How is it that people can read the same exact info and then get such diametrically opposed meanings out of it? I see this in my profession where highly respected experts from Yale and Wharton are looking at the same economic data and reaching totally different outlooks and conclusions.
I also wonder this about the abortion debate and the death penalty. I am speaking in generalities here and obviously there are exceptions but I think that you will find that most people who are anti abortion are pro death penalty. I think the same general observation can be made about the other side. Those that are pro abortion are also anti death penalty.
The interesting thing is that you have Christians on both sides of the issue. How is it that Christians who presumably draw their moral direction from reading the same Word of God can be on both sides of these issues?
In the interest of full and fair disclosure, I am in the anti abortion, pro death penalty camp. I believe that abortion is the taking of an innocent life and I believe that the death penalty is the justifiable forfeiture of a guilty life. That is why I found the following scripture so interesting.
We have God speaking to the prophet Ezekiel about the Israelis and how badly they were messing up. This is just before the Jewish nation is taken captive to Babylon as punishment for all of the things they were doing.
Ezekiel 13:17-19(NKJV)
17“Likewise, son of man, set your face against the daughters of your people, who prophesy out of their own heart; prophesy against them,
18and say, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Woe to the women who sew magic charms £on their sleeves and make veils for the heads of people of every height to hunt souls! Will you hunt the souls of My people, and keep yourselves alive?
19And will you profane Me among My people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live, by your lying to My people who listen to lies?”
So in God's words, one of the things that the Jewish nation was guilty of was "killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live".
I found that wording awfully interesting. Let's apply this phrase to the issues of abortion and the death penalty.
Killing people who should not die. One side tries to maintain the death penalty as a just punishment for capital crimes, the other side fights to preserve the right to have an abortion on demand. Which group is guilty of "killing people who should not die?
Keeping people alive who should not live. One side tries to save the life of unborn babies, the other group tries to save the lives of those convicted of capital crimes. Which group is guilty of "keeping people alive who should not live?
Something to ponder!
No comments:
Post a Comment