Proliferation: Prolife Victory is Only a Generation Away!

Bullinger on Literary Figūrae

“This peculiar form or unusual manner (i.e., figure of speech) may not be true, or so true, to the literal meaning of the words; but it is more true to their real sense, and truer to truth. Figures are never used but for the sake of emphasis. They can never, therefore, be ignored. Ignorance of Figures of speech has led to the grossest errors, which have been caused either from taking literally what is figurative, or from taking figuratively what is literal.”

E. W. Bullinger, The Companion Bible, App. VI

Reading Joel...and the Rest of Scripture

I’ve recently been thinking about the universal judgment in Joel, which is promised from YHWH, and is to take place at "The valley of Jehoshaphat" ('the LORD is judge,' 3:12) or the "valley of decision" (3:14).

If one accepts the traditional idea that this is the Kidron valley (or “holler,” here in the South :), then one's mind is immediately carried backwards to David's journey across the valley, up the Mt. of Olives, to his Gesthemane-crisis-decision with his band of three closest followers (2 Sam. 15:23-33); and, it takes one forward to Jesus' journey through the same route, with his three closest followers, wherein YHWH did in fact execute judgment on his people from all nations (Jn. 18:1; Lk 22:39—46; cf. Mt 26:36—46; Mk 14:32f,), and where they both committed themselves to the will of God.

Abortion and the Lordship of Christ

In short, abortion has to do with the lordship of Jesus Christ and with everything we say about the nature of Christ's lordly rule. Abortion says that Christ was wrong when he commanded "Do not kill" (Mark 10:19). Abortion says that we can make up our own rules for our sinful selves, and totally ignore the fact that apart from Christ, we can do nothing, except wither and dry up like branches that are good only to be tossed into a fire (John 15:5-6). Abortion says that Christ is not Lord, but rather that we are our own lords instead. And so abortion argues against and denies the church's earliest, central, most enduring confession, that Jesus Christ alone is Lord over all in heaven and on earth.

                        Dr. Elizabeth Achtemeier, “Abortion: Not a Fringe Issue,” 1993

Co-Dependency is Not the Problem

The other afternoon Fanny and I were standing in the kitchen discussing the concept of "co-dependency." Now, it may be granted that certain folks find too much significance and comfort in a relationship with this or that person. However, I don't think a self-conscious, Christ-conscious Christian should use the popular psycho-babble term co-dependency to describe this situation.

Rather, we've had the correct diagnosis for centuries in Scripture; it is called idolatry. It is elevating another mere mortal to a deified status, and making them to bear the burden of trying to live as your God. We don't need some wacked Freudian analysis or Banduran social theory to explain this. The root of this problematic behavior is that a person isn't co-dependent on the right One; the idolatrous relationship isn’t co-dependency, it's rooted in a failure in being co-dependent on Christ.

However, popular psychology has vilified the concept of co-dependency. This "weakness" is the strength, the muscles and sinews, of the Church! Turning the concept of co-dependency into a "disorder," a "condition," or worse a "disease" (as though behavior is subject to pathology--pleeeez!), or any other term of derision was made easy by our culture's crass individualistic tendencies. Anyone who doesn't wish to be "an island to herself" is thought to be "co-dependent." So, the church is counter-cultural by default, in so far as she is heeding Christ's command to be "co-dependent" upon him and one another. 

I don't think one would risk being impious to say that the Trinity is nothing short of the Ultimate Co-Dependency. No one Person could be what he is in isolation from the other two. In fact, most historic heresies have ultimately been instances of attempted theo-therapeutic philosophies, which have sought to "heal" God's co-dependency within himself.   

St. Paul said, "Your life is hid with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3). If a person has a problem with being co-dependent, then, well...I suppose there are other religions out there.

The Recent Election, Human Rights, and Pro-Abortion Rhetoric

One wonders how many of this year’s mid-term election races were won, based on the claim that the prolife candidate’s position was contrary to women’s rights, because he or she took a position against elective abortion on demand.




Sociopaths notwithstanding, we all agree that adult human beings enjoy an equal share in equal rights, which we commonly call human rights. What, though, is that property we all share that grounds our human rights?




Is it function, size, development, race, or gender that grounds human rights? No, because these criteria sometimes vary radically among people, while our claim to rights does not. Human rights do not come in degrees. Our rights are based on what we are, not what we can do.




That universal property which grounds human rights is the human nature. Human nature is not something that develops over time. Instead it’s a necessary precondition for all of our subsequent development. Therefore, human nature is prior to human development.




The continuum of human development begins at fertilization and continues to natural death. All humans, from conception onward, have an equal share in human rights, especially the right to life. Women's rights are what they are because of their more fundamental basis in human rights.




Consequently, the rhetoric that the prolife candidate or vote is one against women’s rights is absurd. Regardless of the fact that approximately half of all abortions take a tiny female’s life, women’s rights presuppose human rights, which all enjoy—almost all.  




The Symmetry of Covenant Sexuality in 1 Cor. 7:1—7

1-2a	Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication
2b, c	A. let every man        B. have his own wife, and        B. let every woman A. have her own husband.
3	A. Let the husband        B. render unto the wife               C. due benevolence:               C. and likewise also        B. the wife A. unto the husband.
4	A. The wife hath not power of her own body,        B. but the husband:        B. and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, A. but the wife.
5	A. Defraud ye not one the other,        B. except it be with consent for a time,               C. that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer;        B. and come together again, A. that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
6, 7	A. But I speak this by permission,        B. and not of commandment.        B. For I would that all men were even as I myself. A. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.