Is “Pro-Forced Birth” a More Accurate Term than “Pro-Life”?
Greg responds to a tweet by Jameela Jamil claiming “pro-forced birth” is a more accurate term than “pro-life,” then he answers questions about secondary issues in churches and an atheist’s case for objective morality.
0:00 Introduction
2:45 Is “Pro-Forced Birth” a more accurate term than “pro-life”? (00:00)
33:32 How important are secondary issues when deciding whether to leave a church or stay?
43:58 Should I be troubled by my church using Bethel music?
48:08 How can I respond to Peter Singer’s case for objective morality without God?
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity #ProLife #Bioethics
————— CALL IN TO THE SHOW —————
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl, live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time, at (855) 243-9975.
————— SUBMIT YOUR QUESTION —————
If you’d like to submit your question ahead of time for the broadcast, or if you’d like to submit a question for the #STRask podcast, fill out our form at https://www.str.org/broadcast.
————— FIND MORE FREE TRAINING —————
Website: https://www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: https://training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: https://www.str.org/apps
————— CONNECT —————
Twitter: https://twitter.com/STRtweets
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/standtoreason93
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/standtoreason
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stand-to-reason/
————— GIVE —————
Support the work of Stand to Reason: https://str.org/donate
source
I wrote this a few years ago….
Conclusion:
My current position as I understand the facts is that one could and should (logically and theologically) separate and judge Hillsong the music from Hillsong the teaching. One can reject one and keep the other (e.g., reject the false teaching and keep the orthodox teaching). However, the stronger Christian may be able to separate Hillsong music from their teaching while the weaker Christian may not and so the stronger Christian should take this into consideration with weaker Christians at least until the weaker Christians mature in their faith and understanding. This means that we all should be growing in our knowledge of God and of our personal beliefs, be doing theology in community, checking our beliefs and theology to make sure they are coherent (make logical sense), consistent (internally consistent with itself and other statements in a given system) and comprehensive (live able). We should not be afraid to have our personal beliefs challenged. It seems to me that we tend to be inconsistent and in comprehensive with our beliefs because of our laziness, complacency. We don't want to be inconvenienced. We don't want to give up our traditional and religious folklore, or the passion, and personal investment we have made.As I mentioned before, J.P. Moreland comments in his book, “Love Your God With All Your Mind”, “We must stand against the culture (including inappropriate tendencies in the evangelical subculture), resist the empty self, and eschew the intellectual flabbiness that goes along with it. Motivation is a key here…
Expose yourself to ideas with which you disagree and let yourself be motivated to excel intellectually by the exposure. Listen to talk shows, read the editorial page, and walk around a local university and look at bulletin boards or read the student newspaper. Get into discussions with people at work with whom you differ. The point is to spend time around those who do not simply reinforce your own ways of looking at things. There are two advantages to this. For one thing, we can learn from our critics. For another, such exposure can move us to realize just how serious the war of ideas really is and how inadequately prepared we are to engage in that contest.” Greg Koukl from Stand To Reason further emphasizes the importance of having our beliefs challenged so that we can know how valid they are, “None of us wants his views proven wrong, especially his most cherished ones, regardless of which side of the fence we’re on. But if we want to cultivate a sensible faith, we need to be aware of our own powerful instincts for theological self-preservation.
This instinct is so strong, in fact, that sometimes we are tempted to intellectually circle the wagons and guard against the slightest challenge to our beliefs. This strategy, however, provides a false sense of security. The opposite approach actually provides much more safety.
In Medieval times when a knight threw his gauntlet—an armored glove—into the arena, it was a challenge to fight. This was his signal to the world he was willing to take on a challenger. He was in the game.
In the same way, Christians need to throw down the gauntlet. Instead of digging in behind the trenches to defend against attackers, we should tear down our defenses. We should throw our ideas into the arena and invite attack by hostile witnesses.
In academic circles this is called “peer review.” Philosophers, scientists, and theologians present their ideas in professional forums and solicit critique. They test the merit of their thoughts by offering them to people who are inclined to disagree.
The idea of peer review is based on a very sound notion. If our ideas are easily destroyed by those acquainted with the facts, they ought to be discarded. But if our ideas are good, they will not be upended so easily. In the process, we’ll learn what the other side knows, and may be surprised at how weak their resistance really is…”
(from Ambassador Insights “Peer Review”. http://www.str.org).
In my paper “Does the Church Need A New Reformation: An Argument for A New Reformation”, I ask: Why the local church needs to get back to reason and training: The Importance of Understanding Barriers to the Gospel, the Nature of Truth and the Christian's and Church’s Responsibility then move on to how the church can do that: By Understanding The Importance of Philosophy in Theology, by Understanding The Importance Purpose and Audience, by Interpreting and Applying The Bible Correctly, by Explaining Why There Are Different Systems, Views and Interpretations? and by Incorporating Apologetics. And I reached the conclusion that: All Christians and especially pastors should have some basic knowledge of philosophy, hermeneutics, theology and apologetics so that they can know and love God better and explain more effectively and more convincing what they believe and why in our postmodern culture.” You can find my paper at: https://sites.google.com/site/worldviewcafe
We should all attempt to live consistently between the claimed beliefs we claim to hold and between our actions and our claimed beliefs. We should continually ask ourselves: Is what I say, claim, really how I live?
Personally I don't really call myself pro-life. I prefer the term Pro-Eternal life, because there's much more to the pro-life movement to just making sure the baby is born. You want to help and make sure that child is born Again into the kingdom of Go. In some settings though, I have called myself pro-choice. Two people have the right to go to bed together, however, if pregnancy is the result of that choice, the woman does NOT have the right to go back and kill her baby just so she can reverse the result of that choice. Why? Because chances are she's going to go back out and get pregnant again. That's exactly what Planned Parenthood wants.
One point missing in the response is this: women who hear a pro-life message and choose life where abortions are available (like Britain where Jameela Jamil is from), aren't forced to give birth. They maintained their agency throughout their pregnancy and at any time could change their minds, up til it's no longer legally allowed. .
Something to think about… You likely won't ever find a church where everyone agrees on everything. We need to learn how to disagree kindly on topics that are not close-handed gospel issues, and still love each other, worship together, serve together, etc.
Appreciate the time stamps!
i am against capital punishment and pro-life thank you very much
Your wisdom is always a blessing,. Thank you!
Isaiah 5:20.
Great show!
great stuff. I kept trying to clean your camera lense from my side tho. 😉
Pro-lifers need to stop calling pro-aborts "pro-choicers" and "abortion choice advocates." They are the ones who favour choices that wipe out an entire lifetime of choices. They don't care about accuracy. They just want to win. We hold these people to a standard that they don't even hold themselves to.
Calling pro-lifers "pro-forced birth" is like saying that pro-lifers will do anything to stop a prenatal human being from being dismembered. Even if the label "pro-forced birth" were true (which it isn't), there's nothing wrong with saying I don't want the unborn child to be killed.
65,000,000 unborn children murdered since Roe vs Wade. We live in a Sodom and Gomorrah cesspool of aa country.
You people who think you can change the verbiage and make the concept better?
It's called murder, people.
İmagine having sex, causing someone to start existing inside you and then just chopping them to pieces. And then imagine doing that more than once. And then imagine you are the one going around forcing everyone to accept and to celebrate the shitty crappy person you are. İmagine that
Is “Pro-Forced Birth” a More Accurate Term than “Pro-Life”?
only if you are stupid.
Is "pro-forced death" a more accurate term than "pro-choice?" Yes. Especially when they are not pro-choice on anything besides a woman's "choice" to kill her offspring.
Thank you Greg and Team for another wonderful and insightful session.
The most recent clip on Red Pen Logic is three months ago. What's going on?
Gotta give it to these people. They come up with alot of things that MAKE the other side, actually THINK, rather than sit on their rears
I opened my eyes this morning and was forced to see.
I’m forcing Pro-Choicers to live a tough hard life by not killing them then. I’m Pro-Forced Tough Life
Birth is the natural and expected result of pregnancy, so it seems pretty hysterical to imply that allowing birth to happen is "forced". I think the "force" would be to not allow the natural process to take place. But as usual this is beside the point when it comes to this issue. Like most pro-abortion arguments it ignores the question of abortion and the humanity of the unborn completely.