In the same vein as Maphet’s “Relationally-driven theology”, at least in my own muddled brain, I’ve been pondering the relationship between abortion and predestination. I have been questioning the connection of my theology to its real world application and defending it against opposition.
Recently abortion has been a rather hot topic in my 20-something small group Bible study as we are on a journey through the 10 Commandments. The controversy has not been about the morality of legal abortions as imposed by the Supreme Court, but about the unintended consequences of using birth control pills. Does using the pill cause unintended abortions as a last resort to keep the fertilized egg from implanting? I have heard arguments supporting both sides of this disagreement.
As one can imagine, an issue like this in a 20-something group of young married couples in different stages of matrimonial bliss may cause a bit of an uproar. Causing many an uneasiness with the idea that something they believe is wrong to the core would be perpetrated by them in a most unintended of ways. Family planning.
My intent here is not to make the argument for either conclusion, as I have not adequately reviewed the resources at my limited disposal. I simply wanted to lay some of the ground work for my ponderings, so we understand just how convoluted my thought process is!
The main gist of the question that is beckoning an answer from my heart here is this. If one has a reformed view of theology, in this case regarding original sin and predestination. Basically this means that all humans are affected by the fall of man and thus have the stain of sin upon their hearts which is where the natural bend of the heart is –none are born innocent; original sin, and God’s sovereignty over the world has called a people His very own before the very foundations of this world – all Christians that were ever going to be Christians were known before day 1 of creation; predestination. If those truths are to be held self-evident by such a person as me, then one would believe that a child being born or unborn would already have their final destination in eternity picked out for them.
If they are called out to be one of God’s chosen people and are aborted before they have an opportunity to live life in this fallen world, and we live to look eternally at our chance to be with our creator. What is the argument to the pro-choice advocate against sending this person to the joyousness of being in the very presence of their King?
Here is a living testimony as to why the choice of life is so vital by a young woman named Jessica Farrell. But still I ponder these things to better breakdown a pro-choice argument with an improved understanding of the real world application of my theology.
Posted by price at February 9, 2005 09:32 PMI know this is unrelated, I just wanted to thank you for the kind comment on my entry yesterday.
Posted by: liveinlove at February 11, 2005 12:46 PMI too thank you for your nice comment today.
As to this topic. I'm not sure we can phrase the rightness or wrongness of abortion in the terms of predestination, at least I'm not sure I'm smart enough to. I think it can only be phrased in terms of life and death, and that the Bible calls us not to murder. This is the problem with the abortion debate, those for abortion don't see it as killing a living person, thus the disconnect between the two sides (but you already knew this).
My wife used the pill for the first 3 years of our marriage. Last summer she began to do some research on the pill and found out that it can cause the body to reject a fertile embryo, or abort it. She's a biology teacher, and was very convinced with the evidence she found. I'll ask her for some links and try to get them to you. After her research we decided to stop using the pill and begin natural family planning. It worked great, until we decided to ignore it one weekend. Now we're expecting, and I wouldn't want it any other way. All that to say, there are natural alternatives out there to the pill that work. They do require more work and patience than the pill, there is always the chance of getting pregnant. But if your having sex that risk is always there.
Posted by: mo at February 11, 2005 05:19 PMThank you for the encouragement you left on my blog. I too hope that this "quest" will not drag me down. It's a lot to take in, but thanks for stopping by!
Posted by: Jess at February 11, 2005 10:55 PMSomehow. I doubt that there are many (if any at all) pro-choice advocates who hold to their views for the purpose of sending the unborn directly to heaven. No argument is necessary against a position that doesn't exist. Generally, whatever possible legitimacy there is to a pro-choice position is found in the belief that the fetus is not a person. Considerations of eternal destiny are, therefore, moot. [I suspect that this is the case in your own small group. Once the discussion has moved beyond whether the pill prevents implantation of a fertilized egg, the next question is whether fertilization without implantation is sufficient to be considered a human individual.] Perhaps, then, the question is -why not be a pro-choice advocate for this reason?
First, even if predestination is entered into the equation, we don't know which ones are elect. Abortion could just as easily be sending them in the opposite direction. There is not a consensus within reformed theology concerning the eternal destiny of those too young for a conscious profession of faith (which, obviously, would include the unborn). For some, it is a matter of strict election: God makes his own decisions and we won't know what they are until the final judgment. Others, especially in the continental reformed position (following the Canons of Dort I.17), believe that "godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy." Right now, let's leave aside which of these views is closer to the truth and, for the sake of this discussion, assume a popular non-reformed position: all babies go to heaven. Just say that abortion is 100% effective in sending people straight to heaven. Why not support it?
Because of God's sovereignty. Not considered, this time, in terms of his secret will whereby he foreordains whatever comes to pass; but in terms of his revealed will, whereby he has the right to expect obedience. It is God's intent that people live life in this world, even if it is fallen. This is evident on two accounts: 1) He keeps putting people in it, and 2) his law requires the preservation of life. We don't abort the unborn to allow them to escape this life for the same reason that we don't kill Christians to allow them to escape any more of this life. This world, fallen though it may be, is the arena in which God has chosen to be glorified. If to die is gain, then to live is still Christ.
Posted by: Keviin at February 12, 2005 05:13 AMChange the age in the person in question in "What is the argument to the pro-choice advocate against sending this person to the joyousness of being in the very presence of their King?" and I think you will have your answer.
While it is a personal choice on whether to use birth control or not, it ought to be kept in mind that naturally there are times the egg doesn't attach properly or at all- abortion is usually a term for when something ends the *established* life. (whether natural abortion of miscarriage or the intervention of medically induced abortion)
If it is against your conscience to use a certain family planning method-don't use it.
This issue is complicated by the conflict between that idea and the cultural idea of having no more than two children or so, and related cultural desires.
I suppose the hard truth is that something has got to give.
Posted by: ilona at February 12, 2005 07:00 PMIlona,
Thanks for pointing that out, I should have done it in my initial comment. I hope I didn't come across as sounding like we had the best approach to birth control, although reading back I feel like I did. The Pill is certianly a big grey area, and I hold nothing against a couple that makes a different decision then we did.
As I read through your comments, it's, first off, very evident to me that, we have very different takes on Christianity. So, because of that, my arguements are going to cover some different territory. First off, I won't touch the topic of "do babies go to heaven" since, from my study of the Bible, that it's was ever God's intention to have everyone go to heaven. If it was, why even create humans and the Earth? Angels seemed like plenty up there already.
I also disagree with the idea that our destinies are predetermined, since it completely throws out the idea of freewill. Example: if it was already decided that certain men of Isreal would live or die, why did God, through his prophets, beg the people to change their ways? Just because God CAN look into the future, does not mean he always does and that destiny is predetermined.
So, to the topic of "aborted babies being predestined to go to heaven", I have to disagree on all fronts.
Now, the topic of birth control,the pill, in particular, I don't believe this is in conflict with God's law. The idea behind birth control, from what I have read, is that the hormones convince the body to believe that it is pregnant already, so no egg is released, therefore making it almost impossible to get pregnant. Nothing is fool proof so, I suppose it is possible someone could get pregnant while on the pill. But, if this happened, and the baby was killed, I would not consider that an intentional abortion. This would be, to me, the equivalent of falling down the stairs, coming to get checked out be your doctor, and finding out you were pregnant and the baby died. The situation was not in your control and, had you know you were pregnant, you wouldn't have done what you did, been more careful, ect.
While God's law is serious, it is not irrational and does leave room for conscience matters. My suggestion would be to take prayerful consideration of the issue and make a decision based on your Bible trained conscience.
Sorry if my post is too long and I hope this helps.