Monday 14 March 2011

Is there a problem with how we argue the sanctity of life?

"... [In their attempt] to thwart the abortion movement many well-meaning Christians unintentionally exalt man by declaring him to be of infinite worth. Abortion should not be fought on the basis that killing a human being is wrong because he or she is so valuable, but on the basis that, when a child bearing God's image is slaughtered, it is God who is attacked because that child bears His image. If you tear up a picture of my wife, you'll have me to answer to -- not because of the intrinsic worth or value of the paper and print that you destroyed, but because you have insulted my wife. An attack on the image of God is serious, not because of man's supposed great worth, but because of the One whose image he reflects" (Dr. Jay E. Adams, A Call to Discernment, pp. 18-19).

Dr Adams’ argument seems to be directed as an “offence to God” and I must admit I just never thought of it that way, but isn’t that the reason like murder that it’s so abhorent?

  • Does this, should this, affect how we determine to minister to women (and men!) who are faced with an unplanned pregnancy?
  • If we don’t discuss the impact of potential actions from a biblical perspective, won’t someone who later comes to faith say ‘when I had an abortion no-one told me I was offending the Father?
  • Are we perhaps guilty of only attempting to provide sympathy and understanding with no attempt to be biblical and direct?

I’m not sure I have any answers here… I’d be interested in peoples comments…

No comments: