Note: This article was first published in 2020, when Harris was named as Joe Biden’s running mate. It has been updated to reflect latest developments.
Few presidential candidates have had as much exposure to the world’s religions as Kamala Harris, America’s 59-year-old vice president who just became the front-running Democratic presidential candidate,
Harris’ ethnic, racial, and cultural biography represents a slice of the U.S. population that is becoming ascendant but has not been represented in the nation’s highest office with perhaps the exception of Barack Obama.
Here are five faith facts about Harris:
She was raised on Hinduism and Christianity.
Her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, was from Chennai, India; her father, Donald Harris, from Jamaica. The two met as graduate students at the University of California, Berkeley.
Your tax-deductible gift helps our journalists report the truth and hold Christian leaders and organizations accountable. Donate $75 or more to The Roys Report this month, and you can elect to receive the “Reimagine Church” 2-Book Bundle including ‘Invisible Jesus’ by Scot McKnight & Tommy Phillips and ‘Need to Know’ edited by Danielle Strickland. To donate, click here.
Her name, Kamala, means “lotus” in Sanskrit, and is another name for the Hindu goddess Lakshmi. She visited India multiple times as a girl and got to know her relatives there.
But because her parents divorced when she was 7, she also grew up in Oakland and Berkeley attending predominantly Black churches. Her downstairs neighbor, Regina Shelton, often took Kamala and her sister, Maya, to Oakland’s 23rd Avenue Church of God in Oakland. Harris now considers herself a Black Baptist.
She was a member of the Third Baptist Church of San Francisco, led by the Rev. Amos Brown.
She is married to a Jewish man.
Harris met her husband, Los Angeles lawyer Douglas Emhoff, on a blind date in San Francisco. They married in 2014. At their wedding, the couple smashed a glass to honor Emhoff’s upbringing (a traditional Jewish wedding custom).
It was Harris’ first marriage and his second. An article in the Jewish press described her imitation of her Jewish mother-in-law, Barbara Emhoff, as “worthy of an Oscar.”
Harris’s stepchildren gave her the nickname of “Momala,” which not only rhymes with Kamala, but also with the Yiddish term of endearment for mother, “mamaleh.”
She was criticized for not proactively assisting in civil cases against Catholic clergy sex abuse during the years she served as a prosecutor.
After graduating from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, Harris specialized in prosecuting sex crimes and child exploitation as a young prosecutor. But two investigations by The Intercept and The Associated Press found that Harris was consistently silent on the Catholic Church’s abuse scandal — first as San Francisco district attorney and later as California’s attorney general.
Survivors of sex abuse at the hands of priests say she resisted informal requests to help them with their cases and refused to release church records on abusive priests that had been gathered by her predecessor, Terence Hallinan.
As attorney general, Harris filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to refuse Hobby Lobby’s request to opt out of providing health care coverage for contraception because of the craft-store chain owner’s religious beliefs.
In her 2014 brief, supported by 15 states and the city of Washington, D.C., Harris wrote that if Hobby Lobby were allowed to withhold birth control coverage on religious grounds, it might lead other corporations to demand similar exemptions from the nation’s civil rights laws.
In the landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled that family-owned corporations can’t be forced to pay for insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act if it offends their religious beliefs.
Later, as U.S. Senator, Harris co-sponsored a congressional bill to weaken the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to ensure it is not used to permit discrimination in the name of religion.
The measure, called the Do No Harm Act, was first introduced in 2017 and again in 2019. RFRA originally passed in 1993 to prevent the government from “substantially burdening a person’s exercise of religion.” Do No Harm’s backers believed that RFRA “should not be interpreted to authorize an exemption from generally applicable law.”
Had it passed, it would have forced religious employers to provide health care coverage for employees, even if it violates an employer’s religious convictions.
During her brief run for president four years ago, she often used the New Testament parable of the good Samaritan.
Jesus tells the parable about an outsider who helps a man beaten and left on the side of the road. Harris has said it has helped her clarify who one’s “neighbor” is.
“Neighbor is not about having the same ZIP code,” Harris said at a Poor People’s Campaign forum last year. “What we learn about in that parable is that neighbor is someone you are walking by on the street. … Neighbor is about understanding and living in service of others — that we are all each other’s brothers and sisters.”
Today, I met with Rev. Dr. William Barber to thank him for his years of work to raise wages and end poverty.
President Biden and I know: We have a duty to ensure workers across our nation are treated with dignity and that all families have the opportunity to thrive. pic.twitter.com/2wka4wVb8Y
— Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) February 6, 2024
In other speeches, Harris has invoked liberation theology, the strain of Christian thought that emphasizes social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples.
“Justice is on the ballot,” Harris said at an event hosted by the Iowa Democratic Party last year.
“Economic justice is on the ballot. … Health care justice is on the ballot. … Education justice is on the ballot. … Reproductive justice is on the ballot. … Justice for children is on the ballot. … Here’s the bottom line, Iowa. I do believe that when we overcome these injustices, we will unlock the promise of America and the potential of the American people.”
The Roys Report updated and contributed to this article.
Yonat Shimron is a national reporter and senior editor for Religion News Service.
English 
Spanish
96 Responses
It is surprising to me that in an article about VP Harris’s faith, no mention was made about the controversy between her and the conservative evangelical community about her being one of the most pro abortion politicians in our generation. Maybe I’m missing the point of the article, but this feels like doing a “Faith-Facts” article on a Southern presidential candidate in the 18th century without mentioning that they’re radically pro slavery. If someone wrote an article like that, it would seem like an inappropriate omission, and so too in this article, not mentioning Harris’s radical pro abortion history and stances seems like an inappropriate omission.
Trevor Jones’ comment is correct. Whether she is pro choice or pro life, this journalist has not really told us the facts of Kamala’s personal beliefs.
What is “pro abortion?” Do you mean “pro CHOICE”? That’s an important distinction.
Many Christians – myself included – are pro-CHOICE for a number of reasons:
1. I do not believe my belief is to be the law of the land. My belief – which informs what I would do if pregnant – is MY belief, rooted in MY faith.
2. I do not believe my personal decision to continue with a pregnancy – is to be enforced or upheld by the government. It’s not the government’s business. I still remember those women in TN and TX who were hauled into court by “Christians”, with their medical records on full display, for the court to see if they were in “enough danger” to have an abortion. They were living in pain until the government could validate their decision. How invasive and humiliating. I do not support pro-life laws being enforced in such a way.
3. There is a lot of nuance that the current pro-life movement is not considering. Several medical procedures are labeled as abortions (e.g., certain miscarriages are called “spontaneous abortions” and require treatment), yet the mere mention of the term “abortion” has pro-lifers shutting all conversation and making sweeping laws and judgments.
4. I don’t believe in using the government to spy on others re: “report those who drive women to abortion appointments so they can be fined or prosecuted.” What is this – communist Russia? Nazi Germany? Aren’t we better than this?
Would it be better to understand where Harris stands on this? Yes. But let’s start by NOT conflating “pro-choice” with “pro-abortion”. Such intentional demonization says it wouldn’t matter what her stance is anyway.
What you are essentially saying is you are ‘Pro-sin’, no matter how nuanced your reasoning is. The murder of unborn babies is an abomination in the eyes of God. Yes, people have choices, they can reject or receive Christ as their Lord and Savior. They can defile their body with drugs and alcohol. That is their choice. To regurgitate the liberal talking point that it’s a woman’s body and it’s her right to terminate a pregnancy, is not reflective of the mind of Christ or consistent with the Word of God. You need to seriously reconsider your position, and how destructive your viewpoint is the cause of Christ. Utterly shameful .
Sin would be to ignore 1 Corinthians 5:11 when it comes to associating with people like trump, who claim to be Christian.
Please tell me how much republican policies have reduced abortions in the last 40 years?
Mike – I thought about my position for years. I was like you, going around finger pointing and shaming others, telling them they aren’t real Christians and the like. (I never won anyone to Christ that way, but if it’s working for you, then amen). I was “no abortion, ever, no matter what!”
And I have grown and learned. If I were to get pregnant, I’d have the baby. But how would I feel if the government intervened and said I couldn’t have it and forced me to terminate (for whatever reason)? I’d feel violated, as if my choice was robbed of me.
I would not want anyone to feel that way. So why would I support that happening to anyone else?
I also had a roommate who was completing her medical residency, who listed the DOZENS of procedures labeled abortions – many that are life saving, and some that involve removing the remains of a dead fetus after a miscarriage. I want a woman to be able to receive such treatments if she needs them. Under the extremist legislation being proposed in many states, they wouldn’t. I find that problematic and endangering to a woman’s physical, mental and emotional health (can you imagine miscarrying and not being able to have the remains removed without going to court?)
Legalism has grabbed hold of the pro-life movement, to its detriment. What you consider “right” has become Phariseeical. If these new sweeping legislations allowed women to get emergency procedures and the like, I’d come back to the table.
First of all Christianity is about first knowing and following Jesus which means following His ways and killing babies is murder so if that is ok with you then you might want to rethink about what it means to truly value what God created we definitely need more of that in this world.
Cultural, pick-a-mix religion can become very confusing and lead to all sorts of distortions and contradictions in life.
This was an enlightening article from 2019 about Harris and clergy abuse:
https://apnews.com/united-states-presidential-election-general-news-ecc0da5f6ac94b13be11e2a388967a85
Anne – Are you SURE you want to bring up martial fidelity? Or are you not voting for Trump either?
Anne, you can’t be serious!
Are you arguing that people should vote for Trump because Harris supposedly committed adultery?
Trump, who was found by a jury to have raped E. Jean Carrol, stands accused of sexual assault by dozens victims and found guilty of cooking the books to illegally pay off a porn star while his wife was home taking care of their new born baby.
That Trump?
I did look that up, back in 2020. I found a bunch of articles and interviews rooted in gossip, opinions, accusations, and assumptions (of Harris, her friends and colleagues). No concrete proof or facts. A bunch of “it looked like”, “it appeared to be”, “I concluded” and the like.
It’s unfortunate Christians would believe and take part in spreading information that can smear someone’s reputation without solid proof.
I love a candidate who puts their Christian faith into practice for people who need justice, rather than weaponizes it against people they disagree with.
Kamala is fighting as hard as she can to keep one of the largest holocausts in the world going in America – the murder of the unborn. I doubt she is a born again believer filled with the selfless love of God. Half of the 10 virgins in Matthew 25 thought they were going to heaven but didn’t. The Lord said I never knew you.
Kamala Harris needs the true gospel. I appreciated the nuanced feedback with pro-choice and pro-abortion. I may disagree, but at least the issue has been delineated in Marin’s mind. However that is not the nuanced perspective that Kamala has shared over a period of time. Kamala has supported a regime that has caused great harm to this economy and has a liberal progressive voting record that surpasses all in the senate when she served. She has done zilch with the border. As regards to Biden. A 60 year old President Biden would have been a far better president both politically and practically. Kamala is behind one of the greatest coverups in modern day history. She lied to the American people about the cognitive state of Biden. She has zero ethics and morals. She is far more transactional than Trump.
More like Donald trump needs the true gospel. He thinks he has no sins to confess. This is what he stated. That in itself is disqualifying. Trump oversaw the largest increase in the federal deficit in history. He allowed one of the worst pandemics to occur. Trump brags about torpedoing one of the first bipartisan border bills.
Bob:
Pandemics aren’t amenable to human intervention during their initial phase. President Trump had nothing to do with the COVID pandemic occurring. However, he can certainly take credit for encouraging the fastest development of vaccines in U. S. history.
She’s not black. She is 1/2 Indian & 1/2 Jamacian. She’s also not a legitimate American citizen. Neither of her parents were citizens when she was born in Canada which is also where she spent most of her childhood. This is why research is so important. She’s another cabal manchurian candidate just like Obama. Thank the Lord, the truth is coming out and spreading over all the earth. He’s making sure of that as we are not meant to live in darkness and deception.
Dee –
First, you are conflating race and ethnicity. Kamala is both of mixed ethnicity (Indian and Jamaican) and of mixed race (Asian and Black). I get how Americans can confuse race and ethnicity, but they are still separate (one can be a white Jamaican, and one can be a Black Cuban).
I also understand why Kamala tends to be referred to as Black: look at this nation’s history and it’s “one drop” rule (by law, if you had “one drop” of Black blood, you were to be considered Black). I also understand people tend to treat you based on visuals: Kamala “looks” Black and likely has been treated as such. That’s a pretty common experience among people: see the stories of Halle Berry, Mariah Carey, and Tiger Woods (who “look” Black) and those of Cameron Diaz, Charlie Sheen, and Christina Aguilera (who “look” white). Their experiences say a lot about appearance shaping one’s identity.
And let’s not start the “only white people are real Americans”, “let’s challenge the nationality of all non-white candidates” narrative again. (Nationality is yet another layer – and separate entity – to the race and ethnicity conversation). Barack is an American. So is Kamala. And yes, one can born and/or live overseas and STILL be American. There are expats all over the world. John McCain wasn’t born in the US – and spent a lot of his life overseas – and no one questioned his nationality.
Sigh. Hasn’t this gotten old? Americans come in all colors and ethnicities. That’s part of what makes us…American.
Except Harris was born in Oakland CA.
And Obama was born in Hawaii. But here we are again.
Tiresome.
She was born in Oakland CA, and we have birthright citizenship here, so she is an American Citizen, regardless of her parent’s citizenship at the time of her birth. She lived in CA until she was 12, so I’m not sure how you’re defining “most of her childhood”.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/07/23/kamala-harris-ethnicity-race-childhood-canada-fact-check/74501477007/
She was born in Oakland CA. Per the 14th Amendment, she is is a US citizen by virtue of the fact of being born here. Her mom was born in India but moved to the US as a graduate student and was naturalized. Her father was born in Jamaica and was naturalized. So do you believe that both parents have to been born in the United States to be considered “legitimate?”
She’s not black. She is 1/2 Indian & 1/2 Jamacian.
Jen,
According to government statistics Jamaica is 92.1% black.
And the black Jamaican slaves were imported from the region of modern day Ghana, Nigeria and Central Africa, the same regions where we got our slaves.
So what’s your point?
The right is also pointing out that her white great, great, great, great grandfather was a slave owner and fought to keep slavery legal.
But that begs the question of how her great, great, great, great grandmother, a Jamaican slave, got pregnant by her master. Wouldn’t sex with a person you kidnapped and are imprisoning today be considered rape? So how can the right hold that against Kamala Harris?
Dee, my reply above was in reply to you.
Sorry Jen.
Superlative. Splendid. But something is bugging me with this headline: the need to identify that she is “black”. We all know what Kamal Harris look like and we know her gender. Interestingly enough, the headline did not point out that she is “woman”, but that she is ‘black’. Why is this?
It should read: “5 faith facts about VP Kamala Harris, a Baptist with Hindu background. After all, this is about her faith not skin colour.
Ask yourself: if she was “white”, would this headline have read: 5 faith facts about VP……, a white Baptist………???. Most likely not.
BTW: she is mixed. NOT “black”. Her skin colour is not black either. Her ethnicity is NOT black. She is American with Indian and Jamaican background. Get it right.
This insistent need to draw attention to skin colour is so uncalled for; and so….American. And so Un-Christ like. In Christ, there’s no longer Jew, Gentile, Male, Female, slave, free…………black, white, brown, yellow…..
Personally, my babies being of multi-ethnic background (yes skin colour too); I shall teach them to never ever let anyone box them in a ‘skin colour’ or identify them by their skin colour. You are human; and wonderfully so.
If you can skip the ‘race’ box, skip it. If you are forced to check a “race” box, and you can write it in, write/type HUMAN. That’s what I have done; and people chuckle but they do get the profound message therein.
Seraphina –
Again, let’s not mix race and ethnicity. And it’s perfectly fine to claim your racial and ethnic heritage. If someone chooses to put you in a box based on that, that is THEIR problem, not yours. It doesn’t make you any more or less human to claim your heritage. (Again, if someone else tries to say so, that is their problem).
And ultimately, who are WE to tell Kamala how she identifies?
I was sitting with a friend – who is a lighter skinned Black man – having coffee, and we started chatting with a couple near us. As our conversation got deeper, we invited them to join our table. I was appalled when one of them looked at my friend and said, “Why do you call yourself Black, you clearly aren’t Black!” While my friend was polite in his response, the couple kept going on and on with “but how are you so light – look at HER, she’s Black (I am dark skinned); are BOTH of your parents Black? Are you SURE?” I was floored by the audacity of someone to challenge my friend’s racial heritage to his face – especially after he repeatedly said he is a Black man.
Many of the comments here read in similar manner: audacious.
Kamala has told us her heritage. Let’s stop audaciously “correcting” her, and keep it moving by discussing her faith and policies. Or let’s at least have an honest conversation as to why her Blackness (or lack thereof, if that’s your position) it matters. Stop trying to sell this “only the content of character matters” if you continue to obsess over this woman’s racial and ethnic heritage.
She is a member of a “Black Baptist” church, which a different category than White Baptist churches, in part because the largest White Baptist denomination was created to maintain enslavement. (SBC). Black wasn’t referring to herself, although she is, it is referring to the type of denomination she belongs to, as clarified in the article.
I do appreciate Marin clarifying why race and ethnicity are different every time it comes up though- we’re all going to be learning a LOT this election season!
An article about Kamala without mentioning abortion which is the central pillar in her platform as a leader? Kind of like writing about the grand wizard of the KKK without mentioning anything about his views on black people. This journalist is either being evasive or needs a bit more schooling.
Alex, there are many Christians who don’t hold abortion as a central tenet to their faith, or a tenet at all- seeing as how the Bible doesn’t mention it. It may be your deciding faith factor, but it isn’t everyone’s.
Jen:
Psalm 139 might help you regarding how God feels about aborting little ones.
Cynthia, the Psalms are poetic language, to be interpreted poetically. The Hebrew people throughout the bible considered personhood to begin at first breath. That’s an important thing to understand when reading scripture.
Jen, there is a poetic structure (chiasms) it’s a poetic structure that uses parallelisms to convey a narrative in Hebrew. However it is not meant to be interpreted poetically. It’s a form of storytelling. Never meant to be interpreted by The original audience as a poem, but as a story conveying truth. You also have to contend with Jeremiah 1:5 and Ephesians 1:4. The gospel where John the Baptist jumped in his mother’s womb. He was alive prior to breath. Chiastic structure correlates to a literal interpretation to a Hebrew audience. It would be arrogant for us to allegorize what was a literal truth to the original audience.
The part about hating those who hate God?
Confused as to your point, I didn’t see these verses saying anything about abortion
As someone who places caring for the poor and marginalized as a high priority for how I vote – and often defend it against Christians who have lots of excuses to ignore the scriptures on how we are to do that – thank you, Jen.
Marin,
I also look at how the poor and marginalized and vulnerable (as in unborn children) are treated to determine who gets my vote.
Words mean nothing. It is how people are actually treated that matters. What have Democrats done to increase the welfare of public school children? Why have their policies consistently failed our children? Why have they emphasized speeches and photo ops over results? More importantly, why do their education policies consistently discourage school choice for vulnerable children?
I like what President Trump actually DID, including how he made it easier for organ donors to help others. I don’t care much (or even pay much attention to) what politicians say; I care far more about results. Democrat policies have consistently failed Americans on almost all measures. If you look at public education, inflation, illegal immigration, foreign policy – ALL point to massive failure by the current administration.
Hi Cynthia –
I care about access to affordable healthcare. The number one cause for bankruptcy is medical bills. That needs to change. And Democrats took action with the affordable care act. Republicans talk and talk about how they hate it without presenting any solutions – even Trump swore his solution was coming – and it’s nearly a decade later and we are still waiting. ZERO action.
I care about not gutting Medicare or free school lunches, as our poor, elderly and children need them. (I’ve volunteered at a homeless shelter for teens and seen free lunch be the only balanced meal they get). Dems fight for this. Republicans REPEATEDLY want to gut it.
And as for schools, my thoughts are too long (and middle of the road) for this thread. I’ll say this: I don’t believe charter schools or school choice will solve everything. I dislike all the “my party is always right, that party is always wrong” stances, because if you listen to both sides – some bipartisanship could really tackle the complex causes impacting our public schools. (Hint: the root causes are not in the schools). But will anyone EVER concede to listening to the other side?
I think we both know everyone is too busy vilifying and self righteously grandstanding against the other party to do so.
And our children are paying the price. That’s the sad part.
I love it when pro-Trump and pro-Harris (or any other Democrat) supporters engage in a game of tu quoque. By now everyone knows Trump is a hound dog. And everyone knows Harris’ relationship with CA power broker Brown launched her career. So what? I guess that’s what happens when you have nothing relevant to say about issues and fall back on ad hominem arguments.
Harris’s relationship didn’t “launch her career”. She was dating Willie Brown and he put her on two committees. He put many of his friends and coworkers on committees. He didn’t give her any jobs- she had to get elected to most of those. She’s worked SO MUCH HARDER to get where she is than trump or any man running for president ever has. She’s been elected several times. She’s had to fight racial and gender biases for her entire careers. Lets stop with the slept-her-way-to-the-top nonsense, because it’s just plain false.
Abortion is sin. I hope that’s not a question in the mind of the follower of Christ. It is unfortunate that we have dehumanized life into a political “choice”. Or labeled it as “healthcare”. The redefinition of words and narratives have harmed the body of Christ. My aim is to have scripture be the lens of my ethics. It is why I would never vote for a modern democrat. I am accountable for my choices. I will vote for Donald Trump. Because my biblically informed worldview has more in common with Trumps policies. He’s not a moral authority in my life. Kamala has zero gravitas in that arena either. I do not trust the media’s propaganda. I research for myself, thereby inform my views via biblical exegesis. With humility and conviction try to exegete the world through that rigor. One thing these comments prove. Biblical illiteracy. So I’m praying for that. Then we can restore the body of Christ.
I do not consider abortion a sin, namely because the bible itself doesn’t. Scripture considers “personhood” to start at first breath, and we see that affirmed throughout scripture any time it is speaking directly, rather than metaphorically, about life. We see it in the creation account, when Adam becomes a person when God breathes into him. We see it in the levitical law when the penalty for causing a woman to miscarry is akin to property damage, but causing a baby to be born then die is akin to murder. We see it in millenia of Jewish teaching that personhood begins with breath. The christians later debated as to whether or not fetuses were persons, and generally landed on quickening- but that’s extrabilical- it’s Christians responding to the current scientific and philiosoplical trends of their time.
By your same measure, I cannot vote for republicans because of their abhorant policies toward those Christ actually lists as the people Christians are to be actively “for” in scripture. The stranger, the foreigner, the outsider, the unhoused, unclothed, imprisoned, and needy- Jesus actually talks about these folks, and I can only morally vote for people who are taking care of them rather than stripping them of their rights, and stripping programs that help them of their funding. No party is perfect, but I’m going to go with the one that helps the people Jesus actually told us to help. directly.
Jen- You need to read Psalm 119. Jeremiah 1:5 as well. Ephesians 1:4 also teaches that He predestined prior to birth or breath. Life begins at conception. It is sin. Whether you consider it a sin or not. The Bible is the authority. I pray the Holy Spirit supernaturally convicts your heart. The Bible strongly contradicts your premise. I’ll pray for you. Not to prove you are wrong, but that you are open to biblical truth. I wonder for us all. What is the final authority in our lives. Also that we let scripture guide our beliefs and grow us to be more like Christ.
Jason, thanks for the prayers, I always appreciate them. Biblical truth is what got me to this position. Lots of study, with my preconcieved ideas that I’d been indoctrinated into removed, led me to this stance. Listening to my Hebrew siblings led me to this stance. Only after that did I look into when and why christians started caring about abortion so much, and then was happy to wash my hands of the entire nonsense, and refocus on what Jesus actually called us to do. I pray that your eyes are opened to Jesus’ calling, and that your heart is soft enough to respond.
And there are a lot of scriptures about caring for the poor that are often (conveniently) forgotten in this conversation. Most of the women impacted by the abortion debate are POOR. And the same people singing the pro-life tune, pushing these women to have the baby, turn their back when the child is born, and start singing a whole different “it’s her fault she’s poor, don’t ask me to help!” song.
Case in point: look at who is in support of cutting free lunches at school (which is often the ONLY complete meal that poor children will eat). Interesting how SUDDENLY that’s when pro-lifers believe in small government and independent choice.
Oh and the “what about adoption” song? People singing that tune often choose to go overseas to adopt an infant, and ignore the MILLIONS of children stuck in the foster care system in the US (which also needs an overhaul, but that’s another discussion).
If you want to apply scriptures, let’s talk about them ALL.
Jason, I notice you said NOTHING about Jen’s point that “The stranger, the foreigner, the outsider, the unhoused, unclothed, imprisoned, and needy- Jesus actually talks about these folks, and I can only morally vote for people who are taking care of them rather than stripping them of their rights, and stripping programs that help them of their funding.”
How does the Bible strongly contradict this premise? I can point to several scriptures that say otherwise.
Marin,
Jesus talks about ALL folks – EVERYONE. All of us are sinners who need his help. The social gospel cannot take the place of Jesus’s own mission and ours: To seek and save the lost.
Yes, all are sinners who need help.
I was moreso asking Jason how the Bible points against Jen’s premise (Jason’s words), when Jen is literally pointing to Jesus’s words to help the stranger, foreigner, etc.
How is that a “social gospel”? I’m learning more and more how that’s a conservative Christianese phrase to justify not helping the poor and marginalized.
Jen, you might want to take a look at the ante-Nicene church’s views on abortion. For example: Didache: you shall not murder a child by abortion nor commit infanticide. Epistle of Barnabas: you shall not abort a child nor, again commit infanticide. Apocalypse of Peter: …these are they who have procured abortions and have ruined the work of God. Eight different authors in eleven different writings mention abortion. In every instance, the writing unequivocally rejects abortion. See “The Early Church on Killing” by Ronald Sider. If you’ve read anything by Sider, you know he sits squarely on the Left/Progressive side of Christianity.
Because the Bible doesn’t teach that the government is responsible for the poor. The church. She is conflating contextual premises. Jesus never came and said that government policies are going to address the needs of the poor. The problem Is the church (those in Christ) are to reach the needy. There are many organizations that do. Here’s a practical example: Addiction. I worked in the rescue mission for years taking care of the poor and those who suffer from alcohol and mostly opioid/opiate addiction. The government throws money to Methadone clinics (which are very wealthy organizations) that to keep people from freedom and keeping them medicated. They never solve problems. Only make them worse. Instead of freedom in Christ. That’s not a Party issue it’s a church issue.
Jason – It’s a people issue. And the people make up the church. (The people also make up a party.) And the people who make up the church – self righteously believe they are “better” than those who are pro-choice – aren’t helping the poor. Giving is down. Volunteer hours are down. But I guess that’s fine as long as they are pro-life, right? That’s the only scriptures they seem to quote…
Interestingly enough, you’re looking to the government to solve the abortion problem, but then you’re against the government helping the poor, thus proving my point.
Ironically, since Roe was reversed, the number of abortions has gone UP, also proving the government is making it worse. So why not leave the government out of it and make it about “the people”?
Jason – I’m also still looking for the scripture where the government is responsible for protecting pregnant women or their unborn children.
Hi Jason, the bible absolutely DOES teach that the government is responsible for the poor. Ancient Judaism was not just a religion, it was an ethno-state. They had kings and laws and judges and armies (although not standing ones when they were following God’s command), and yes, priests. Even in Jesus’ time, the Jews considered themselves a nation occupied by Rome. Separation of church and state is a fairly recent idea. Just because they Jews were a faith group doesn’t mean that it wasn’t actually a government. And Jesus wasn’t teaching wholly new ideas about caring for the poor, it’s written into their laws.
Daniel, I am aware of both the early church stance, and when and how the stances have adjusted. However, none of those are scripture- all are the tradition of man. None of those teachings made it into the Canon. any of the Canons- this is because it wasn’t a belief that Jewish people held- the Bible was written almost entirely by Jews, and Jews believed that personhood begins at first breath. This is why there is not a biblical argument against abortion- abortion doesn’t kill a “person”, even if it takes a life.
Jen:
You stated: “By your same measure, I cannot vote for republicans because of their abhorant policies toward those Christ actually lists as the people Christians are to be actively “for” in scripture.”
Christians are to be actively for Christ. This means they are to abhor sin in all its forms. We can love people without supporting their sin. Do you believe love is possible without supporting sinful behavior? It sounds like you are equating the support of sin with loving people.
I’m sure Jen can answer for herself, but I know it’s absolutely possible to love people and hate the sin. I believe there are two things we are disagreeing upon:
1. What does it look like to love people? From our exchanges, you seem to mistake loving people by caring, feeding, clothing and providing basic necessities for them as enabling them. Where I come from is that many of these people in need will not receive the gospel if all you’re doing is quoting it to them and walking away – leaving them hungry, without clothing, etc. I think of James 2:15-17 here.
2. Why does the concept of “abhoring sin” suddenly go out the window when the abhorrent words, behaviors and actions of Trump come into the conversation? Then it turns into “well, it’s ok, because Trump’s doing it against Democrats and we are at war!”, “It’s ok, because in the end, we are getting what we want (pro-life, pro-Israel, etc), and we are the people of God!”, “Whatabout (insert deflection about Democrats here, thus making Trump’s sins ok)”, “We are all sinners and need grace (but somehow lack the same grace for Democrats/liberals/progressives)”, “Trump’s not elected to be a pastor! (so his sin is ok)”, “The alternative is worse (so being subjective about sin)”, “People are just too sensitive (so Trump’s berating language is ok)”. VERY problematic.
Hi Marin,
You have raised some good points. My point to Jen was this: It is incumbent upon Christians everywhere to abhor sin in all its forms. It doesn’t matter what kind of sin it is or what flavor it is or who is committing the sin. That said, we will always have to choose between the lesser of two evils when it comes to politicians because, to date, no politician has been born perfect/sinless. As the Bible clearly states, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Romans 3: 23.
That means I am a sinner, President Trump is a sinner, Republicans and Democrats are sinners….Basically, each of us needs Jesus. Without him, there is no hope at all. This is not “Christianese,” just factual information.
The other fact is this: When we confess our sins, Jesus forgives us and cleanses us from all unrighteousness. I am 100% certain you already know this, so I am not sure why you bring up past sins that Jesus has already wiped out?
I too believe we should help others when we can, but we cannot afford to divorce the gospel message from the bread we give out. If you take care of physical needs without addressing spiritual ones, you are participating in Social Gospel propagation. Without Jesus, “life is like a donut: there’s a hole in the middle of your heart.”
Cynthia – You asked: “When we confess our sins, Jesus forgives us and cleanses us from all unrighteousness. I am 100% certain you already know this, so I am not sure why you bring up past sins that Jesus has already wiped out?”‘
Because Trump himself has said he’s never confessed his sins. When directly asked if he has ever sought forgiveness of sins, Trump himself answered, “I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don’t think so. I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.”
This is on VIDEO: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4624981/asked-god-forgiveness
So therefore, Jesus has NOT wiped out his sins. They are still before him.
This is big reason why I’ve been so baffled at how Christians give him such grace; yet when it comes to Christians who HAVE confessed and sought forgiveness who happen to be Democrats – ZERO grace. I’ve NEVER seen a conservative say “we are all sinners, who I am to judge” when it comes to Obama, Clinton, Pelosi or Biden. So while it may be true (yes, we are all sinners), when we are selective in who we apply that to (only those we like politically), it DOES come across as Christianese.
And per James 2:15-17, I believe we are to feed bodies AND souls; as I said in another comment, it’s frustrating that believers are in this “either/or” conversation.
Honestly a lot of these comments are symptomatic of the church of Laodicea. I pray for those who do not have Christ! I’m praying that Julie shared her biblical views so she can help restore the church. Right living and right doctrine. She has dutifully exposed the poor and sinful behavior. Also the other side of the coin is poor and sinful beliefs. Both are pertinent for reporting the truth and restoring the church.
I knew when I saw this article posted yesterday the Die-Hard Trump supporters would show up to trash the current VP. How many of the 10 commandments has Trump broken?
Jen,
Thank you for mentioning “personhood.” It sounds like we agree that personhood theory is the foundational belief system for any discussion about the ethics of abortion.
When it comes to my understanding of personhood theory, I’m indebted to Nancy Pearcey and her book, “Love Thy Body.” For those who may be unfamiliar, personhood theory is a set of ideas that provide guidance for how decide when a human becomes a person and when a human ceases to be a person. This is highly relevant because, as I think we all probably agree, killing a ~person~ is murder. However, killing a human non-person is considered by many to not be murder.
The core assumption of personhood theory is that the human body can be separated from the person. And once separated, the person takes authority over the body.
And before getting into the details of personhood theory, know that Gen Z is swimming in its many applications. We see personhood theory applied to the ethics of abortion, infanticide, hook-up culture, pornography, LGBT ideas, with special emphasis on transgender ideology, euthanasia and transhumanism (human 2.0). All of these applications require a low view of the body–rooted in Gnosticism—that supports the separation of the person from the body.
So, the foundational question in this discussion is, “Does the Bible provide a justification for separating personhood from the human body until birth/breath?”
One helpful scripture passage is the account of the prenatal personal interactions between Jesus and John the Baptist. There’s much more in the Tanach and the Psalms.
Neal, thanks for engaging kindly and not questioning my salvation! You raise good questions about personhood, and I am aware that Christendom has landed largely on quickening as to when ensoulment happens- although, I stand by that this is a product of it’s age, not of biblical support. I think it’s a compromise between the growth of scientific knowledge and Biblical principles and laws.
But even if we clear that first hurdle, and agree that a fetus gains personhood after quickening, then next hurdle is bodily autonomy. In no other circumstance is an individual forced to use any part of their body to save another’s life without their own consent. Even if you will die without my kidney, and I don’t need my kidney, you cannot have it unless I freely give it. This is even true after death, unless express consent was given while living. This, of course, is a modern interpretation, because in scripture, pregnant women would generally be the property of the father involved. But, if we’re willing to make compromises for new knowledge, as above, I suggest they apply here as well. Women aren’t property, and in ownership of their own selves.
I understand that the fetus did not consent to being conceived- that was the choice of two other people. However, those two people are also individuals able to choose what to do with their own bodies, independent of the idea that the fetus will not survive without the life support of the womb. You might not survive without my kidney, but that doesn’t mean you’re owed it.
I would LOVE for every pregnancy to be financially possible, wanted and loved. We as a society should work toward THAT end, and this debate would be moot.
Hi Jen,
Just to confirm, I really do enjoy these discussions and I am thankful for your kind tone of engagement.
I believe that the question of when does human life, which begins at conception, become a person is the central question here. It looks as though the main options are conception, quickening and first breath. To resolve this based on Hebrew scripture, one key passage is the situation in which a pregnant woman is attacked and experiences either premature birth or a miscarriage. The crucial passage is Exodus 21:22-25.
Since this is such a crucial passage, the history of translating it has sometimes involved insertion of words to change the meaning. The following is the best I’ve seen when it comes to sorting out this highly contentious interpretation challenge.
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1992/09/the-fetus-in-biblical-law
It’s about a 15 minute read.
The conclusion of the analysis presented in the article is that according to Hebrew scripture, the fetus is a person.
Neal
Neal, I appreciate the article, but I think it falls a bit short in it’s dependence on English translations. It’s one of the more thorough examinations of english translations, and I can see how he came to the conclusions that he did- but now that original language scholarship is more widely available, and there are scholars that are studying not only original languages, but understanding the context and history of when and why things were written, as well how the audience would have understood them, it just seems like there is better scholarship more widely available.
Also, since finding out how political the beginning of the pro-life movement was, I aim my focus on scholarship outside of any kind of modern or recent christianity-which seems to start with the ideal that “abortion is always wrong”, and then prove that presupposition. This article uses great historical sources, but all dependent on other translators, and outright dismisses Talmudic interpretations- which to me is the whole ball of wax. I want to understand scripture the way Jesus understood it (or as close as I can get to it) so that I can follow Jesus in the Way, Truth, and Life that he led. Truly, it seems misguided to put such emphasis on something that neither Jesus nor the scriptures mention, when Jesus (and the scriptures) DO instruct us on so much.
I have found it particularly helpful to learn from Jewish scholars, especially because Exodus, and really nearly the entire Canon(s) was written by then and mostly TO them. I found this article particularly interesting in beginning to understand Hebrew thought on the matter. https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/abortion (it is not short, and not simple, but facinating how many different and complex views there are.)
Jen,
I’m in the early stages of reading the encylopedia article on abortion to which you linked above. As I’m reading, a question has occured to me. Do you believe there is such a thing as an incorrect interpretation of scripture? Just checking, because I thought I remembered you commenting somewhere else something along the lines of, “everyone can have their own interpretation.” Honest question,
Neal
Neal,
I do believe that there can be incorrect interpretation of scripture. But I also believe that can be more than one correct interpretation of scripture- that there is not ONLY one correct way to see things. This is a position I have come to because at least in part, it’s how the Hebrews interprest scripture. The a-ha moment for me was learning that there are several “historical” things recorded in 1-2 Chronicles that are recorded differently in 1-2 Kings- and that that’s not “wrong”- but that different interpretations of the events were needed to teach the Israelites different things. That was a foreign concept to me, who has been raised on western thought where history is history and numbers mean quantity, and if you won the war in one text, you should win the war in every text. But that’s NOT the way the Bible works, or the point of it. It’s why there can be an excyclopedic aritcle about Hebrew thought on abortion, and you can have ideas that are clearly contradictory one after the next.
So I don’t think everyone can have their own interpretation, or that all interpretations are right- we must rightly divide the word of truth, after all- but I do think there is more than one single right way to understand many things in scripture.
https://biologos.org/articles/the-books-of-chronicles-and-the-problem-with-literalism
As a footnote, someone show me a text where God would support killing a child in his/her mother’s womb. So was Jesus not Jesus prior to birth? And John the Baptist who leaped in his mother’s womb was he a life? I’ve heard the arguments that well abortion wasn’t an issue back then and the Bible is silent. The Bible is silent on individuals viewing child porn. So is that ok? My point is how can you biblically arrive at that conclusion. You have yet to lay a biblical hermeneutic to lead to abortion. The same government prosecutors, who believes that a child in the womb is not viable. Also charged Scott Peterson double murder for killing his wife and unborn child. The government has zero consistency
To those who claim to be “pro-choice” while simultaneously claiming NOT to be pro-abortion:
If you believe it is fine for a woman to CHOOSE to abort a life, then you are pro-abortion. Period.
Stop playing word games and face reality: God has designed every single human being who ever lived or attempted to. Who can claim that God is okay with his design being terminated? Destroyed? Cut short?
Aborted?
The character of God does not allow room for such an atrocity. Ancient Canaan was destroyed by God largely because child sacrifice figured so prominently in the culture. Those who understand His character understand His revulsion when it comes to the murder of unborn children.
Cynthia –
Please don’t try to tell me what my stance is. To be “pro-abortion” is to be in support of it, wishing and cheering for it. I am not. Abortion is a gut-wrenching decision and experience I wouldn’t wish on or “cheer for” for anyone. I pray it doesn’t have to be an option for anyone, and I believe there are ways for that to happen (access to affordable birth control, better prenatal care, more research on what’s causing the spike in maternal deaths of Black women, etc.) I also note how abortions are going UP with all this government interference. I thought you said actions and results matter? Something is amiss.
I am also in support of a woman who has a “spontaneous abortion” (a type of miscarriage) or a ruptured placenta being treated properly. These procedure are medically called abortions. I don’t want her to have to go to court and trot out her medical records for the government to see and approve. Yes, that’s where we are. I won’t support that, no matter how you try to self righteously tell me what I believe.
We are going about this in a Phariseeical manner that is increasing the problem we want to eradicate.
Hey Marin,
My words were not singling you out. Sorry if you thought they were.
I love dogs. If I end the lives of my dog’s puppies before they are born, does that mean I am “pro-choice,” or does that mean I am “pro-abortion”?
Does it depend on circumstances or does it depend on what I actually did?
Cynthia –
I do appreciate and accept the apology, and did not feel singled out. And I do want to clarify that I am not trying to represent all believers who are pro-choice, just clarifying my stance.
I’m not sure I understand the dog analogy, as you are talking about a choice you would make for your dog no matter what? I’m truly confused.
I don’t understand this need to make sure all pro-choice people are lumped together with a broad brush of all being pro-abortion cheerleaders. We aren’t walking around like “we LOVE murdering babies!”, “You go, girl, good for you for having that abortion!” We have thought – and for those of us who are believers, prayed – about our stances, with many of us shifting them over time for a variety of reasons.
I don’t agree with all pro-choice believers. I also know pro-life believers who don’t all agree with one another (I know some who are NO ABORTION, even if mother or baby are in danger, just “pray through it”; and others who agree with abortion when mother or baby are in danger.) I let them have their various stances without the need to lump together and label.
Why can’t you allow the same?
Marin,
Good questions and thoughts, as always. Perhaps we agree on this: God has loved us so much that he sent his own Son and proclaimed that, through Him, we might have eternal life.
If God values us that much, so much that He sent Jesus as our Savior, shouldn’t we respect him more? Shouldn’t we at least agree that we owe him big-time? That one way we can show our love for Him is through the way we treat those less strong? Those less able to defend themselves? The poor, for example? The old and dying? The vulnerable?
The unborn?
Shouldn’t we respect the entire pregnancy process, from start to finish, as an act of God himself?
He designed us each in a completely unique DNA way. Why would a woman want to terminate such a creation? Why would anyone do it more than once, as many women do?
The dog analogy was meant to illustrate that our actions speak more than our stance on issues. For example, if I claim to be against adultery, yet go out and sleep with the husbands of other women, am I truly against adultery? If I claim to be against abortion, yet I support those women who have abortions, am I truly against abortion?
It is not possible to be pro-choice without also being pro-abortion, is it? For instance, if my friend says she thinks a woman should make that choice, isn’t she saying in effect that she thinks abortion is okay if a woman decides to have one? So, doesn’t that make her a supporter of abortion?
Jen please give me text (s) which support your view and not opine. I have yet to see anyone exegetically prove that God is prochoice. I gave you texts. Which assumes life prior to birth. Even non poetic texts. Although they are chiastic in structure not poetic in meaning, thus you can ignore it. Marin, if you believe that those who are prolife think they are better than prochoice. Then you are missing the whole point of the gospel. It is not a perspective of superiority. And you are judging others motives. I earlier stated that I can appreciate the nuanced view of pro-choice vs pro-abortion. I strongly disagree but at least cogitation has happened. Just because I biblically disagree doesn’t equate to superiority. You are creating a false dilemma! I’ve worked in the government for many many years and in a Christian recovery center. There’s a difference. These politicians do not care about you. I just provided security for Ron Johnson in Lake Geneva and I’ve dealt with Jerry Nadler. My estimation is not important, but what I’ve seen. There isn’t one who cares more about the unfortunate than the other. It’s not personality. It’s utilitarian. However, meeting someone’s need devoid of sharing Jesus has zero eternal value. Please respond to the texts I listed above. Then give text that back your view. I’ve never seen your opining that crystal in the text.
Jason –
By superiority, I am referring to the attitudes reflected in this thread. Let’s see, I’ve read that those who are not pro-life “need the true gospel”, “don’t have the mind of Christ”, “are not born again believers filled with the selfless love of God” (and need to realize God will say “He never knew us”), are “pro-sin”, are “pro-abortion”, “support the murder of unborn babies”, and “don’t understand the character of God.” I didn’t make up this dilemma, I cut and paste. This is little more than “you aren’t REAL Christians like we are!”, complete with accusations that conflate arguments to shame those who disagree. That is superiority in action.
Note that I expressed why I am pro-choice without attacking, accusing, or questioning the salvation of those who disagree with me. Your salvation is rooted in your faith in Jesus Christ as your Savior, and on nothing else (as is mine). Not even what you believe on abortion, or if the government should help the poor. We have had fellow believers – and even church leaders – be pro-slavery, pro-segregation, pro-death penalty and the like (remember Pat Robertson’s sermon in the 80s on the “Civil WRONGS Movement” and how it was against God to give people of color their civil rights?). As ugly as those beliefs are, I acknowledge they are held by people who profess Christ as their Savior, and ultimately give it to God to determine their salvation. Not my job.
James 2:15-17 also comes to mind, as too many are arguing this “either/or” approach to helping those in need. We should be feeding bodies AND souls, not either/or.
Furthermore, you mention utilitarian – at some point should we address how abortions are going up since the SCOTUS ruling (and how they tend to go up under pro-life administrations)? As much as pro-lifers are cheering about the reversal of Roe v Wade, I don’t think they are getting what they want. (I mean, they DO want abortions to go down, right? Or did they just want the power of the courts? I’m hearing ZERO concerns on the actual data.)
I believe this also proves the point that inserting the government into this matter wasn’t the holy grail many were led to believe. This is about PEOPLE – getting out there and actually caring about people, not rulings and courts. Hence my earlier reply: I was appalled at how those women in TN and TX were trotted into court to publicly “prove” they needed abortions, while they were in physical (not to mention emotional) pain. I was focused on them as PEOPLE, not the legalism of “being right.” I heard not ONE Christian leader speak up on behalf of those women.
And I’d like for ANYONE to tell me of just ONE person who was moved to accept the gospel and/or become a pro-lifer after watching Christians do that to those women.
Hi Jason. If this is a good faith question, I encourage you to look up Dan McClellan and his numerous videos about the Bible and abortion. He’s incredibly well versed biblically and historically, and it will take more than 300 words to respond fully to your request (and I’d likely just be typing up many things he’s shared more concisely, so lets give him the credit in the fist place). Here’s one of his shorter videos to start with, but he goes very in depth in others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWoqrL4XP8U
I have also worked in a christian recovery program and in government funded homelessness work. I worked with very good people in the christian recovery program, but much prefer my current work because it’s so much less coercive, and treats people as individuals with dignity- I’m not their savior, I’m walking along side them, and I don’t require to pretend my faith in order to get my help.
I’m so much freer to do Christ’s work now that I’ve given up the political trap that is the pro-life movement. It’s part of why I post about it on here- you DON’T have to be trapped into voting republican because of this one issue, especially since voting republican doesn’t actually DO anything to curb this issue, it just give people the moral superiority of voting for “the right side”. Be free!
Jason – I’m also still looking for the scripture where the government is responsible for protecting pregnant women or their unborn children.”. -Again, Context is being conflated. I’m talking about the church not government. I have been crystal the the church (not govt) is responsible for the poor. Scripture has a plethora of references of actual life before birth. No one has texts to the contrary. That foundation informs the Constitution/Bill of Rights. That’s why I vote for certain individuals which is based on biblical ethics. As a Soldier/officer/Christian . I believe that pro-life candidates, small-government, less bureaucracy, and lower taxes. I believe the Constitution/Bill Of Rights (which I fought for and lost my brother) defends all life. I was wounded overseas. Afterwards i was addicted to pain meds and eventually a Methadone clinic. Which was more addicting and mind altering than hydrocodone. I finally got free through the a year long church program. Went back to school got my M-Div and a THD. Now I teach New Testament Greek Syntax and Biblical Theology. Without Christ-I’d be dead like my brother. I believe in the gospel parallels to the US Constitution/Bill of Rights-Which I believe should defend all life. John the Baptist was a live in his mother’s womb. I felt my kids kick in my wife’s stomach. They were alive.
Jason – per your point: scripture says nothing about the government being responsible for taking care of the poor. Using your SAME logic, scripture says nothing about the government being responsible for taking care of the unborn.
So I believe you’re selectively applying scripture.
I do believe it’s a PEOPLE thing, and that the government wouldn’t need to step in to care for the poor OR the unborn if people were doing what scripture calls us to do (can we admit we aren’t doing a good job of either?) but that’s a whole OTHER layer.
Marin- if we were actually taking care of our neighbors and being a blessing to the place we live, we wouldn’t NEED to make laws about abortion, because it would be such a diminished issue. if we addressed poverty and education, made birth control widely available and free, and supported mothers from conception to the child’s adulthood, no questions asked, we would eliminate most of the barriers to keeping a child.
But watch everyone come tell me why each of those things aren’t possible, or Godly, or whatever.
My point is that if we wanted to greatly reduce abortion, we could. Colorado springs did by doing only one of those things. We just always have reasons… not to. And if we keep choosing not to solve the problem, we should at least be honest about what we’re actually trying to do.
https://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/30/colorado-teen-pregnancy-abortion-rates-drop-free-low-cost-iud/
Marin,
Regarding abortion, you make some good points. What I like to do when it comes to sticky issues like this is to picture God and how I think He feels about them.
You mention those poor women being trotted out in front of everyone and them having to justify their decision to have an abortion. Does God support shaming people in this way? I don’t think so. The story about the adulterous woman in the Bible illustrates this well.
You mention slavery and segregation. Does God support enslaving people and forcing them to be in bondage to others? I don’t think so. He discusses freedom in Jesus consistently, and how Jesus came to set us free. He is also consistent when it comes to calling out Christians to care for those in need, and “setting the captive free” is part of that message.
You mention caring about people. Does God support loving all people and “getting out there and actually caring”? Of course he does – he sent his own Son, didn’t he? And he most definitely cares about those yet to be, the unborn. “All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be…” Psalm 139.
So, does God support ending the lives of the unborn? Does He? I don’t think so. I believe, along with the Psalmist, that God forms us in our mother’s womb from Day 1. His hands begin to work the miracle of life at the moment of conception. I cannot in good conscience support a decision to end that work except in very rare cases when moms could die, were raped, or were forced into incest.
Cynthia – thanks for your response. They do make me think.
I didn’t call myself pro-life or pro-choice for years due to my stance. I would have a child if pregnant. I wish all women would do the same. But I know there are circumstances that make women not see having a child as a viable option. MY stance is to address these circumstances: sex education that discusses abstinence, access to affordable birth control and prenatal care, counseling services for pregnant women and new moms, proper funding of WIC, adequate family leave, revamping our foster care/adoption system….it baffles me so many pro-lifers are against these things! It reeks of “just force her to have the baby.”
So I ask, “then what?” Pro-lifers believe a woman will give birth, fall in love with her child at first glance, be grateful she didn’t have an abortion, and all is well. Untrue. Keeping a child can horrible cycles of poverty. I’ve known of women who were so resentful of having a child, they were neglectful, bordering on abusive. I’ve known people who knew they were unwanted by their parents and had a childhood marked by trauma. I’ve known of families that were so pro-life they were anti-birth control and had TOO many kids – and CPS intervened due to malnourishment. I’ve had friends who bounced around foster care their entire life.
This makes me ask questions that are deemed “pro-choice”, but by no means do I think these people shouldnt’ be born. It’s about asking pro-lifers to fully think through what they are asking for, including cause, effect, and implementation. Because we both agree what happened to those two women trotted into court was Phariseeical legalism at play.
Jen, Dan McClellan is LDS. The Book of Mormon is heretical. The Bible is clear fnot add to it. “if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.” God takes His Word seriously. Mormonism teach their book(s) is a purer gospel than the Bible. That’s arrogance. If you aren’t Mormon. You are relegated to one of the lower rungs of their universal gospel. Mormonism is dangerous-not mormons. Please do not conflate the two.
It was stated, “you aren’t REAL Christians like we are!” That thought has never crossed my mind. That’s conflating.
Those who are pro-choice are projecting on those who disagree. Could someone be prochoice and saved? Idk-I will question (Biblically) how they coincide. I have shown biblical evidence of life prior to birth and a practical illustration with Scott Peterson charged for double homicide for his wife and unborn child. Second, no one has show scripture where God disregarded the unborn child. Lastly, the ability to protect life is based on the Constitution/Bill of Rights. Which I discussed above. I have yet to hear a contextual response. I’m not the authority. The Bible is and my conviction is the constitution protects the rights of every individual. Remember you are loved!
Jason – wanted to clarify it was me who made the “you aren’t REAL Christians like we are!” comment; and I included a cut and paste of comments in this thread that have that sentiment. So while it may not be on YOUR mind (although the “needs the true gospel”, “not a question in the mind of a follower of Christ”, and “pray for those who do not have Christ” comments did come from you, and I find them to be iaccusing those who are pro-choice of “not being a real Christian” – I’d love you to clarify), it definitely is on the mind of others, as proven by the comments.
Hence why I stand by my comment on superiority being at play. Spiritual superiority.
I do appreciate Jen’s demonstration of how landing on the pro-choice side of the argument CAN be part of exploring one’s faith and understanding of scripture. While my thought process was different, I have found the comments in your back and forth to make me think – and also revisit various scriptures. (I do wonder if there being no direct verses speaking to abortion are due to Jewish understanding of personhood beginning at birth; which I don’t see as contradicting such verses as Psalm 139)
Marin-the real Christian comment was just that. It never crossed my mind. I will leave that to God. I’m commanded to do my best to cut the Word straight in scripture. As for the “attitude” comment. You and I do not known what the other’s attitude is. I’m not going to opine on your attitude. Please do not opine on mine.
As for Jen, we agreed that we have a different gospel. She stated that a LDS teacher is her source. Her Hermeneutic is “mysterious”. She stated a LDS teacher is reliable. Due to a historical approach. Which thus concludes -mysterious. I have taught and studied biblical Greek and Hebrew for 2 decades. I agree, we need to understand the original context as well as the exhortation for the body of Christ. However my conclusion is that the historical context has meaning thus understanding. But it does require rigor and effort. Yet rewarding. At the end of the day we believe in a different gospel. And have a different faith. Which was my point. Not that im superior. But each of us will answer one day.
Jason – people LOVE hiding behind their intent to avoid adressing the impact of their words. “I didn’t mean to” or “It never crossed my mind” does NOT take away the impact.
Questioning someone’s salvation or relationship with God – especially a fellow Christian who has placed their faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior (which is THE thing that matters) – can be harmful to the Christian as well as the overall body of Christ.
“I didn’t mean to” doesn’t mean it didn’t.
“It never crossed my mind” doesn’t mean it never harmed.
I will never challenge you – or anyone – on your intent; that’s between your and the Lord. I WILL call attention to impact, as scripture does warn us of the damage our words can cause, even if “it never crossed our minds” (verses like Proverbs 12:18 speak on the impact of thoughtless words), and tells us we will be accountable for all that we utter (even the idle words, as stated in Matthew 12:36)
And the impact is, it makes fellow believers feel lesser or as if they don’t belong in the body of Christ because they have another view. I can point you to MANY believers who feel this way if they DARE to not fully align with all conservative political stances.
Jason, Dan McClellan is a bible scholar, his mormon beliefs do not enter the picture. You asked for biblical foundation, I provided it. He’s a great resource for understanding the bible historically.
As for scripture where God disregards unborn children, well, in Ex 21, an unborn child is treated like property, not a person, so there’s that. in Hosea 9:11-16, Hosea, the hero of the story, prays for God to cause the people of Ephriam to miscarry, and this is seen as acceptable. Numbers 5:11-21 is a strange ritual where priests seem to cause abortions for women suspected of adultery. Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”. 2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”.
If you believe the Bible is historically accurate, God doesn’t seem overly concerned about babies- in the womb or out (there’s more disturbing stuff about infants and children).
Jen,
Your words:
“God doesn’t seem overly concerned about babies- in the womb or out (there’s more disturbing stuff about infants and children).”
I am praying for you. Up until now, I had no idea where you were coming from. Now I do. God loves infants and children with a love beyond understanding. It is terribly sad that you believe otherwise.
I would highly recommend the book, “God in the Dock,” by C. S. Lewis. You might find it helpful when it comes to understanding who God actually is, what He has done, and how great his love is.
He loves you, Jen. More than you can know.
Jumping in because this debate has made me think.
While we can point to many scriptures that point to God forming us in the womb, etc – that all point to His sovereignty, involvment in our creation, and omnipresence – I hadn’t thought too much about how there aren’t verses that specifically speak to how to care for the unborn. Yet there are verses that speak to homosexuality, murder, caring for the poor, etc.
I do wonder if some of this is due to the Jewish view of personhood starting at birth. And does that view counter scripture? I’m not sure. I mean, we know God cares about people who are not even CONCEIVED yet; that speaks to His nature and power, which are outside of and across our human realms. And we can get into personhood versus soul/spirit from a definition standpoint.
But does this mean that calling abortion a sin is an inference (e.g., and speaking where scripture is technically silent)? And if so, is that necessarily wrong? (We can point to a slew of things that aren’t specifically referenced in scripture BUT we can infer are in line with or against scripture and the “spirit” of the Word.)
Also, can it be argued that if we obey many of the other aspects of scripture – taking care of the poor, loving our neighbor, loving the person (who may be an unwed mom) but hating the sin, etc – that abortion wouldn’t even be an issue (addressing root causes)?
I’ll say something that I think is said enough in these sorts of conversation: I don’t know. I don’t have all the answers to these questions.
I appreciate the discussion.
I’m not sure we are looking at this from the same vantage. I could list a plethora of teachers from ministries that would debunk Dan. However, when we see God face to face, He will ask you and I what we did with His Word. We are commanded to rightly divide the Word (2 Timothy 4:1-2). Second, the previous chap about church corruption (3:1-9). Then later in chapter 3:15-16. God gives the remedy. His Word and how it is the spiritual antibiotic to an infected church oozing with corruption. Like what Julie is trying to expose. But we are to preach the word when it’s popular and when it’s not. We are living in a dangerous time both in orthodoxy and orthopraxy. I believe orthopraxy is based in weak orthodoxy. I will address those text listed later.
Jason- I think we are finally getting close to the same page! there ARE many many ways to interpret scripture! You still believe that there is only ONE right way to do it, and I get that- I really do. But I had to let go of it- because there are just so many contradicting ways to read the same thing that either God intended that- that scripture could teach in different ways at different times to different folks (which is a strongly Hebrew way to look at scripture) or God only ever meant one thing (which is a strongly western way to look at scripture) and then you have to deal with contradictions, like God knitting some people together in wombs and ripping others out of wombs. Which is, indeed, a contradiction- even if most evangelicalism chooses to just ignore it as you did.
I choose to acknowledge that scripture is mysterious, and was written in a different time to a different culture, with a different way of thinking. i now learn from people who dig into the historocity of it (Dan McClellan, Marty Solomon, Brent Billings, Pete Enns) to understand how the Hebrews would have understood it, and people who interpret it for the audiences Jesus would be focused on today- those on the underside of power (Wil Gaffney, James Cone, Ada María Isasi-Díaz Patrick Cheng). It’s not that I don’t know the perspective you and others are sharing- I do, I grew up to it and got a degree in it at the conservative baptist bible college. it just couldn’t support my faith any more- my choice was move on to something fuller, or walk away. I’m glad I chose to move on, because my faith is so much wider now.
Agreed Jen. We are coming from a different gospel. I’ve been all around the world. There are pockets everywhere that would lean towards your perspective and some that would lean towards my view of the sufficiency of scriptures vs going outside of scripture. I’ll will be accountable to His Word in orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Unfortunately many men have orthodoxy but didn’t believe they needed to focus on behavior. The blessings of losing my brother at a young age from ptsd from fighting in a pointless war, as did I. Is that I believe that God is sovereign. Why did I live and he die from alcoholism due to the pain of his trauma? God is sovereign. It’s nothing but that. Isaiah 45:7 states, “ form light and create darkness;
I make well-being and create calamity;
I am the LORD, who does all these things.” Hebrews 12:2 states, “ looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.” and James 1:2-4, “ Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.” Those three text are the guide for me. God causes all things. Jesus endured all things for joy and I am to do the same.
The truths of scripture have been intensely examined and have been interwoven from unspeakable hardship. At the end I still chose Christ and His Word!
Jason,
Well said. I, too, stand on the sufficiency of scripture even though life’s outcomes do not always match what I had hoped for. I often go back to the story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the Old Testament. Their answer to the king rings true today:
Daniel 3: 17,18:
“If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.”
EVEN IF HE DOES NOT…That means, no matter the outcome, even if my best hopes are dashed and my life is a daily grind of sadness, God is STILL in control and I will STILL follow him.
Perhaps those arguing for human explanation have not realized that God is omniscient, omnipresent, eternal, love itself….I could go on. Perhaps they do not yet know who God really is and have not met his Son and have not experienced the Holy Spirit working in their lives. Stated differently, they have yet to find a Savior.
I am so sorry about your brother.
Jason – I did want to pause and say thank you for being vulnerable enough to share about your loss and hardships. I know those moments can make it SO hard to understand God’s sovereignty and omnipresence. It says a lot about your faith in who God is (and not just what He does or can do) that you let those moments draw you closer to Him. Seeking His face versus seeking His hand is where true intimacy with Him lies. God bless!
Jason, I do not argue with your faith, how it was formed or where it now stands.
I do, however, question your willingness to look at the fullness of scriptures if you believe it is consistent and without contradiction, especially if you believe it constantly holds a “pro-life” ethic. One has to willfully ignore the chaos and distruction “God” wills on people.
I don’t think we have much difference in our Gospels, just in the way we interact with scripture. I no longer believe it’s inerrant or infallible, because I don’t think it was ever meant to be that (or history, or rules, or most of the other ways we use it. (and it wasn’t Dan McClellan that started me on this road, by the way, it was Marty Solomon and Pete Enns). I think scripture is God’s story of God trying to interact with man, and how man (mis)understood it. God sent Jesus to show us the best picture of who God is, and how God intended us to live. I haven’t landed on an atonement theory, but I’m not positive I need to understand atonement- I’m pretty sure it’s not PSA, because that’s so contradictory to the overarching nature of God I see, but, you know, I could be wrong.
We may have a different gospel because infallibility and inerrancy are beautiful illustrations of the Words in the Bible. That doesn’t mean that I do not have value in your perspective. I use these platforms vs just going into an echo chamber. I watch CNN and rarely find commonality. If anything you are sharpening my view.
The Bible is not a book of rules to follow. It’s all about God’s Glory, Holiness and His Son Jesus. Paul stated that Timothy had the the Old Testament (2Timothy 3:15) which is alone could bring him to salvation in Christ. VS 16-17 states, “ All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”
Jesus told the men He was walking with (Luke 24:44-45). That all of scripture is about Him. The texts says then He opened their minds to “understand the scriptures.” Which leads me to believe that Christ is Lord and Savior of my life and Hermeneutic. We all have transcendent loss and profound pain. I just can’t leave my convictions. That He began this work in me and He will finish it!
Jason, you suggest “We may have a different gospel because infallibility and inerrancy are beautiful illustrations of the Words in the Bible.”
They may be nice ideas, but much like the “pro-life” stance, they can not be proven with scripture. And if you’re open to scripture+ church tradition+ new scientific and sociological knowledge (which is how you get “pro-life” AND inerrancy/infallability), well then I’ll remind you of that when we meet again on an LGBTQ+ thread. I think we’ve found our dividing line. You will use scripture to support the ideas you already hold whether they’re in there or not(I mean, we all do to an extent) and ignore contradictions that don’t fit. I let go of ideas “from” and about scripture when they have proven untennable when compared to actual scripture (inerrancy, “pro-life”), and deal with scripture on scriptures terms.
I’m guessing we’ll both have eternal life, especially if we’re doing thing things that sort us into the sheep category in Matthew 25. that, ultimately, was the freeing factor for me to be less terrified about “believing” the wrong thing- Jesus sorts the sheep and goats based on how we treat those on the underside of power and justice- nothing more, nothing less. Right belief, correct dogma, even the right political stances don’t even enter the picture (or scripture), so, my prayer for you is that whatever your beliefs, interpretations and dogmas, they may lead to to the correct actions that Jesus instructed us in- that you may truly find the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that you may be found among the sheep.
Jen:
Your words: “Jesus sorts the sheep and goats based on how we treat those on the underside of power and justice- nothing more, nothing less.”
With these words, Jen, you have made Jason’s point for him: You do not believe the Gospel proclaimed in the Bible. If you did, you would realize that NO good works of any sort can get us into heaven.
Only Jesus can.
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2: 8-10
I am wondering if you understand the concept of sin and what it actually is? You seem so confused.
I think the Roys Report does some great work, but it is articles like this one that make me not support it. It boggles my mind that “Christians” openly advocate for a person who celebrates abortion. She doesn’t just support “pro-choice,” she celebrates abortion as an active good. All of the “I support those who care for the foreigner, needy, and widow” are lying to themselves. Neither party cares for these people. You use Christianity as a means to an end…both parties do that.