision on the course of treatment (of course with the concurrence of the radiologist who did the treatment). This is supposed to be something like 1 case in 100,000 people, but I have found 4 other people (all of whom I knew casually before I found they had a neuroma) who had one too.
Bennett
“Ferguson doesn’t use his book to posit one viewpoint as the right answer concerning the right to die. But he reached one conclusion while writing the book: It’s important to put into writing one’s wishes concerning a continuation of life when there is little hope for recovery — and do it long before the crisis occurs.”
This is from the article that is linked in my previous comment. I have found that you can write it all down, but somehow the situation that presents itself will seldom clearly be one that you have talked about. It can get really complicated no matter how you try to plan ahead.
Bennett
Brother Bennett,
Tell me, when do you see the soul being united and separated from the body? I know that no one can know, know when this takes place, but I certainly believe that at conception God places everything together. Does He remove the soul and allow the body to continue to exist?
Blessings,
Tim
Wes Kenney asked:
“Rather that simply dismissing Mrs. Patterson’s view by saying others will not like it, why don’t you offer your thoughts on this complex issue?”
–
I believe that many SBC members will support their leaders in publicly opposing abortion and advocating adoption. I also believe that opposing modern methods of contraception would not be embraced by a majority of SBC members.
We’ll never know because I suspect a majority of SBC pastors are wise enough not to preach Mrs. Doctor Patterson’s arguments against use of oral contraceptives from their pulpits.
Blessings to you and yours during this season of Thanksgiving,
-jack-
PS: the anti-spam word for this post is “kindness.”
<p><p>Brother Jack,</p><br />
<p>Your comments were in our spam file. I released the latest comment and deleted the earliest as they were the same comments. How is that for being kind? </p><br />
<p>Blessings,<br /><br />
Tim</p></p>
Jack,
What preacher would stoop and compromise to preaching about contraceptives, when you have the Gospel?
I would expect that the women that have been informed by the Gospel, will take the time to instruct their daughters and the younger women of the church on the sanctity of human life and the importance of God’s command to be fruitful and multiply. This should be an ongoing conversation in the midst of the church.
Unfortunately, we live in a society that is enamored with pragmatic capitalism and the convenience of methods for birth control practices that lean against the Word of God. When did having children become a problem? Children have been a problem for China, and other countries, and now it appears that America is following suit. The attitude to child birth is probably just another good indication of the attitude of the heart.
So I would suggest,….don’t waste your time preaching about contraception practices (don’t ignore it though),….but spend your time preaching the power of the Gospel and then the attitude of the heart will change.
Blessings,
Chris
Thanks for this post folks…specifically in highlighting the irresponsible handling of the doctrine of ensoulment by some SBC pastors. When we begin believing that what we conceive is not ‘fully’ human, we have totally rejected a biblical view of human life.
Tim said, “Tell me, when do you see the soul being united and separated from the body? I know that no one can know, know when this takes place…”
Tim (or anyone), I offer this with no justifying scriptures and you may feel free to proof text me to humiliation. I undertake this in more of an effort to understand what I think than to convince anyone. I argue for transparency and openness when possible, and in that spirit I put my thoughts out for review. And I’ll check back to find out how obviously wrong I am. I promise not to take it personally–unless of course it is meant that way.
I have no way either of knowing when the soul comes to reside with the child to be. I do feel that the present attitude that it happens when the egg and sperm unite is a position taken because it is a safe one. You can’t get out flanked when you say that and that is very important these days. I doubt that it is clearly scripturally justified because the folks who wrote the scriptures did not have any idea what was going on at that point. My personal expectation is that it does not occur before the successful implantation into the womb and perhaps not until “quickening.” What would be the “motivation” to do it sooner than that? Are all the frozen cells that might possibly become a child some day blessed with a soul that will be released when they are washed down the sink?
To express my feeling on when the soul leaves the body is similarly difficult. What is our earthly purpose? The only purpose (in the eternal sense) that I see for this life is to prepare us (our soul) for the next life. Thus, once that preparation is done, there is no reason for the soul to “hang around.” From my point of view, as long as thought exists, preparation continues and when thought no longer exists and never will exist again (and the all knowing God knows when this is) the soul leaves. I don’t feel that suffering through dying without relief from pain (to keep the thoughts clear) is preparation for anything—not heaven anyway.
Clearly we can find situations that we have medically managed to produce that challenge any rational, ethical or religious concept of the start and end of life. Some of these situations are “I know it when I see it” situations and others are just not clear. But this paragraph is off the track and put in for defensive purposes.
Bennett Willis
Bro. Hank clearly won’t agree with me. His comment came in while I was working on mine so he should not regard my comment as a challenge to his. Bro. Hank, I expect well supported scriptural evidence on ensoulment if you go after me–not the “soft” proofs from the letter linked in the post. As I read it, God knew Jeremiah from the beginning of time, not from the moment the egg and sperm united. And don’t forget Leviticus when discussing penalties.
Happy Thanksgiving to all. I don’t plan to comment in this thread again. One good push should be adequate for some interesting discussion.
Bennett
Chris Johnson asked:
“Jack,
What preacher would stoop and compromise to preaching about contraceptives, when you have the Gospel?”
Some SBC Seminary and Agency heads come to mind.
And they stand behind bully pulpits paid for by SBC contributions when they do it.
I answered Burleson this way:
Bizarre, truly bizarre-
No one knows when God creates the soul, granted.
But know one knows when the soul is united with the body, but it must be after the body is formed? Why? Why not simultaneous? And it it not true that God creator now, and not a semi-Deistical God, who is watching from afar the physical universe transpire according to natural law alone, or is it true that God is present, omnicient and upholding all things by the power of his might? Then isn’t it true that God is the creator, and there is no other. That as he controls the rain, the stars, all material in the universe, just as he made the mud and then from the mud made man, that he is now creating by that means he has always done, the sperm and the egg that will transduce and become what he is making. And, then your entire premise is your emotional commitment running over the Genesis description of the creation of man. It is God, not the man, and not the woman who creates the individual, they are merely vessels. Just as it was in the beginning. To say that the body must precede the soul’s uniting with it is simply a matter of your predjudice. You know very well that it could, and does happen simultaneously. Genesis’ account does not necessitate that the soul was breathed in. Only that the man began to breath. You have no idea wheather or not the man was created with soul intact. It is just a phony assertion. It is that old arguement that a child is not human until it breathes. So, which is it, was the ruach in God’s breath, or was life?
Jack,
It appears you are none to happy with some Seminary folks. I believe that everyone in the church today needs to realize that the Seminary folks are trying the best they can for the most part. Some have agenda’s that are not as sincere as others, but for the most part, I believe that the motives are not heretical. It will be an interesting day when we all agree with everyone in the seminaries.
I think you bring up or at least point us to an important fact. We should never lose sight that the seminaries are only there to support the church and they exist because of the church. Seminaries will never replace the church,…some would say thankfully!….but, it is up to the individuals that make up the church to determine the value of the work done by those that study the scripture day in and day out in the seminaries. We should never be so naïve as to take everything that is said without knowing the facts concerning any of the subjects being taught or researched in the seminaries..
The sanctity of life and how our young people are brought up to understand our Lord’s command to be fruitful and multiply…is being challenged in our culture without a whole lot of help from the church. Patterson’s remarks are so blatantly obvious for many believers, …it would be difficult to disagree, even if you don’t like the messenger.
Frankly, I think that our culture has already started to answer the question. It would appear that most, but not all mothers in our churches place a higher value on a college education than preparing their daughters to understand the importance of marriage, loving their husbands and raising a family. These issues of contraception emanate from deeper issues at the core of a biblical family value.
Blessings,
Chris
Chris:
I rejoice in the valuable role our seminaries play in educating and training ministers. I despair at their involvement in issues that threaten to divide us.
I fear that the SBC is losing its way from being united around spreading the gospel to dividing over an ever widening war against the popular culture. It is diverting time and resources from our what should be our chief task: fulfilling The Great Commission.
My prayer is that we can all find a way to set aside our differences in order to work together in this vital task.
Blessings,
-jack-
Jack,
Thanks for the response,
I am in agreement with you that the seminaries have in recent past been “losing its way from being united around spreading the gospel”. From my own perspective….I never take what the seminaries dish out at face value. As you have intimated, if the issues deviate from the gospel, then the ideas should get the boot. Sometimes we get up tight with the seminarians because we believe they should have good answers at all times….but the fact is, they are human and sinners…..and will make many, many mistakes.
I’m afraid a lot of the leadership, but not all leadership in the seminaries became lazy and have done the SBC great damage for the balance of 40-50 years. That does not mean that all is lost. There are many, many great pastors….that made it through a mediocre theological education and have spent years carving off traditional views and habits that were instilled from poor seminary leadership and scholars. You have to study hard to show yourself approved unto God, not man…..and no matter how poor a seminary tutoring one receives,… the Holy Spirit is plenty capable of teaching and steering His students back inside the fences.
But I like the wisdom of Paul, speaking of our union with our Savior…..
So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
(Philippians 2:1-7)
Let’s continue to keep these guys and girls honest in their seminarian endeavors and earnestly pray for them (not to leave…, but to gain wisdom and understanding…some may even come to know Christ as well). What a privilege to have the opportunity to attend a seminary and study God’s Word… and to know that the SBC has made it a priority and has increased its vigilance once again for the gospel in these last ten years with renewed leadership and scholars learning once again how to be servants.
Now that truly is a blessing,
Chris