Is there a difference.....

[PaulThomson]

This is a link to an AP article stating that abortions are up since Roe-Wade as overturned.

https://www.breitbart.com/news/abor...icated-picture-as-women-turn-to-pills-travel/

The kindest thing I can say about this article is that it is highly one-sided and biased. It's factuality is questionable. I will leave my criticism at that!

My question, in God's eyes is there a difference between nationally supported and approved abortions, and abortions supported by States?

Yes. Abortions supported by the states are constitutionally approved by the correct agency. Abortions supported by the federal government is an overreach beyond constitutionally designated federal powers. Anyone can work to lower abortion rates in their own state by helping women keep their babies, freely expressing their opinion on the issue as a voter, and lobbying their state legislatures to pass laws that protect babies in the womb.

 

[ParticularWife]

Yes. Abortions supported by the states are constitutionally approved by the correct agency. Abortions supported by the federal government is an overreach beyond constitutionally designated federal powers. Anyone can work to lower abortion rates in their own state by helping women keep their babies, freely expressing their opinion on the issue as a voter, and lobbying their state legislatures to pass laws that protect babies in the womb.

Before the (false) incorporation doctrine states could have theirs own state church and all manner of things. Likewise, things like freedom of speech apply to congress, not the local mayor. The Civil Rights Act is not Constitutional. The USA should be vastly more decentralized than it actually is.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Before the (false) incorporation doctrine states could have theirs own state church and all manner of things. Likewise, things like freedom of speech apply to congress, not the local mayor. The Civil Rights Act is not Constitutional. The USA should be vastly more decentralized than it actually is.

Thank God that was nipped in the bud.

 

[rrcn]

To your question, no. Murder is murder, whether the government sanctions it or not. The "level" of government doing the sanctioning doesn't matter.

I don’t disagree with your statement as it relates to abortion, however I have often wondered “How about the death penalty?”
My thought is that execution may stop a person who is responding to the guidance of the Holy Spirit before they have fully repented.

 

[ParticularWife]

I have often wondered “How about the death penalty?”
My thought is that execution may stop a person who is responding to the guidance of the Holy Spirit before they have fully repented.

In my view, no, that's impossible. God saves whom He wills, nothing can stop Him, not even the executioner.

 

[Seeker47]

I don’t disagree with your statement as it relates to abortion, however I have often wondered “How about the death penalty?”
My thought is that execution may stop a person who is responding to the guidance of the Holy Spirit before they have fully repented.

YHWH has condemned the "convenient" sacrifice of children from the very beginning and made it clear it is the most heinous sin a human can commit. He also mandated the death of anyone who intentionally and maliciously kills another man. Even with repentance and redemption we must face and accept the earthly penalties for our sins. This includes the penalties for all sins.

 

[ParticularWife]

He also mandated the death of anyone who intentionally and maliciously kills another man. Even with repentance and redemption we must face and accept the earthly penalties for our sins. This includes the penalties for all sins.

I acknowledge that in Old Testament Israel, God prescribed the death penalty for certain offenses. I also affirm that civil authorities have the right and duty to impose penalties, even on faithful Christians, for criminal acts.

However, I find it a stretch to assert that God universally mandated the death penalty for all cases of wrongful killing. Such a claim leans toward a classical theonomic interpretation and does not fully account for the shift in governance and pluralism introduced post-Babel, or the distinction between Israel’s theocracy and the broader scope of God’s providence over diverse nations.

While I am not opposed to the death penalty in principle, I do have concerns about the trustworthiness of the state’s judgment and moral integrity in carrying it out. I do not believe Scripture prescribes a specific penal code for every state, though it clearly condemns acts like murder and fraud. The magistrate is charged with restraining such evils, but the precise application of penalties is left to the wisdom and prudence appropriate to each context.

 

[PaulThomson]

I acknowledge that in Old Testament Israel, God prescribed the death penalty for certain offenses. I also affirm that civil authorities have the right and duty to impose penalties, even on faithful Christians, for criminal acts.

However, I find it a stretch to assert that God universally mandated the death penalty for all cases of wrongful killing. Such a claim leans toward a classical theonomic interpretation and does not fully account for the shift in governance and pluralism introduced post-Babel, or the distinction between Israel’s theocracy and the broader scope of God’s providence over diverse nations.

While I am not opposed to the death penalty in principle, I do have concerns about the trustworthiness of the state’s judgment and moral integrity in carrying it out. I do not believe Scripture prescribes a specific penal code for every state, though it clearly condemns acts like murder and fraud. The magistrate is charged with restraining such evils, but the precise application of penalties is left to the wisdom and prudence appropriate to each context.

King David deserved the death penalty, but God did not insist on it. Although. maybe one a legalist could imagine that Bathsheba's child died as a substitute, because David did not put himself on trial and accept the death sentence on himself.

 

[ParticularWife]

King David deserved the death penalty, but God did not insist on it. Although. maybe one a legalist could imagine that Bathsheba's child died as a substitute, because David did not put himself on trial and accept the death sentence on himself.

One thing I noticed about TV evangelism that started to make my antennae twitch was how they usually talk about David and Solomon entirely in glowing terms. Remember that David ended up a murderer and adulterer. Solomon committed idolatry and ended his days a forgotten wretch. No amount of 'good works' or position in the church and state can save anyone from sin and its consequences.
It's David himself who laments in 2 Samuel 1:19-20,

“Your glory, O Israel, is slain on your high places! How the mighty have fallen! Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon, lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised exult.“

It takes on a different impression when your consider what happened to these two.

 

[Dino246]

I don’t disagree with your statement as it relates to abortion, however I have often wondered “How about the death penalty?”
My thought is that execution may stop a person who is responding to the guidance of the Holy Spirit before they have fully repented.

The death penalty is the state’s God-ordained limit on a person’s sin. It has nothing in common with abortion… except perhaps that abortion practitioners deserve it.

 

[Seeker47]

I acknowledge that in Old Testament Israel, God prescribed the death penalty for certain offenses. I also affirm that civil authorities have the right and duty to impose penalties, even on faithful Christians, for criminal acts.

However, I find it a stretch to assert that God universally mandated the death penalty for all cases of wrongful killing. Such a claim leans toward a classical theonomic interpretation and does not fully account for the shift in governance and pluralism introduced post-Babel, or the distinction between Israel’s theocracy and the broader scope of God’s providence over diverse nations.

While I am not opposed to the death penalty in principle, I do have concerns about the trustworthiness of the state’s judgment and moral integrity in carrying it out. I do not believe Scripture prescribes a specific penal code for every state, though it clearly condemns acts like murder and fraud. The magistrate is charged with restraining such evils, but the precise application of penalties is left to the wisdom and prudence appropriate to each context.

Your response is thoughtful, you have given me some things to work on. I share your concerns about the trustworthiness of governance. My concerns are in both directions for carrying out this requirement. God said that when the spilling of innocent blood is not properly avenged, the very ground cries out for justice. I think we are hearing those cries for justice today.

 

[ParticularWife]

Your response is thoughtful, you have given me some things to work on. I share your concerns about the trustworthiness of governance. My concerns are in both directions for carrying out this requirement. God said that when the spilling of innocent blood is not properly avenged, the very ground cries out for justice. I think we are hearing those cries for justice today.

One problem with certain 'progressive' interpretations of mercy is that it puts the state in the position of granting forgiveness. The state may show clemency for various reasons, but mercy is in the hands of he who was offended, not the state. This is also a reason why civil penalties don't cleanse sin: we may be freed of our obligations to men by paying a fine, but vengeance is the Lord's over every act of iniquity.