Baptist History and Abortion Views

[rlvaughn]

Peter S. Ruckman in 1976:
If men strive, and hurt a woman with child…he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow…” (vss. 22, 23). Advocates of birth control will notice that the destruction of a child in the fetal or embryonic stage is NOT counted as Murder in spite of the literature published between 1960 and 1970 by overzealous Kingdom builders who habitually ignore the authority of scriptures when dealing with personal and emotional issues. (The Book of Exodus, Peter S. Ruckman, Pensacola, FL: Bible Baptist Bookstore, 1976, p. 398)

 

[MartyF]

I take it then that you are not one who considers that a child is "safe" until the age of accountability? Baptists have held this view from the beginning which is one reason we differ from Presbyterians by not baptizing infants.

You missed the entire point. You’re perverting God’s mercy. You’re using God’s mercy as an excuse for murder.

“Actually, most rape victims don’t think this very thing.

Typically, those like agedman who have never really ministered to those who have this trauma in their life respond in a manner such as agedman.”

I disagree with you.

As far as what the Bible says about babies born of rape, the Scriptures are very careful to align that with a forever commitment that had to be made. Without the commitment, the person who violated the woman was put to death or paid a very large sum to the parents.

The scripture you’re referring to only concerns unmarried unengaged virgins.

Such was and is to this day an unholy act and the results, without the Scriptural correction, would or do remain unholy.

You clearly have no concept of the term holy. Here’s a primer:

This passage does not refer to one raped, but to a married woman who gives birth prematurely. If the child is alive, then there is a financial settlement. If the child is born dead, there is a sacrifice of life.

It does not specify whether the child was the product of rape or not.

What would impress you to think I am not aware of the temptation of pride from my post?

I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you aren’t just letting a woman decide for herself what is right. You are actually pushing and saying that all babies concieved by rape should be killed.

Marty

 

[agedman]

You missed the entire point. You’re perverting God’s mercy. You’re using God’s mercy as an excuse for murder.

How unfortunate that you assign this old man to such thinking. I do not make an excuse, nor am I in a position to do so. Perhaps your zealousness overtakes you?

“Actually, most rape victims don’t think this very thing.

Typically, those like agedman who have never really ministered to those who have this trauma in their life respond in a manner such as agedman.”

It does so help the reader if you place what the person said in the forum quotes. It makes the reading more reliable and less confused.

I disagree with you.

No problem, I am often disagreeable with myself.

The scripture you’re referring to only concerns unmarried unengaged virgins.

As do ALL the scriptures I have seen so far concerning this topic. Perhaps you can post one that does not?

You clearly have no concept of the term holy. Here’s a primer:


(media removed for quote purposes)

I take it that you are young and have little regard for others.
For you to even suggest to this old man some primer as you did is offensive and so far removed from the purpose of what I wrote it is unworthy of response.

I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you aren’t just letting a woman decide for herself what is right. You are actually pushing and saying that all babies concieved by rape should be killed.

Marty

Bless your heart of little insight. I am not "pushing" for anything.

What I did post were Scripture principles in which you should be familiar.

 

[MartyF]

How unfortunate that you assign this old man to such thinking. I do not make an excuse, nor am I in a position to do so. Perhaps your zealousness overtakes you

Go back and read what you wrote. Perhaps dementia overtakes you.

I take it that you are young and have little regard for others.
For you to even suggest to this old man some primer as you did is offensive and so far removed from the purpose of what I wrote it is unworthy of response.

I have far more regards for others than you do. That’s why I don’t write things to support the murder of babies like you do. In case your senility overtakes you, let me remind you . . .

I would rather be aborted and safe in the arms of Jesus then be born, live a life of depravity, die in rebellion and spend eternity in hell.

I would abort the baby of rape and incest knowing that such actions perpetrated against me were contrary to the law of both God and man, and therefore that which is created is unholy.

I’m sorry you’re unwilling to learn what holy is. If you understood what holy meant, you would understand how wrong you are.

I am not "pushing" for anything.

Then don’t post.

What I did post were Scripture principles in which you should be familiar.

They have nothing to do with scripture.

 

[agedman]

Go back and read what you wrote. Perhaps dementia overtakes you.



I have far more regards for others than you do. That’s why I don’t write things to support the murder of babies like you do. In case your senility overtakes you, let me remind you . . .



I’m sorry you’re unwilling to learn what holy is. If you understood what holy meant, you would understand how wrong you are.



Then don’t post.



They have nothing to do with scripture.

So, basically, you would proudly hold that the child be born, become a rebellious reprobate and be cast into the lake of fire in the second death, rather than safe in the arms of Jesus as an unborn infant.

Do you really think that God is unaware of all that goes on, or not in control of every decision?

Did I not post enough Scriptures about this to show the principle I used?

I can pretend that you are adult enough to receive advice about so long, and then it is time for me to leave this thread. (proverbs 13:10).

 

[rlvaughn]

You missed the entire point. You’re perverting God’s mercy. You’re using God’s mercy as an excuse for murder.

How unfortunate that you assign this old man to such thinking. I do not make an excuse, nor am I in a position to do so. Perhaps your zealousness overtakes you?

As I said before, it's a free country and you guys can do what you want to, but I wish if you want to debate abortion generally rather than discuss Baptist history and abortion particularly, that you would start a thread for that purpose.

Thanks.

 

[Jerome]

1970 polling by the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention found that while 80% of Southern Baptist pastors surveyed said they'd oppose legalizing first trimester abortions entirely, most pastors would favor a law...

...permitting abortions when women's mental or physical health was threatened (70%)
...permitting abortions when fetal deformity was clearly indicated (64%)
...permitting abortions following rape or incest (71%)

http://media.sbhla.org.s3.amazonaws.com/3054,09-Sep-1970.pdf

 

[agedman]

It is amazing how fear of exposure will oblige a pastor's preaching and teaching.

SBC has long had a history of covering up for the fallen and allowing continued ministry despite the lack of Biblical qualification. It now shows in the polls as seen in the above post by Jerome.

When accountability is lacking, then waffling on issues happens.

Teaching schools of the SBC were hot "beds" of students with questionable morals even in the 50's, even at the seminary level, and therefore as each generation has gone out to teach and preach the "fear of exposure" began to drive the message.

Interestingly, Jerome's poll statistics concerning permitting abortions are actually lower than I had expected. In my own experience, I came across very few pastors who were truly anti-anything when it came to standards from about the mid 1970's.

As the poll shown by Jerome shows, the great majority would permit what even the RCC stands against. But, again, it goes back to the training. The SBC has long lost that battle over establishing any sort of standard of what is truthfully right.

Prior to the 50's, the SBC stood upon Bible principles concerning social "evils."

Baptists were the brunt of mockery, and were known for their strict views.

Today, the typical church is nothing but a welcome mat for all things worldly.

 

[KJVOBible]

I hope what I am seeing isn't true, that Christians are saying abortion is okay in the case of rape... please tell me that my eyes are deceiving me...

I as a mother am appalled... I almost lost my daughter, (she is 4 now and doing fine thank God), but I almost miscarried her, and then on top of that she almost died from suffocation due to the umbilical cord being wrapped around her neck. I could NEVER imagine myself EVER aborting a baby due to rape or even due to some medical emergency, I would DIE before I murder any of my future children if I have anymore.

It is a PROVEN FACT that many abortions happen not because of rape and medical emergencies, but instead they are done due to convenience! I will NEVER advocate murder, EVER. Abortion IS murder no matter how you try to slice it, it doesn't matter whether the innocent child was conceived by rape, incest, whatever! This isn't some blob of cells we are talking about here people! we are talking about a baby! Children are a heritage of the Lord! they are NOT nor will they ever be garbage! What is garbage though is the devil and his lies!

Come on, why punish a baby anyway because of some sick pervert who took advantage of someone... If anyone deserves to be punished it should be the rapist! but sadly in the few cases where abortions are done due to rape these poor babies pay the price, what a shame! Shame on those who murder their babies, and shame on those who support this filth!

 

[MartyF]

I hope what I am seeing isn't true, that Christians are saying abortion is okay in the case of rape... please tell me that my eyes are deceiving me...

No, this is not unusual. You understand correctly. In fact, in Baptists in America: A History you can read how the Baptists who were pro-choice actually were close to taking over the SBC. Remember, Carter and Clinton were Baptists even if some might want to disown them.

Marty

 

[Salty]

No, this is not unusual. You understand correctly. In fact, in Baptists in America: A History you can read how the Baptists who were pro-choice actually were close to taking over the SBC. Remember, Carter and Clinton were Baptists even if some might want to disown them.

The bold in the above quote is my emphasis.

They are not Pro-choice - They are pro-abortion.

I am pro-choice -

If a baby crosses abortion - then I say go ahead and let him!
And he is the only one who should have a choice.