A World War II bomb exploded at a construction site in Munich on Wednesday, injuring four people, one of them seriously. According to the Associated Press, such bombs are still found frequently in Germany seventy-six years after the end of the war.

This is just one way events in the past can still profoundly affect the present.

Another is the discovery in the US Constitution of a right to abortion by seven members of the Supreme Court in 1973. Since that time, more than sixty-two million babies have been aborted in the US. Forty-one times more babies die from abortion each day than from all other causes combined.

In response to Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing that could determine the future of legalized abortion in the US, I have defended on biblical, scientific, and secular grounds my assertion that abortion takes a human life. Today, we’ll take up my second claim: that abortion should therefore be illegal.

I am writing today’s Daily Article for those who agree with my first assertion but question the second. If you are in their number or know someone who is, I hope what follows will persuade you to defend the cause of life with compassionate courage.

4 arguments separating life and legality

A few months ago, I was discussing the abortion issue on Equipped with Chris Brooks. Chris is a brilliant thinker and pastor and one of my favorite radio hosts. During our conversation, a listener called in to make the statement, “I disagree personally with abortion, but I also believe it should be the decision of the mother rather than the government.” Over the years, I have met many people who would agree. Let’s identify and respond to some of their arguments.

1: A woman should be free to make her own healthcare and reproductive decisions. “My body, my choice” is a mantra we often see on signs at pro-abortion rallies. However, the state does not allow women to make all their own healthcare choices—the decision to use illegal drugs is an example—since it has a compelling interest to protect them from physical harm.

In addition, those who agree that abortion takes a human life should logically agree that the government has a compelling interest to protect that life. This interest obviously extends to female babies (around 140 million women are believed to be “missing” around the world, the victims of gender-biased abortion). “My body, my choice” is a claim an aborted child is not permitted to make.

Chris responded to the caller by asking if she supported the mother’s right to end her newborn baby’s life. She assured him that she did not. He then asked what changes biologically with the baby when it moves from inside the mother’s womb to outside it. She agreed that nothing changes. Why, then, he asked, would you support her right to kill her baby before it is born but not afterward?

2: Men should not be making personal decisions for women. Some would say that as a male, I have no right to speak to this issue. I would offer three responses. First, seven male Supreme Court justices legalized abortion when they voted for Roe v. Wade. One of the current court’s strongest abortion supporters is a male (Justice Breyer). Second, abortion affects male babies who are aborted, the biological father, males in the extended family, and men in society at large. Third, to be consistent, we must then segregate all legal issues into strictly male or female categories regarding those affected, a highly implausible strategy.

3: The state should not legislate personal morality. For example, while most would agree that adultery is immoral, it is not therefore illegal. However, as I noted yesterday, all laws are in some sense a legislation of morality. And the right to life itself is “unalienable,” as our Declaration of Independence notes: a bedrock, fundamental human right. Should the state not then legislate its protection?

4: The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade recognized abortion as a fundamental right of women. This assertion was repeated by an attorney arguing against the Mississippi abortion law before the court. As a Christian, I am commanded to “be subject to the governing authorities” (Romans 13:1). Thus, some claim that I should not seek to make abortion illegal even though I object to the practice personally, any more than I should seek to make Muslim worship illegal even though I disagree with Islamic theology.

However, the apostles refused to obey laws that conflicted with biblical morality and their missional commission (cf. Acts 5:29). Christians such as William Wilberforce led the fight to overturn legal slavery. Ministers such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led the fight to overturn legal segregation and racial discrimination. In his famous Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Dr. King quoted St. Augustine: “An unjust law is no law at all.”

Two fascinating Washington Post articles

My articles this week have focused on the abortion issue from biblical and secular perspectives. Let’s close with two practical imperatives for believers.

1: Continue using our influence to engage the culture.

Jesus’ call for us to be “salt” and “light” is clear and unequivocal (Matthew 5:13–16). Neither functions unless it is applied where it is needed.

Is America advancing toward biblical morality or receding from it? Does our culture desperately need courageous, compassionate Christians who speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15)? Given the examples of Joseph, Mordecai, Nicodemus, William Wilberforce, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and many others, does God call his people into political leadership, legal and judicial service, and other places of enormous cultural influence?

If them, why not you?

2: Find ways to serve those in need and trust God to use your influence for good.

I was gratified to read in the Washington Post that evangelicals in Texas are creating a “maternity ranch” and finding other life-affirming ways to help pregnant women. I was also deeply impressed to read in the Washington Post about the racially inclusive congregation of Bethlehem Apostolic Temple in Wheeling, West Virginia.

Its pastor, Rev. Darrell Cummings, notes: “We’re not a Black church or a white church. We’re just a church.” The article adds that the church “floods social services into the community.” Rev. Cummings explains: “We’re just showing love.”

The Washington Post is a highly influential but highly “progressive” platform. If evangelical Christians can catch its eye by serving those in need, God can use your influence in cultural ways that might surprise you.

“The source of national purpose”

John F. Kennedy stated: “I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, human liberty as the source of national action, the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas.”

Let’s speak the truth in love to all four, to the glory of God.

Denison Forum

Around 385,000 babies are born each day worldwide. On November 14, Analia Acevedo Castañeda was one of them. She was, however, the only one I know of to be born on an airplane.

Her mother went into premature labor an hour into their flight heading home to North Carolina from Mexico. A nurse on board helped her for more than three hours until the plane landed at the Atlanta International Airport. First responders then found the mother lying on the floor in the back of the plane and decided to deliver the baby there. When she was born, one of the flight attendants took the microphone to announce, “We have a baby girl.”

If the mother had chosen abortion, her “baby girl” would have become a “fetus” and her life would have ended in a legally protected act. If, however, her mother had been murdered and the unborn child had died, that child would have been recognized as a legal victim as well.

Whether the “baby girl” was murdered with her mother, her mother aborted her, or her mother gave birth to her, nothing whatsoever about Analia herself would have changed.

Herein lies the tragic contradiction inherent in Roe v. Wade and the abortion license it grants.

What happened at the Supreme Court

As you know, the US Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday regarding a Mississippi law that bans abortion after fifteen weeks. According to CNN, the court “seemed poised” to uphold the law, “but it is less clear if there is a clear majority to end the right to abortion nationwide.”

After the hearing, Fox News’ Bill Mears suggested the court would support Mississippi’s ban and remove the “viability” standard from Roe (see more on this below) as the constitutional standard. This would mean “Roe would neither be struck down in its entirety or upheld in its entirety.”

The New York Times reports that the justices will cast tentative votes at a private conference in the coming days. If there is a majority, the senior justice in that majority will write the majority opinion or assign it to a colleague. Draft opinions will be prepared and exchanged. A final decision is not expected until late June or early July, when major rulings tend to arrive.

Pro-life supporters should be praying for the justices in these crucial days of personal and private deliberations (1 Timothy 2:1–2), asking God to guide their minds and, where necessary, change their views and hearts (cf. Proverbs 16:9).

In the meantime, how can we persuade others that preborn life is sacred and should be safeguarded?

Six secular arguments

My position on abortion can be stated in two phrases: Abortion takes a human life and therefore abortion should be illegal. Yesterday, we discussed biblical and scientific evidence for the first phrase. Today, we’ll consider other relevant secular arguments; tomorrow, we’ll focus on the logical imperative of the second phrase.

1: The stare decisis (“to stand by things decided”) argument is that Roe is settled law and thus should be allowed to stand. This was the reasoning of three conservative justices who voted to uphold Roe in 1992. However, the Supreme Court has overturned previous decisions 230 times over its history, including the horrific Dred Scott decision that protected slavery.

2: The viability argument is that the unborn child should be protected by law once it could survive outside the womb but can be aborted prior to this point. This was the reasoning in the court’s 1992 Planned Parenthood vs. Casey ruling that kept the core of Roe but changed its trimesters approach to a “viability” standard. However, as Russell Moore and Ross Douthat convincingly demonstrate, this standard also applies to small children, those with significant developmental challenges, the elderly infirm, those battling severe disease, and so on. It is a slippery slope to devaluing all life based on its utility to those who do the valuing.

3: The imposing morality argument claims that the state should not legislate ethical standards on this issue, leaving the decision to the mother. But every law is an imposition of morality, from speed limits to seatbelt laws to prohibitions against murder. If a mother is to be free of all such “impositions,” should said freedom extend to infanticide? Where are such lines to be drawn?

4: The “no unwanted children” argument claims that a woman who does not want to bear a child will be an inappropriate or ineffective mother if the child is born. The mother is more closely involved with the fetus than any other individual and is the best person to determine whether or not this child is wanted and will receive proper care. However, it is hard to argue seriously that an unwanted child would rather be aborted than given life. This approach would also apply to infanticide and all forms of euthanasia. And it overlooks the positive and life-giving alternative of adoption.

5: The rape and incest argument claims that pregnancies resulting from these despicable crimes should be subject to legal abortion for the sake of the mother. However, just 1 percent of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape; less than 0.5 percent do so because of incest. Seventy-four percent of abortions are chosen because “having a baby would dramatically change my life”; 73 percent are chosen because the mother “can’t afford a baby now.”

6: The health of the mother argument claims that since the mother is clearly a person under the Constitution, her physical life, emotional health, and quality of life should take precedence. However, the medical risks posted by abortion should be considered as well as the guilt and long-term mental anguish reported by many who abort their children. Legalized abortion also subjects women to pressure from others to end their pregnancies. While pro-life advocates uniformly agree that pregnancy can be morally terminated to save the life of the mother, only 4 percent of abortions relate to her physical health problems.

“Our mouths wide open at his love”

Legalized abortion is a tragic symptom of the foundational spiritual disease of our culture. The fact that we are even having this debate and that I needed to outline the arguments above shows how far our culture has moved from biblical truth.

According to the word of God, every human is created in our Creator’s image and likeness (Genesis 1:27). Each of us can say with the prophet, “The Lᴏʀᴅ called me from the womb, from the body of my mother he named my name” (Isaiah 49:1). Our Lord loved us “while we were still sinners” (Romans 5:8) and rejoices over us “with gladness” today (Zephaniah 3:17). He has a unique and providential purpose for each of us from the moment of our conception (cf. Jeremiah 1:5).

If we viewed life as he does, rather than debating the status of preborn children, we would be celebrating the miracle of their lives and ours with them.

Brennan Manning was right: “We should be astonished at the goodness of God, stunned that he should bother to call us by name, our mouths wide open at his love, bewildered that at this very moment we are standing on holy ground.”

When last were you “bewildered” by your Father’s love for you?

How will you share that love with someone today?

Denison Forum

Ariana Grande made her Broadway debut at the age of fifteen, starred on Nickelodeon’s Victorious two years later, and has released six studio albums, five of which peaked at #1 on the Billboard 200 albums chart. She is also the newest judge on NBC’s hit show, The Voice.

Now she is in the news for a different reason. During a recent appearance on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, she revealed that she has had a “weird” manifestation gift her entire life.

In case “manifestation” is an unfamiliar concept for you, I’ll let Oprah Winfrey explain: “You control a lot by your thoughts, and we control a lot by our joined thoughts . . . by what I [and we] believe. When I started to figure that out for myself, I became careful of what I think and what I ask for. I was like what else can I do? What else can I manifest, because I have seen it work. I have seen it happen over and over again.”

Four victims were Milwaukee Dancing Grannies

On this Thanksgiving eve, it can be hard to be grateful in a fallen world filled with tragedy and suffering.

For example, we now know that four of the five people killed in the Waukesha Christmas parade attack on Sunday were part of a group of older women called the Milwaukee Dancing Grannies. The attack is just one example of a growing trend of vehicles used as weapons for mass killing.

In other news, Washington, DC, has recorded its two-hundredth homicide of the year, a mark not seen since 2003. Dozens of San Francisco area stores and pharmacies have been hit by mobs of smash-and-grab looters. And a bus carrying North Macedonian tourists crashed in flames in Bulgaria before daybreak yesterday, killing at least forty-five people, including twelve children.

In a world that feels more chaotic than ever, strategies to gain personal control will always be popular, “manifesting” among them.

“You have God potential and power”

This concept was the focus of the 2006 bestselling book, The Secret. It claims: “You are the master of your life, and the Universe is answering your every command.” This is because “you are God in a physical body. You are Spirit in the flesh. You are Eternal Life expressing itself as You.

“You are a cosmic being. You are all power. You are all wisdom. You are all intelligence. You are perfection. You are magnificence. You are the creator, and you are creating the creation of You on this planet. . . . You have God potential and power to create your world.”

The author adds: “We are the creators not only of our own destiny but also of the Universe. . . . Your life will be what you create it as, and no one will stand in judgment of it, now or ever. You are the master of the Universe. You are the heir to the kingdom. You are the perfection of Life.”

As a result, “You can have, be, or do anything you want.” Here’s how: “Decide what you want to be, do, and have, think the thoughts of it, emit the frequency, and your vision will become your life.” This is because “all good things are your birthright! You are the creator of you.”

Is this biblical? The author claims: “Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and Jesus were not only prosperity teachers, but also millionaires themselves, with more affluent lifestyles than many present-day millionaires could conceive of.” You can join them, or so the book says.

“Shut up I’m manifesting”

Now this promise has been made into a process that is exploding in popularity.

Vox reports that “a new generation is discovering its central thesis” on social media: “On TikTok, teenagers share stories about how ‘scripting,’ or repeatedly writing down a wish,” is working for them. Vloggers on YouTube are leading tutorials on “how to properly manifest your dream future.” Instagram and Twitter are being used to “manifest” as well.

During one five-month period last year, Google searches for “manifesting” skyrocketed 669 percent; “shut up I’m manifesting” was one of the defining memes of the year. The article explains that “manifesting” was especially attractive during the pandemic quarantine, giving people “a way to accomplish something we have control over in a time when we’re mostly powerless to effect any real change.”

It adds, “There is also a lower barrier to entry than almost any other activity: All you need are your dreams and to think about how nice it would be if they all came true.”

Why “manifesting” doesn’t work

According to German academic and NYU psychology professor Gabriele Oettingen, the advice espoused in books like The Secret is demonstrably false. She states: “The more positively people dream about the future, the better they feel at the moment. People relax and their blood pressure goes down. But you need the energy to implement your wishes, and over time, they actually get more depressed, partly because they’re putting in less effort and have less success.”

Substantiating her concern, the Vox article points to “decades of scientific research and dozens of studies proving that, often, positive thinking actually makes us more complacent and therefore less likely to muster the effort to achieve our goals.”

Of course, the larger issue with The Secret and the “manifesting” phenomenon it has sparked is theological. Satan’s central lie from Eden to today is the same: “You will be like God” (Genesis 3:5). But there can be only one God in your life. There is room for only one occupant on the throne of your mind and heart. If you choose yourself, you substitute your fallen mind for divine omniscience, your finite capacities for divine omnipotence, and your sinful attitudes and actions for the sanctifying and empowering Holy Spirit.

If you resign from your throne today and enthrone Jesus as your authoritative King (Matthew 28:18), surrendering your life and day to his Spirit (Ephesians 5:18) and asking him to guide and use your life for his glory and our good (Proverbs 3:5–6), you will have great cause for thanksgiving this day and every day.

You can attempt to “manifest” your desires for your purposes, or you can ask Jesus to manifest himself and his perfect will in your life and influence (Romans 12:1–2). But you cannot do both.

“Only one sermon to preach”

Vance Havner testified, “If I had only one sermon to preach, it would be on the Lordship of Christ. When we get right on that point, we are right all down the line. God honors the exaltation of his Son.”

Keith Green was right: “Making Jesus Lord of our life is not something passive. It’s not a state of being, it’s a state of doing.” Watchman Nee added: “A day must come in our lives, as definite as the day of our conversion, when we give up all right to ourselves and submit to the absolute Lordship of Jesus Christ.”

Has that day come for you yet?

Denison Forum