A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Millions have perished in our own land for the crime of being unborn. It is estimated that approximately forty-five million unborn babies have been either poisoned or butchered by physicians who were trained to save lives, but who, for profit sake, engage in the business of summarily executing those innocent babies waiting to have the rare chance of taking their first breath.
This is another topic where we, Seventh-day Adventists, have chosen to remain silent while the genocide is taking place. We have plenty of printed space to talk about the importance of worshipping God on the correct day of the week, but we have no interest in raising our voices in condemnation of the slaughter of the innocent in our own land. Every weekend, over three thousand unborn babies are sacrificed for the sake of convenience, and those criminal abortionists do this again and again with impunity.
If we as a nation and as a church continue to remain silent, I believe that the 9/11 event will be followed by other terrible calamities, which will dwarf what happened in New York. God cannot forever remain silent and continue to protect our nation, if we remain silent while those destined to the slaughter house go to their death and perish before they have a chance to see the light of day.
I personally believe that the U.S. will be getting it's "payback" for the slaughter of all those innocent babies by about 2029. (if the Lord lets us hang around that long) That's when Social Security will REALLY hit the wall and all the politicians will be moaning about all those people that aren't around to pay taxes. God has different ways to make a nation wake-up! Amen?
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2002 10:31 am Post subject: Our SDA silence on Abortion
Since my original comments about our SDA silence on the slaughter of innocent Christians in sudan was split in two, and the portion of my comments dealing with abortion were posted here, I would like the privilege of quoting what I wrote to Eugene Shubert in response to this action.
Quote:
I see in both cases a lack of interest in defending the innocent from a sure death. This does not surprise me, since historically, we have been more concerned about the sacredness of holy time than human life. The same thing happened when Hitler began his genocidal program against the Jews. We SDA's turned a blind eye to the plight of the innocent. We were more concerned about making sure Christians were warned about the dangers of worshipping God on the wrong day of the week.
We have championed many good causes. One of them is our concern for the health of those who had the great privilege of being allowed to be born. We have invested our precious resources in our efforts to help those eager to stop smoking, for example. Why? Because, by doing so, we can add about five years to their life. We are blind to see that, by saving the unborn from a sure death, we could add not merely five years to the life of human beings, but an entire life span.
We think that by keeping the Sabbath Day Holy, we are rendering a great service to humanity, forgetting that Jesus stated that the Sabbath was made for the sake of man, and not the other way around. We also forget that the Sabbath is a sign, a mere sign. Signs are important. The sign that reads Emergency in front of a hospital is a big help in guiding ambulances to the place where help is available. Nevertheless, if there is no hospital behind the sign staffed with trained physicians and nurses to render vital help, the sign turns into a dangerous distraction which can cost the life of the patient on the verge of death.
This is where we fail. Physicians who have been trained to save lives, devote their entire energy and know how, not to save the lives of those destined to perish; but rather, for the sake of profit, engage in the art of killing, instead of the art of healing; and we, the people who claim to have the last message of hope for a perishing world, prefer to remain silent while the genocide of the unborn and of those Christians who are being persecuted in Sudan continues unabated. I do not know if you are aware that one of the most prosperous abortionists in California, who owns over twenty abortion clinics, is a graduate from Loma Linda University.
Some time ago, I stopped at the White Estate section of the Loma Linda University library, and checked the list of printed material we have been publishing on the subject connected with the Sabbath. We have spent tons of ink in our efforts to convince the rest of Christians about the need to worship God on the correct day of the week. Then I looked for what we were doing in defense of those being poisoned and butchered inside the womb, the modern torture chamber of humanity. What did I find? Nothing! Zero! This shows very clearly where our interest is. We proclaim that prenatal human life is a magnificent gift of God which should be protected, and then admit that the church has decided not to define when human life begins. Ican't understand this! How can we expect our physicians to protect prenatal human life if we affirm that we do not know when human life begins!
The Pope, whom we have demonized and labelled as the Beast of Revelation knows when human life begins. And yet we, the Remnant don't. Beasts of prey kill the innocent and defenseless. Isn't this what abortionists are doing? Isn't that the true image of the beast? Doesn't this sound like an anomaly to you? We have labelled the one who is more determined than anybody else in the world to protect the innocent as the Beast. I think that our SDA eyes need to be examined. We have lost our 20/20 vision. How I wish somebody would come to the rescue of those destined to perish.
The Lord has impressed me to do something about this egregious situation, this is why I created the www.sdaforum.net website. I wish I had the knowledge and the talent you have in order to carry my mission. I am doing what I can, but it is so little! Besides, I am seventy already, and I do not have too much time left to accomplish what the Lord has laid on my heart!
Posted: Fri Dec 06, 2002 10:37 am Post subject: When Does Human Life Begins?
In connection with this topic, I want to cite my response to an article published in the Autumn 2002 edition of Spectrum entitled "Current Creation Questions," in which the authors deal with the "Beginning of Human Life." I hope the editor will publish my comments, but I wouldn't be surprised if they just trash it!
Quote:
After reading the article authored by Zuccarelli and Winslow in your latest issue, I must commend you for reopening the dialogue about the beginning of human life. The authors cite in their article the argument that until day fourteen of human development, science is unable to ascertain individuality and personhood, since there is the possibility "for the embryo to split into two or more monozygotic offsprings."
The implication seems to be that there is no need to protect the embryo before day 14 of gestation, since we are not sure if we are dealing with one or more individuals. My question to them is: Are two human lives of less value than one? Is the life of identical twins less valuable than that of a single individual? Do we refuse to render emergency services to a woman if we are not sure if we are dealing with one or two human lives. The woman might be pregnant, or pregnant with twins. Do we first ascertain the number of victims we are dealing before providing our rescue effort. If miners are trapped, do we refuse to render emergency services until we can ascertain the exact number of miners in trouble? Does the presence of a gray area morally justify our indifference towards human life?
On august 7,2001, Bettina Krause, the SDA editor of the Adventist News Network, cited Winslow as saying that "the church has chosen not to define the precise moment human life begins," but that "prenatal life ... should be protected." How can we effectively protect human life if we choose to ignore when human life begins? Would it make sense for President Bush to order the border patrol to protect our U.S. borders, and then admit that we do not know where those borders lie?
The Pope, whom we have labelled in the past with the apocalyptic term, "The Beast of Revelation," knows that human life begins at conception, but we, the "Remnant" with the "last message to a perishing world" prefer to ignore this. Does this make sense? We proclaim to the world that our attitude towards the Sabbath will eventually determine our loyalty to the Creator, yet Jesus stated in Matthew 25 that our destiny will be decided on the basis of our attitude towards the "least." Can you think of any human beings deserving more said label than the unborn? We have used a ton of ink to emphasize the need to worship God on the correct day of the week, yet our magazines and pulpits are silent while the unborn are butchered and poisoned by physicians who were trained in the art of healing instead of killing.
You may wonder whether I am a SDA or a Catholic. I am a second generation Adventist, and I intend to remain one till I die. Nevertheless, I admire the Pope for his courage in defense of the defenseless. He may be wrong on the correct day of worship. He is also wrong on the state of the death; but he is correct on the state of the living, I believe, and on the sanctity of human life. I think that heaven is more concerned about the slaughter of the unborn than whether we worship him on the correct day of the week. Jesus had a lot to say about how we treat others, but very little about the Sabbath, and he stated that the Sabbath was made for the sake of man, and not the reverse, which means to me that human life is more sacred than Holy Time.
Forty-five million have perished since we legalized abortion, and we are condoning this by our silence, while we publish ad nauseam about the Sabbath. Does this make sense? We have demonstrated a great concern for the health of those who have had the privilege of being allowed to be born, and we have championed the fight against the smoking habit, because by stopping the smoking habit we can add about five years to the lives of those addicted to this drug. Have we considered that stopping abortion would add approximately 80 or 90 years to the lives of the victims of abortion? Isn't it time that we did something about this?
It's "high noon" in busy Times Square. A man gets out of a taxi then calmly shoots two people on the sidewalk to death. Several bystanders wrestle the man to the ground, the police "cuff" him and haul him away. At his arraignment, he tells the judge that he forgives them all for keeping him in jail these past few days and now he'll just go on his merry way.
So the judge asks why he should just let him go free. (the judge thinks the guy is a total lunatic)
The man answers: "I know for a fact that one of the people I shot was the result of incest and the other was the result of rape"
Think this is "far-fetched"? Wait a few years. Johnny Corcoran will get another murderer off by arguing that this kind of murder is totally protected by the Constitution.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
