WorldNetDaily: Abortionist accused of eating fetuses
How long Oh God? How long will you tarry?
Elitists believe that we are ever growing more wiser. We as a people can figure out how to become a more utopian society. Maybe we can abort unwanted babies? Yeah, that would be wise. We will have a loving-peacefull society of like minded beautiful people.
They didn’t count on this article…did they?
The “Aspiring” Dr. Adkins,
I could not help but notice your hasty comments directed toward the current abortion article recently posted on your site. Allow me to be brief. I feel as if you’re building a “straw man” argument here. For instance, your case has been founded upon unconstitutional presuppositions (See Roe v. Wade). Mr.Adkins, theology and medicine don’t mix.
Dr. Elite,
I fear that your view is relative, small, and grievesly not based in reality. Allow me to argue from an objective, large, realistic viewpoint.
First, you may well be correct that I’m building a straw man argument if I were to mix my views of politics and religion, or state and church. I am not doing such a thing. I am taking a moral-ethical view of the social climate of America when I discuss abortion and the elitist mentality.
Second, I would remind you of world history. It is Christianity that first brought human worth onto the stage of history. A reading of the any of the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John) will aid in this objective truth. If you find the Bible to be too marginal, then a quick scan of most any History of Civilization Text book will refresh your memory. Jesus speaks to the poor, the hurting, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, and the unborn (the generation to come).
Third, I’m using “elitist” generally. I don’t mean to offend anyone, rather to stir good dialogue. However, elitists typically think that they have the answers for society, actually when it is simple rationalization and justification for a personal agenda. What is that agenda? Peace, love, happiness, personal gain. Jesus spoke to these issues 2000 years ago and killing “unwanted” babies was not one of them. One of the major ethical-moral facades of the elists philosophy is that their view of societal evolution is to help everyone, when it is in fact a self-serving, self-interested paradigm.
Why don’t theology and medicine mix?
-Ron
P.S. “Do I know you?”
Dr. Elite,
For an educated man, I’m surprised that you have forgotten that medicine has its roots in the church and therefore, theology. But that is beside the point, are you suggesting that the US Constitution trumps or supercedes Scripture or even moral law?
P.S., Is Roe Frazer still practicing?
Just a quick note.
There is no “moral” law without God.
Therefore, it is impossible for “moral” law to supercede God, or Scripture, as morality comes from God.
-Matt Gaiser
Matt,
I would take it that you do not hold to a view of the separation between church and state. Your argument for moral law is sound, but what are you to do with the non-Christian? What law shall govern the land when Christians live with non-Christians? The one question left for me is where is the dogmatist’s place in a democratic society?
Sincerely,
Dr. Elite
I think we have reached the heart of the matter. The “Separation of Church and State” concept (which appears nowhere in the Constitution directly or implied) threatens to undermine any notion of morality altogether. Where did our forefathers derive their sense of morality that caused them to write the Declaration of Independence? It was their faith in an almighty and loving God that was the foundation for all their beliefs and values. The concept of Democracy flows from a view that God values every person and has bestowed them with a will and right to live freely and be treated with basic dignity and respect. If we remove God from the picture completely then we remove any objective morality. If morality is simply a majority vote then what are we left with? Try a million aborted fetuses every year in the U.S. Abortion is the inevitable result of “Separation of Church and State,” because when you remove God you remove any objective, absolute morality.
Avoiding a tyrannical state religion is one thing, but removing God from all aspects of our decision making processes is another entirely.
Good argument Dr.Elite ,keep up
the fight to keep these wizards on their intellectual toes!
3
Dr. Elite,
I absolutely have a view on the separation of Church and state. It is a decision made by a sinful court, established within a sinful government, elected by a sinful nation. Essentially, and simply put, “separation of Church and state” is a man made theory, and a liberal attempt to remove God, and morality from the ruling over the people. The Jews did this in 1 Samuel 8. I will paraphrase what happened. Keep in mind that I have changed the word, “King” for “government ruled by man.”
10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a government ruled by man. 11 The government said, “This is what the government ruled by man who will reign over you will do: The government will take your sons and make them serve with chariots and horses, and they will run in front of chariots. 12 Some the government will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow the ground and reap it’s harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for it’s chariots. 13 The government will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 The government will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to it’s attendants. 15 The government will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to it’s officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle [b] and donkeys the government will take for it’s own use. 17 The government will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become it’s slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the government ruled by man you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.”
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a government ruled by man over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a government ruled by man to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”
21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, the government repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, “Listen to them and give them a government ruled by man.”
The entire concept is anti Christian, and anti God. So my view is that it is wrong.
As far as what we are to do with non-Christians, that is the easiest of your questions to answer. We are to love them, extend grace to them, and to share and reflect Christ in our lives with them.
You see… There is only one truth, and God is that truth. If man rejects God, and thus rejects truth, that doesn’t change the truth…it only makes man wrong.
We live in a society that rejects God, truth, and morality. That doesn’t mean that we as Christians should reject those who follow the sinful path allowed them by the government, it means that we have our work cut out for us. We can reject actions, but we can not immediately reject all those who fall into that sin.
Thank God for grace!! Oh, that Amazing Grace!
-Matt Gaiser
Who is number 3, besides the late Dale Earnhart?
I’m really enjoy this blogsite, I want you guys to know that. And as much as I admire your passion for Christ and your love for God–when it comes to politics, well, I think you confuse the two.
When Christ established the “church” I doubt he ever intended it to become the political machine that it has become today. Paul didn’t advise the early church to interfere with Roman rule, instead he told them to live “quiet lives”.
I’m not suggesting that Christians should not become involved in politics–certainly we should vote, campaign and hold office, etc., etc., etc.,
And as Christians we should certainly be “light in the world” and “salt to the earth”. But for many evangelicals I believe we’ve worked to hard to merge church and state together again. We are not living in OT times, Matt, Israel’s govt. ceased to be a theocracy with the advent of Saul’s reign. And I don’t believe it would really be good for any of us to go back to an early colonial era where “witches” were hunted down and burned at the stake. But then again, wouldn’t we all like to burn Hilary there…
Like it or not the world has changed and we live in a secular society one in which not everyone wants the 10 Commandments poisted on the courthouse steps. I get so sick of listening to conservatives (I’m one of them) ranting and raving about “no prayer in public schools” and the removal of the 10 Commandments–when we don’t pray in our homes, we send our daughters to the prom to lose their virginity and we can’t even keep the seventh commandment by avoiding divoce at all cost.
One reason we aren’t being listened to by the far-left is because we have no credibility. We’ve become hypocrites–especially when it comes to loving our enemies as you’ll note by some of your comments on the treatment of “terrorist criminals”. To many of you they are your “enemy” deserving of no mercy–why? Because they place your life and your security at risk–the same comparison could be made of “liberals”. You like them about as much. No wonder they don’t listen to what we have to say. We don’t know how to love them. Seems to me Jesus would be at the table with them all–and if that didn’t work he’d meet them at the cross, a place few of us are willing to go for our enemies.
anonymous–q,
I am glad that you are enjoying the dialogue here. Please keep it up.
As far as the fact that times have changed, and we no longer live in OT times, you are correct.
The fact is, however, that theocracy or not, God does not change with times.
In regards to praying at home, in the home… AMEN!
You are right, God did not intend for government. He intended for us to allow Him to rule. (period).
In my last post, I was merely demonstrating that it is because man decided to have a man made government, that we are becoming so immoral.
The removal of God from schools is a scary thing when you have kids in those schools who are now being taught that homosexuality is normal, and evolution is a fact.
-Matt
-Matt
How is it that everyone could so quickly get off the subject here! A doctor ate (consumed) a human baby! I think this shows the depravity of our society. What is political about that! A doctor ripped a baby out of his/her mother, microwaved it and ate it. Maybe we don’t believe that it happened. According to dr. elite and others we ought to worry about our own problems in our own litte world. It is this kind of self-interest that has turned a blind eye to the paganism of our society rather than dealing with issues. I’m sure glad that John Wesley wasn’t afraid of dealing with social issues.
Well said, Ron! It’s funny how quickly we miss the point. I’ve never heard of anything like this in such and “enlightened” age.
Ron,
I was done posting, and I “will” make this my last in this discussion.
I agree that we went off topic, but how are we supposed to dialogue over a Dr. consuming a baby? I think we would all be in agreement, and all saying the same thing.
It wouldn’t be nearly as fun.
Okay… you are right… I will try to stay on topic from now on.
-Matt
Maybe someone should eat the doctor…. No?
Wow, Sean! Way to stay on topic and come at it from a different angle.