God is Pro-Choice

In this overheated political landscape, where Christians often blur the lines between their moral convictions and scriptural mandates, we have heard all too often that abortion is banned in the Bible and considered blatant murder. However, I intend to show here that if God was not Pro-Choice, we would all be going to Hell.

To date the great dispute between Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choicers has been over precisely what time the zygote/fetus/sperm-egg becomes a Human-Being with a spirit, soul, and inherent right to stay alive. However all this issue does is distract from the real crux of the debate: Does a parent have the authority (right) to end their child's life?

What is fascinating about the Evangelicals is how quickly they aligned with the political right on this issue. It was assumed from the beginning that ending any living thing's livingness was by definition murder, especially if that living thing is a human being. However the Biblical view of murder is, and has always been, quite different from the modern view of murder.

In the Old Testament we see God commanding the Israelite army to kill unarmed citizens of conquered cities, something that by today's standards would be murder, but that Christians vehemently argue was not -because it was one nation versus another nation in war, which requires different rules. We even see God commanding the Israelites to kill women and children, and to commit systematic genocide, which again would be murder by our international laws, but the Christians defend it as an act of war, and casualties in war are not murders.

In the Old Testament we see citizens being commanded to pick up rocks and execute criminals in the streets without trial or verdict, something that by every civilized nation's standards would be murder, but Christian's are quick to point out that this was a primitive Justice system -the society was dealing punishment to social offenders, something that is Just in any culture of law and order. We see God himself striking down countless people, even innocent ones, which looks from every angle like murder, but Christians again defend this as Just -since God is Master of all things it is His prerogative to give life, or take it away.

C.S. Lewis once explained this phenomenon of death in the Bible and the appearance of foul play like this, "All killing is not murder any more than all sex is adultery." Murder is a Sin, a criminal act in direct disobedience to God's law. It happens when one human kills, without proper justification, another human in cold blood.

When Cain killed Abel, it was murder. When David killed Uriah, it was murder. They were individuals acting without prior justification against another. However when the Israelites killed their enemies, even their women and children, it was merely an act of war (justified killing according to the conditions of one nation at war with another). When Hebrews picked up stones and executed a rapist in the streets, it was merely a justice system being dealt out not by a mob, but by conscientious citizens acting as agents of the society (the equivalent of citizen's arrest today).

Nobody questions that these killings were not murders, a fact only bolstered by God having commanded people to do them. Since God is perfectly Holy, it is impossible for him to sin, or to command others to sin, so its impossible for these actions to be murder if God commanded them. They may have become illegal by man's standards of law and order, but by God's standards of sin and righteousness, they are not considered murder, or else he would have never allowed them in the first place.

By God commanding these occasions of killing, it is implied that the person doing the killing has some sort of authority to do so, otherwise it would clearly be murder. For instance, a nation at war has authority to destroy the people it is at war with; a society has authority to deal justice against criminal offenders. These groups already had the authority to kill the people they killed, God's command for them to do so wasn't an act of giving them permission, it was an act of direction. We know this because God only directs these killings using people who already had the authority to kill their target: a sovereign nation, a justice system.

This all leads us to the third and final time that God has commanded somebody to exercise their preexisting authority to kill somebody else: Abraham and Issac.

Just as in the other examples, God commands Abraham to kill (not murder) his son. What's fascinating is that this (by the contemporary Evangelical's assumption) is so blatantly murder that of course Abraham would have cried out against God and questioned the directive -but Abraham was silent. The same Abraham who argued with God to defend the homosexual deviants of Sodom and Gomorrah didn't even utter one word to defend the life of his own son! Amazing!

How is it that Abraham, the progenitor of the chosen people, could have so much trust in God that he was willing to commit murder in order to obey Him? How did it not register in Abraham's mind that God cannot possibly be "Holy" and also command him to murder in His name? Despite these obvious contradictions, Abraham unflinchingly drags his son to the altar and raises his knife....

The answer to these questions is obvious: Abraham didn't oppose God because it wasn't murder to begin with! Israel had authority to vanquish her enemies, so God directed that authority toward certain nations. A society had authority to capitally punish offenders, so God directed that punishment toward certain crimes. A Father had the authority to end his own child's life, and God was acknowledging that authority in His directive to Abraham.

If this were not the case, then this story of Abraham and Issac is the only account in all of recorded history where God has blatantly commanded somebody to sin - a situation that would raise countless questions about the validity of God's claim to holiness, and the nature of sin itself. Suddenly it isn't a sin to cheat on your wife if you think God told you to, or rob a bank if you felt lead. But we know better than that. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He can allow a person to be tempted, even play a role in causing the temptation, but God by the nature of being Holy, cannot command somebody to break His own commands. Its a paradox we will never have to face, and must readily surrender in this Abraham/Issac instance -God didn't command Abraham to do something that would have ordinarily been sinful.

Abraham had the authority to end his own child's life, that is why it was such a great test for him. What role would faith play if God had asked Abraham to murder Lot? Or an Egyptian King? The sacrifice came in Abraham's inherent ability to surrender his son's life by his own hand, to throw away his most cherished possession. Parent's have authority over their children's lives, even to the point of death. Its a point clearly illustrated in scripture, and nowhere disputed.

If this were not so, then our salvation is false as well.

Abraham's test of faith is the archetypal story for the crucifixion of Jesus, the center for the Christian theory of salvation. Just as Abraham had the choice to kill his own son as a sacrifice for God, so God had the choice to kill His son as a sacrifice for man.

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son." The story of Christ is not that Jesus willingly surrendered His life on the cross. Its that God willingly gave His own son up to death. The fact that Jesus, like Issac, willingly walked up the hill to the altar is the side plot, the climax however is a Father's choice. You cannot give what isn't yours to begin with. On a certain level, we all know that our children are our own.

There is another dimension to this that few have taken seriously: what could possibly kill God? Nails? Lashings? A spear? Could mere suffocation stamp out the life of the Son of God? The man healed lepers and rose the dead from the grave. He survived for 40 days without food or water. He walked on water and calmed storms, the material world bowed before his ever whim. There is no knife sharp enough, no cross painful enough, to kill the Holy of Holies.

Only one thing could have killed Jesus, only one thing could be strong enough to choke the life out of the Son of God...the hands of the Father. It was the Father who killed his son, and so sacrificed him for the souls of men. Just as Abraham lowered the knife upon Issac, so God rained death upon His beloved Son, only no angel dare stay His hand. "For God so loved the world..."

Yes Jesus died willingly, yes Jesus surrendered his spirit, but consider in what context. Was it not only hours earlier in a garden that he wept and sweat blood over what his Father was commanding him to do? Did he not beg for another way? There can be no question that Jesus wanted anything but the cross, it is part of his incredible story that he obeyed his Father despite this. But regardless, it was his Father who made the choice to give up Jesus' life.

While Jesus and Issac were the sacrifices, they were not the one's doing the sacrificing. Jesus and Issac look up at the familiar hands descending upon them, the hands that had taught them to walk, to eat, to create, now striking down toward them with a force to end their lives..."Father..." they whimper as they watch the horror, "why have you forsaken me?"

Something cannot be forsaken if it was not at one point owned. I am able to forsake my wealth, because its mine to use or to throw away. In fact that is the very definition of forsake, to cast away. How can you throw away what you were not already holding? God was able to forsake His son, able to choose death for His son, because it was within His authority as a Father to do so. The same authority that was implied by God commanding Abraham to kill Issac, that was the great sacrifice, to throw away something that belongs to you.

God is Pro-Choice, and I know this because God already made that choice. If a parent has no right to end their child's life, no authority over them at all, then the story of Christianity is a hoax, and our Jesus is not a savior or a martyr, but the victim of a cruel and twisted crime.

If a Father does not have authority over the life of his own son, then Abraham had no right to kill Issac, and the greatest threat to God's divinity lies in His own command to Abraham, a command to commit murder, a command to commit sin. Even if God was determined to stay Abraham's hand, Holiness does not self-defeat, it does not command its own betrayal. If Abraham did not already have the authority to surrender his own child's life, then God's command that he do so disproves God's very goodness. This would be the mother of all blunders.

The truth is that Abraham did have authority over his son's life, just as Israel had the right to punish criminals or lay waste to enemies -God has given them these authorities for their use.
The truth is our very salvation is based on the fact that God had the authority as a Father to put his own son to death as a payment for our sin.

The authority of a parent to end their child's life is complicated and does not likely come without restrictions. One quickly notes that Abraham had a reason to kill his son, just as the state only kills guilty criminals, and not on a whim. And a nation only kills their enemies, and not just any group of people who are inconvenient. Its likely that certain contexts must be present for a parent to exercise their authority, but what cannot be disputed is that they have that authority.

Christians can still oppose abortion. They can still decide that life is a value presented in the bible, and that they would like to see that value bear fruit in America's laws. Christian's can have any number of reasons to ask the state to limit or outlaw abortion, and if this is their conviction, let them pursue these ends to the glory of God. However, let them also understand that they are asking the secular power of Government to impose upon themselves an authority that scripture clearly says they as parents have. Its like asking the Government to outlaw spanking, when the Bible tells us we can choose the rod to discipline our child. Or asking the Government to outlaw alcohol, when the Bible is clear that a person is completely within their boundaries to have a responsible drink. If you feel more comfortable having the restrictions, by all means fight for them, but you should do so with full knowledge that you seek to limit the authority given to parents by God Himself.

Is abortion a Holy thing? Of course not. I myself am politically Pro-Life, I believe that Abortion is a medieval thing and that our country is above killing 40 million unborn citizens, for whatever reason. However I refuse to Lord scripture over Pro-Choicers and support the harassment of Abortion clinics and those who are considering it. Especially when that harassment finds it's justification in the over-simplified and over-used "Thou shalt not murder". I believe that we must submit ourselves to what the Bible says, and not use the Bible to support our own views. I fear that the Pro-Life Evangelicals have done exactly that.

At the very least the reader of this article should understand that Abortion is a clouded issue in scripture. Its something that is not spoken to directly, and something we pretend to have very clear commands on. However if this Biblical Pro-Choice perspective has accomplished anything, let it be to shed doubt on the certainties we take for granted, and the things we think we have pegged in the word. Even if you think you have found holes in the above argument, you must admit that there is at least some discussion that needs to take place over what the Bible says about this issue, and how arrogantly the Evangelical Pro-Lifers have touted their supportive scripture without giving ear to the whole bible, or even humbling themselves before the word to ask honestly what it says. They came to it with their conclusions, and got back what they already had- in this way scripture is more a mirror than a window.

Part of the point of this essay is to be a caricature of how the Bible is used with little to no real humility. One assumes that they can nail down truth, find the right things, and then present them as a newly formed spiritual law. Part of emergent Christianity is to overcome these temptations, and to have a little fear and trembling in the way we read scripture.

Clarification:
I thought to make this section a separate post, but realized it was most appropriate to drop it here where it will make the most sense. The above argument, and its confident explanation, is an attempt to balance a scale that has been tilted long in only one direction. My sincerest belief about abortion is that it is among the many issues that we do not find a clear opinion from scripture on, and it is impossible to make such forthright determinations on it, such as calling it a sin, or claiming that God is actually Pro-Choice.

My attempt was to demonstrate how easy it is to make one's argument by slanting scripture in their direction, and then accusing the other side of being disingenious. As I said at the end of the essay, it is a caricature. My hope is that people will realize that there are many issues where God has not given us a clear statement, and it is wrong for us to impose an opinion on the word, or claim to bring one about when no clear statement exists. I feel like that is bullying the writer's words, using them as an incharitable tool that only hurts, and never heals.

Update: I was reading through John, and stumbled upon an old verse that I knew, but had forgotten.

John 10:17-18

"The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

Another good one, John 14:31

"but the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father has commanded me."