Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

A newspaper article previewed and reviewed a television documentary produced by British film maker Anthony Thomas. In the course of the column, the following extract appears.

The documentary’s most astonishing moment comes when a First Baptist theologian insists that saintly Mother Teresa – who’s given her life to helping the sick — is doomed to hell unless she’s born again.

Thomas is dumbstruck: “Yet you, because you’re born-again, can commit any sin you want between now and your death and still go to heaven?”

“I thank the Lord every day for that,” the theologian says (The Indianapolis Star, April 6, 1988, p. 13- 19, by Steve Hall).

The first paragraph correctly represents the truth. Indeed, “Ye must be born again.” But what of “the saintly Mother Teresa,” and others like her, who devote their lives to casing the ills of humanity? Unselfish, sacrificing spirits expend their time, talent and money to soothe the souls and suffering of the downcast and downtrodden. Are they lost? Will their good works count for nothing? Is it possible that such wonderful people could be “doomed to hell”?

Yes, and here is why. Even benevolent people sin. Decent and devout people sin. No amount of good deeds can erase a single sin, and “all have sinned” (Rom. 3:23). “Mother Teresa” has sinned, and if she is to be saved, her sins must be forgiven. If she lives a thousand years and feeds, clothes and houses a billion people, she, with all mankind, must stand before the judgment bar of God Almighty and give account (2 Cor. 5: 10). If her sins have not been washed away by the blood of Christ, she will be lost. As proof thereof, observe:

(1) Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say unto me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name have done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matt. 7:21-23).

(2) Cornelius was “a devout (note: “devout,” not depraved) man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway” (Acts 10:2). The “saintly centurion Cornelius,” like the esteemed “Mother Teresa … .. gave much alms to the people,” but, he, too, had sinned and needed to be saved (Acts 11:14). Though he was “a just man, and one that feareth God, and (was) of good report among all the nation” (Acts 10:22), still, he was “warned of God” to hear and heed the word of God in order that he might be saved.

Neither the acclaimed “Mother Teresa,” nor any other good and gracious individual, could be more highly praised than was Cornelius. But Cornelius, like all men, had sinned, and his sins required forgiveness.

(3) If virtuous deeds could save, the rich, young ruler would have been saved (Mk. 10:17-22). If generosity could save, Jesus did not need to die on the cross. All one would need to do is live a good, moral life, help his neighbor and be saved. There are atheists and idolaters who bless and benefit mankind. Do their good works save them? No, for they, too, have sinned. As sinners, they must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31).

Hence, the Baptists are correct. One must be born again if he is to be saved.

So What?

With the remarks above, few Baptists would disagree. So what is the problem? Where is the Baptist dilemma? Read again the second paragraph of the quotation, “Thomas is dumbstruck: ‘Yet you, because you’re born again, can commit any sin you want between now and your death and still go to heaven?'”

Here is where Baptist doctrine is not consistent. Here is where it clouds and obscures truth. Here is where it repulses film makers, newspaper columnists and the general “run-of-the-mill, man-on-the-street” sinner. The Baptist does declare (and quite correctly, as noted) “that saintly Mother Teresa is doomed to hell unless she’s born again. ” But because he is born again, he “can commit any sin . . . and still go to heaven.” It is not a pretty picture. It is the Baptist dilemma.

Calvinian Baptist doctrine says one who is born again can commit any sin “from idolatry to murder” and still be saved. As the Baptist theologian said, “I thank the Lord every day for that.” Columnist, Steve Hall, sees the contradiction that dooms “Mother Teresa” to hell but delivers a born-again sinner to heaven.

It mocks the justice and righteousness of God. It affords occasion for the enemies of truth to blaspheme, and Mr. Hall does not neglect the opportunity to display the inconsistent doctrine in all its stark ugliness. Such a view hinders and suppresses the truth in unrighteousness and turns the grace of God into lasciviousness. The watching world is quick to seize the putrid carcass and parade it through the streets as a representation of the true grace of God. “This,” they shout, “is the theology of born-again Christianity. Do good and burn in hell if you are not born again, but once born again do evil and still go to heaven.” It is a tragic perversion of truth, but it concisely and correctly manifests the Baptist dilemma. And what shall we say to these things? Shall we.

(1) Slander those who point out the dilemma? Shall we say it is just another case of a heathen unbeliever trying to revile the faith of Christ? Shall we ignore the issue and condemn the media as a biased bunch of God haters whose damnation is just?

(2) Stay above such controversies and decry and deplore muckraking opportunists? Shall we smile broadly, wink often, and hope that sinners are unaware of such issues, and seek to convert them with the warm personality and general “feel goodishness”?

(3) Tell the truth? Shall we admit the position and acknowledge the unfavorable posture? Shall we then explain the difference between the truth and Baptist theology? Shall we candidly denounce Baptist doctrine and kindly replace it with the doctrine of Christ?

The world of unbelief is too shrewd to be fooled with the “good ol’ boy” approach. They see the maize and the mess of denominational dogmas, and they identify Christians with it. We are in the same lump; we are cut from the same cloth in the eyes of the world. So, the Baptist dilemma affects us. We must, therefore, admit, explain and clarify it. We must show the mocking world that the Bible does not teach such theology, that such dilemmas are those of false religion, not of the true not of the truth.

Brethren, evil and error cannot be answered with your best grin. Do not be deceived. A warm, vibrant, loving, smiling personality, by itself, is not the answer. Jim Bakker can beat anyone at that game. He can out-smile a possum. So, think not that good humor alone will win souls. Do not think that an upbeat, positive, enthusiastic attitude, by itself, will solve and surmount any challenge. Besides, Zig Ziglar and Robert Schuller have us all beat on that scale. Ziglar and Schuller are paramount “possibility thinkers,” and they will win that match. The world of unbelief sees through the thin veneer and facade of a superficial positive mental attitude. Yes, we must be happy and excited; we must look for the pure, the powerful and the positive, but we must also confront the dirty and the dangerous directly and decisively, “casting down imaginations (reasonings of men) and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge (the truth) of God” (2 Cor. 10:5).

The Simple Solution

The simple solution to the Baptist dilemma as posed in the newspaper article is found in Ezekiel 3. Read again the quotation at the beginning of this essay. With it in mind, read Ezekiel 3:20, “Again, when a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.” Further, “But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and commiteth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die” (Ezek. 18:24).

In other words, if you are saved, but turn back to iniquity you will be lost (cf. 2 Pet. 2:20-22; Jude 5). That passage is consistent with the truth, justice and righteousness of God. It removes the stench and stigma of Baptist doctrine from the hands of unbelievers who would discredit the way of righteousness, and “I thank the Lord every day for that.”

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 16, pp. 485-486
August 18, 1988

By John R. Gibson

No one should ever begin to preach the gospel without an awareness of the responsibility involved. In his letters to Timothy, Paul seeks to impress upon his young friend the importance of guarding both his life and his doctrine from reproach (1 Tim. 4:11-16). Are those of us preaching the gospel today examples in word, in conduct, in love, etc.? Do we know what qualities characterize such a man? In seeking to take heed to myself and my doctrine, I have been helped by a consideration of Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians. Specifically, 1 Thessalonians 2:1-12 reveals characteristics of a good preacher (or Bible class teacher, personal worker, etc.) which all of us would do well to consider. Please take the time to read these verses before proceeding further.

Bold (2:2)

Opposition and adversity must not silence the preacher of God. Paul reminds the Thessalonians that before arriving in Thessalonica he had been beaten and imprisoned at Philippi (Acts 16). Did persecution produce in Paul a hesitancy to preach or a watered down gospel? By no means: “We were bold in our God to speak to you the gospel of God in much conflict.” Let us all preach and teach with the same boldness, for “God has not given us a spirit of fear” (2 Tim. 1:7).

Certain Of His Convictions (2:3)

Paul could be bold in the face of opposition because he was certain that his exhortation did not come from deceit or error. Here was a man certain of what he believed and why he believed it. There is great danger when a man begins to preach without being certain of the source of his convictions. Many a pulpit has been filled by one whose faith was his father’s and whose sermon was straight from an outline book. Godly parents are a blessing and outline books can be helpful, but it is imperative that our convictions come from God and not man. That necessitates studying the word for ourselves and thereby developing a faith that is our own (Rom. 10:17).

Without Guile (2:3)

Paul makes a claim that some gospel preachers could not make he claims that he did not try to use trickery, deceit or guile to make converts. If not careful, we may become so number conscious that we use ploys designed to have people baptized before they realize what is happening. Converts must be taught of God (Jn. 6:44f) and not tricked by a slick salesman.

Not A Crowd-Pleaser, But A God-Pleaser (2:4)

Paul always behaved himself properly when working with brethren (1 Thess. 2: 10); he was willing to forego his rights for the sake of the gospel (1 Cor. 9); he urged the brethren at Rome to be tolerant and seek to please one another (Rom. 14:1-15:7; esp. 15:2); in short, Paul did his best to get along well with others. But even though he sought good relations with others, at the same time, he realized that he must first please God. It is wonderful when we are able to please both God and man, but it cannot always be that way and, like Paul, we must make it a priority to please God first. Preaching the truth on divorce and remarriage, decency of dress and other unpopular subjects will likely please few men, but preaching the whole counsel of God will please the One we should desire to please. “For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10).

Avoiding Flattery (2:5)

While it is true that Paul frequently used sincere praise and commendation in his teaching efforts, he never resorted to empty flattery that appealed to a man’s pride. Never forget that the gospel must first humble a man before he can be exalted. Proper teaching will show a person that the church does not need him, but rather, he desperately needs the Lord.

Not Covetous (2:5)

When Paul went to Thessalonica, it was not a move motivated by thoughts of monetary gain. Though the Philippians sent him some help (Phil. 4:15f), Paul still had to work with his own hands in order to preach there (1 Thess. 2:9; 2 Thess. 3:7-9), for he would not allow or require the Thessalonians to support him lest he be accused of covetousness. In this day when preachers are generally well paid, it can be a real temptation to become flattering men pleasers unwilling to risk losing financial support because of controversial preaching. Some resort to guile or whatever is necessary to gain “converts” so that the offering can be increased. The solution to such a problem is not discontinuing the support of gospel preachers (a scriptural practice – 1 Cor. 9:14), but having both the preacher and the church realize that no matter who signs the check the preacher must be a servant of God and not a hireling of the church. Churches should desire that the one laboring with them preach in such a way as to please God and not those providing his support. And remember: good preaching will not be enough to get a covetous man into heaven (1 Cor. 6:9f).

Balanced

One of the greatest challenges a preacher faces is maintaining a balanced approach in his teaching. This study has focused so far on strength, courage, boldness, etc. and there are some who seem to specialize in these characteristics. On the other hand, there are those who seem to manifest only the gentleness that is seen in the remainder of our study. What we need are men who are able to blend the two. Remember that it was possible for the same apostle to claim boldness and yet admit to the gentleness of a nursing mother.

Gentle (2:6f)

Paul and his companions did not arrive in town making the type of demands an apostle might be expected to make. (Some preachers I know would do well to read 1 Thess. 2:6 before their next gospel meeting.) They did not seek glory from men, but instead were as gentle as a mother nursing her children (NKJV & NASB). Boldness and gentleness are often difficult to combine, but we must make every effort to do so. Boldness does not justify ugliness; gentleness does not necessitate weakness.

Giving Of Self (2:8f)

Why did the preaching of Paul and his companions have a great impact on so many towns? It may well have been the fact that Paul, Silas and Timothy offered more than the gospel – they offered themselves. If we would make those whom we seek to teach “dear to us” we would probably be more effective in our presentation. Preaching the gospel can never become simply a profession; it must be our very life itself. Our attitude must be: “I will very gladly spend and be spent for your souls” (2 Cor. 12:15).

Blameless In Conduct (2:10)

Many can offer firsthand testimony regarding the damage done to a church when a preacher (or any other teacher) does not live in a manner consistent with his teaching. Paul, Silas and Timothy may not have met with great success everywhere they preached, but their work was never destroyed by their own wickedness. Right or wrong, people always judge the conduct of preachers more strictly and we need to be careful lest we destroy the effectiveness of our preaching by careless conduct. (Parents should also take a lesson from Paul and realize that they cannot teach their children to do things that they themselves are unwilling to do.)

Behaving Like A Loving Father (2:10-12)

Like a father with his children, Paul exhorted the Thessalonians to walk properly before God. A good father teaches his children out of concern for them; he points out that obedience is for their own good. We must not be afraid to reprove and rebuke (2 Tim. 4:2), but it should be the kind of rebuke that a father concerned for the welfare of his children might offer. Let us make certain that when we reprove and correct, it is as one with fatherly love and not a vengeful malice.

The preaching of the gospel is a great work and there is always a need for more men who will follow the example of Paul (who followed Jesus). May God help us to become brave, fearless, truthful and frank, but at the same time, loving and gentle.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 16, pp. 483-484
August 18, 1988

By Norman E. Fultz

He was in the furniture business, a merchant in a moderately sized southern town. In a musical message in his radio advertising, he invited folk to “Come on down, We’ll sell you some happiness.” A catchy jingle! And it reflected an idea widely held in our society, that happiness is to be found in the possession of “things.” The truth is, however, that this precious commodity is not for sale by a merchant anywhere.

Money can’t buy happiness, a truism! Contrary to the bumper sticker which says, “Whoever said that money couldn’t buy happiness, just doesn’t know where to shop.” Someone else was getting much closer to the truth when he said, “Happiness comes not from the things you have, but from the lives you touch.”

There are many evidences of unhappiness in our society. Marriage problems, family conflicts, escalated divorce rates, hundreds of thousands of patients in mental hospitals due to stress from many causes, ten million alcoholics, millions more abusing drugs of other sorts, a near epidemic suicide rate – all are mirrors of unhappiness.

But they are all seeking happiness the drunkard and the sober man, the rich and the poor, the learned and the illiterate, the criminal and the law-abiding citizen. However, most do not know where it can be found, and the result is that they are seeking happiness in all the wrong places and in wrong behavior. Their search thus becomes counter-productive. Let me explain.

Happiness! What Is It? Where Does One Go To Get It?

Happiness is not to be found in the satisfaction of unbridled lusts. The writer of Ecclesiastes shows the fallacy of this idea in chapter two. And many moderns who sought to fulfill all their lusts with no restraint have learned too-late that a life of promiscuity often increases the loneliness and emptiness it hoped to alleviate and pangs of guilt enslaved them. Millions have learned that strong drink neither drowns one’s sorrows nor offers a lasting sense of euphoria. It rather creates an insatiable longing for more (Prov. 23:35). Permanently broken lives are often the result of experimentation with drugs when addiction has occurred, leaving a monkey on one’s back, pain and frustration in the heart. And that is to say nothing of the agony felt by loved ones who stand by in an utter sense of helplessness to do anything.

Happiness is not found in self-centeredness. Jesus Christ taught that there is more blessedness in giving than in receiving (Acts 20:35), and it is better to serve than to be served (Matt. 20:28). How different from the modern philosophy that cries, “Look out for number one.”

Happiness is not to be found in self-pity. Instead of self-pity, inspired Scripture rather teaches that one should develop a sense of pity toward others (1 Pet. 3:8). Such an individual sees the pitiable plight of the less fortunate and seeks to remedy that plight. The word used in the passages means “tender-hearted or compassionate.”

Happiness is not found in vengefulness. How truly miserable one makes himself who harbors a “get even” attitude. Instead of “rendering evil for evil ‘ or railing for railing,” to the contrary, offer blessing (1 Pet. 3:9).

Where then, or in what, is happiness to be found? Consider the divine recipe for happiness found in 1 Peter 3:8-12 which includes a quotation from Psalm 34:11-15. The passage asks for the attention of those that “would love life and see good days.”, What better way to define the happy life?

Teachability. The plea the writer makes is, “Hearken . . . I will teach.” An attitude of teachability, of openness to hear the will of God is involved.

Rule the speech. The inspired penman instructs “keep the tongue from evil.” That evil would include falsehood, vulgarity, profanity, faultfinding, and tale-bearing among other such unsavory kinds of speech. And he appeals, keep “the lips from speaking guile.” Deceit, flattery, pretense are forms of guile prevalent in some circles of society.

Control the conduct. Both negative and positive considerations are involved as he pleads, “depart from evil and do good.” Contentment, one of the companions of happiness, and disorderly conduct do not go together.

And finally, he that would love life and see good days should promote peaceful relationships. “Seek peace and pursue it, ” he says. And remember that Paul said to the Romans, “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men” (12:18).

Friend, has happiness eluded you9 Have you sought for it in all the wrong places? If you would enjoy true happiness, seek God’s will and let him have his way with you. And there is this promise, “The eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil” (1 Pet. 3:12).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 15, p. 467
August 4, 1988

By Alicia DeBerry

(Alicia, aged 15 years, is the oldest daughter of Royce DeBerry, minister for the Eastside church of Christ in Indianapolis. This material was originally prepared for an English class, but is here reproduced for its excellent content. Some footnotes have been eliminated to make for easier reading. – Donald P. Ames)

On January 22, 1973, the United States Supreme Court made a tragic decision that resulted in more loss of life than all the American wars combined. They decided that a woman’s right to abortion was protected by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the word “person” does not include the unborn, therefore they can be killed legally without penalty. Anyone who wants to terminate her pregnancy before the 24th week of the pregnancy may do so. There are over 1.5 million abortions each year in over 1,000 clinics and 1,600 & hospitals. That works out to be 4,200 abortions a day, 177 an hour, 3 a minute and 1 every 20 seconds. One out of every three pregnancies in the U.S. ends up in abortion. In today’s “modern” society, there are numerous laws protecting wildlife, a but none protecting the defenseless “unborn.”

The unborn child is commonly referred to as “potential life.” This infers the child is not yet living. However, modern science disproves the above statement. Both the sperm and ovum have life; they come together to create a new life. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to say life begins at conception. Dr. Joshua Lederberg, a Nobel Laureate in genetics, wrote the following: “Modern man knows too much to pretend that life is merely the beating of the heart or the tide of breathing” (“When Does Human Life Begin?”, Ethics, Vol. 1, article #88, May 3, 198 1, p. 2).

From the moment of conception until the third month, the developing child is called an embryo, which means “the growth within.” After the third month until birth, the developing child is called a fetus. On the 19th day of development, the embryo’s eyes form. The mouth is capable of opening by the 28th day. After 30 days, the circulatory system forms, and the mother and embryo no longer exchange blood. Shortly after that, the heart begins beating. The embryo looks distinctly human by the end of the first month. However, in most cases, the mother isn’t even aware of the pregnancy yet.

The nervous system begins forming around the 6th week, and by the 2nd month is very sensitive to pain. Brain waves have been recorded as early as the 43rd day. After the 8th week, everything that is found on a healthy newborn is found all ready on the embryo. Now, only growth is required. By the l0th week of development, the eyelids close if touched, palms close into fists if something brushes across them, and the lips pucker and try to suck when touched. After the 12th week, the embryo will react to touch, turn its head, kick its legs, flex its wrist, make fists, and, curl its toes. The mother, in most cases, will not be aware of the movement.

The embryo will also suck its thumb and swallow amniotic fluid. The sex of the child is now distinct, and very advanced brain waves can be recorded. At the 4th month, the ears begin functioning, and the fetus will become accustomed to the voices of mother, father, or even brothers and sisters. Babies born between the 16th and 20th week of pregnancy have a 70 percent chance of survival in the best-equipped natology centers. Abortions can still be performed on a fetus of the same age. Dr. Jerome LeJeune said the following: “At two months of age the human being is less than one’s thumb’s length from the head to the rump. He would f it at case in a nutshell, but everything is there: hands, feet, head, organs, brain. . . . With a good magnifer the fingerprint could be detected” (Phyllis Gapen, “Abortion: Hard Choices For Medicine,” New Physician, Vol. 1, July-Aug., 1981, p. 29).

When a woman decides to terminate her pregnancy, the type of abortion done will be determined by what “trimester” her pregnancy is in. The first trimester is from the time of conception until the 12th week. At this time, the decision is left totally up to the mother and her physician. The second trimester begins at the end of the first 12 weeks and runs until the 24th week. The state may, if it wishes, regulate abortions during the second trimester. The third trimester starts at the end of the 24th week and runs to the end of the pregnancy. Abortions can be performed at this time up until birth with the permission of the maternal doctor and the state if the mother’s health is in danger in any way.

The dilatation and curettage (or the D & C) method of abortion is safe up until the 12th week. In this method, a small scraping instrument that resembles a rake is inserted through the cervical opening. The instrument is called a curette. The contents of the uterus are than scraped out. The dilatation and extraction method (or D & E) is an abortion method used in the 2nd trimester. The cervix is dilated to one inch or more in diameter. The contents of the uterus are then cut up inside of the womb and removed with forceps. When this is completed, the doctor must inspect the remains in order to insure no fetal or placental material is left remaining. Death and dismemberment doesn’t come in moments but takes a matter of ten minutes or more. Limbs may be torn off and the body lacerated well before the brain is crushed. Is it possible that the fetus can experience terror or some unspeakable, silent pain? (Landrum Shettles, David Rowik: Rites Of Life; Michigan; Zondervan Corp., 1983, p. 69)

Another method is called “Instillation” or “salting out.” It is used to induce miscarriage or still birth. This is used during the second trimester. A large needle is inserted through the abdominal wall into the uterus. Some of the amniotic fluid around the fetus is withdrawn and is replaced with a solution made of salt, urea, and a hormone called prostaglandin (“The Doctor’s Dilemma,” Ethics, Vol. 2, article #16, Aug. 15, 1982, p. 12). About 24-48 hours later, contractions start, and the fetus is expelled through the vagina. This method of abortion fails 10 percent of the time. When the method does fail, the fetus is removed surgically. Some of the time when the fetus is expelled, it shows signs of life (Myron K. Denny; A Matter of Choice, N.Y.: Simon & Schuster, Ind., 1983, pp. 64-65). Because of the percentage of failure and the controversy, this method is not used as widely today. It may take hours before the fetus dies. “Salting out” actually poisons the fetus and causes hemorrhaging and shock before death. In most cases, the mother can feel the fetus moving around wildly as if to escape the poisoning invading its nest. This method gives the fetus’ skin a burnt look.

The “hysterotomy” is an abortion method used in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters. It is a major surgery that is basically the same as a Cesarean section. The only different is that when doing a hysterotomy, the goal is to end a life, whereas in doing a cesarean, the goal is to save a life. All babies aborted by this method are born alive. They move, breath, and some even cry. However, these babies aren’t wanted so they are thrown in buckets and encouraged to die.

There is a lot of public controversy over abortion. Proabortionists have many arguments they use to justify abortion. Abortions are accepted by most as the best thing to do when an “unwanted” pregnancy occurs because an “unwanted” child shouldn’t have to be born. No child is actually unwanted if allowed to be born. Many couples wait years for a child to be placed in their homes. Some people believe that with more unwanted children being born, there would be more child abuse. However, since 1973 when abortion was legalized, the child abuse rate has climbed over 400 percent (Robert G. Grant, “Abortion,” Candidates Biblical Scoreboard, 1986, p. 7). Others believe if abortions are made illegal, women will resort to back alley abortions with coat hangers. This same argument would support the legalizing of other forms of crime. Should we legalize bank robbery, murder, or the use of cocaine to keep these people from harm in the back alleys while they perpetrate their deeds? Most believe abortion is all right in matters of rape, molestation, and defective fetuses. When our society starts killing those that aren’t “perfect,” we are in fact borrowing Hitler’s theory of a “perfect” society. In cases of rape or molestation, who is at fault? Who should be punished? The unborn child did nothing to deserve such a punishment as death. He did not ask to be put in such a situation. 97 percent of all U.S. abortions are a matter of convenience or economy though, and only 3 percent are due to rape, incest, or defective fetuses (Ibid.). Those who support abortion believe we have replaced “dangerous illegal abortions” with “safe legal abortions.” Both are equally dangerous to the unborn child!

Aborted fetuses make for a very profitable industry, considering the source is abundant. The fetuses are sold by the bag, batch, or pound for approximately $25.00. The Washington, D.C. General Hospital made $68,000 between 1966-1976 on aborted babies (David W. Balsiger, “The Issue,” Presidential Biblical Scoreboard, 1984, p. 7). Collagen is a gelatinous substance found in connective tissue, bone, and cartilage. Cosmetic companies enrich their products with collagen. Unless it specifies animal or bovine collagen, it is most likely collagen that is obtained from grinding up aborted fetuses. Twelve leading shampoos and rive leading hand creams contain collagen obtained this way!

According to the New England Journal of Medicine, living fetuses were dropped into meat grinders and homogenized to obtain tissue cultures. It was necessary for them to be alive for the best quality cultures! In Finland, a grant of $600,000 from the National Institute of Health allowed researchers to slice open one baby without an anesthetic so that a liver could be obtained. The researcher in charge said the baby was completely formed and “was even secreting urine” (loc. cit.). In California, babies aborted at 6 months were submerged in jars of liquid with a high oxygen content. The purpose was to see if they could breathe through their skins. They couldn’t (loc. cit).

In conclusion, birth does not create life but manifests something all ready created. A welcomed child is a baby from the start. Yet an unwelcomed child is only a fetus or embryo. In war, the medical corps saves lives. In abortion, the medical profession takes lives. The major difference is aborted babies get no Purple Hearts, no taps, no Memorial Day – not even a beggar’s funeral.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 16, pp. 481, 500-501
August 18, 1988