From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion
Subject: Re: Abortion and the taking of life.
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 00:26:39 GMT


I wrote:
>>There are four main ways that the taking of life may be legally
>> sanctioned in modern society - war, capital punishment, abortion and
>> euthenasia.

Ron:
>In a number of cases you must add - self-defence.

Yes, obviously, although self defence is a mitigating circumstance
under law. No-one (except the gun lobby) is actually arguing that it
should be encouraged, are they?

>> in principle I am opposed to every one of these, because I
>> consider that the taking of human life by another person, even when
>> sanctioned by the state, is inherently wrong.

>Unfortunately you do not apply the biblical standard or you would not
>come to this conclusion.

Are you one of those people who takes a pair of scissors and chops
John 8:1-11 out of their bibles, Ron? That is the only time Jesus
discussed the death penalty. His opponenet brought him a person who,
according to the law of Moses, should have bveen stoned to death. We
both know what happened. I think that the Christians of today could do
no better than react in the same way Jesus did.

>> I am not anti- abortion or anti- euthenasia, so much as pro-life.

>This could be a dangerous statement.  Just how much abortion, for
>instance, are you tolerating?

As little as possible. As I said, I think that in the cases of rape,
incest, and when the mother's life is endangered, abortions should be
available. When it is just a matter of convenience, or to give a
person a way out from the responsibility for their own actions, then I
am against it.

>> I think that it is hypocritical to be anti- abortion or anti euthenasia
>>
>> and at the same time pro- capital punishment, or the other way around.

>I must strongly disagree.  Again it is a misunderstanding of the biblical
>standard.  It was God who authorised capital punishment and the bible
>nowhere withdraws that command and not one ref. in the N.T. would cancel
>it out.  The bible nowhere sanctions or allows abortion ot euthanasia.

See above. What is your understanding of John 8:1-11?


>> The basic question is - Is it a good thing
>> to end a human life for the convenience of other human beings?

>That is not the basic question and misrepresents the biblical principle.
>Capital punishment was the standard that God put upon human life.  Murder
>was not equated with 7 years in prison or exile.  It was the equalling of
>one human life with another that showed the standard that God applied.
>And He has not repealed that anywhere in the bible.

Capital punishment is mandated in the Bible for many more crimes than
murder. Do you support them all? I am trying to find out if your
agenda here is political or religious. People with a political agenda
often selectively quote from the Bible to support the death penalty
for murder. People with a genuine biblical agenda also call for the
death penalty for hitting or cursing your parents, kidnapping,
(Exodus 21:12-17), bestiality (Exodus 22:9, Leviticus 20:16),
profaning the sabbath (Exodus 31:14-15, 35:2), adultery and Incest
(Leviticus 20:10-12), homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), and so on. None
of these laws have been repealed anywhere in the Bible, Ron, so are we
going to see you arguing that the death penalty should be applied in
all these cases? Or are you one of those people who just selectively
quotes from the bible to pursue a conservative social agenda?

I think that all of those laws have been repealed in Jesus' teaching
about love, his life of compassion, and specifically his example in
John 8:1-11. I also think that Christians in the late 20th century can
and should be clever enough to apply the underlying principles of
Jesus' life and teaching, and to recognise that they are totally
incompatible with the death penalty, and should lead us to be very
reluctant to use abortion, euthanasia and war.

>> I hold this view as a direct consequence of my Christian faith, but I
>> do not consider it to be an exclusively Christian view. Indeed, there
>> are many Christians who understand the issues differently, and no
>> doubt some will present their views here. Atheists and people of other
>> religions also often affirm the value of human life, and express this
>> by their opposition to one or more of abortion, euthenasia, the death
>> penalty or war.

>If atheists hold to certain beliefs, be very careful about following
>them.

What nonsense. 
Do you live in a society which shares values which atheists also hold?

>> I believe that from the ten commandments given to ancient Israel (Do
>> not Kill) to the life- affirming ministry of Jesus, it is clear that
>> the God of Jews and Christians is a God who does not want us to kill
>> each other.

>Unfortunately, you have fallen into the problem of a misunderstanding of
>the translation.  The word should be "murder" and the translation ought
>to reflect that.  It can't possible be "kill" without qualifications

The hebrew word is *ratsach*, meaning to slay, kill, put to death. It
has a broader meaning than simply murder. 
The more common Hebrew word for murder (unlawful killing) is *harag*.

>because the very Law of Moses you quote sanctions the death penalty for a
>whole list of matters.  Just for that reason "kill" can't be correct.  It
>supercedes that - it is murder.

I will wait to see whether you support the application of the whole
law of Moses in this matter, or just for murder, before responding.

>> My attitude to abortion, euthenasia, capital punishment and war is
>> best summed up in the following statement:
>> *Killing is not OK, but it is sometimes regrettably neccesary.*
>> or the religious version:
>> *God is pro- life, and so am I.*

>I cannot marry the last statement with the first.

>If God has said - as you claim - man shall not kill, then how can killing
>therefore be "regrettably necessary"?

Because, in the real world, we often have to make choices involving
the lesser of two evils. There are cases where abortion is the only
compassionate course of action. There are cases where turning off a
life- support system is similarly comapassionate. There are cases
where military action may be justified. None of these decisions are
easy, but I strongly believe that the Christ-like attitude to all of
them is to consider the taking of life to be a last resort.

cheers


N+

Nigel B. Mitchell