You walk into your doctor’s office for your annual check up—flu shot, cancer, cholesterol and blood sugar screening, blood pressure check—you know, routine maintenance on the ol’ bod. You’ve chosen this doctor because you don’t have health insurance and he’s kind enough to lower his prices and work with you on a payment plan. His office is clean and bright, beautifully decorated, and the staff is always friendly. You even get a lollipop at the end of each visit.
But this year, as you’re walking down the hall to exam room four, you happen to notice that in exam room three, there’s a playpen in the corner with an adorable baby girl in it, cooing away and playing with a toy.
“Odd,” you think, since this is not a pediatrician’s office. You continue to your own room, don that scratchy paper gown, and wait for the doctor. By the time he comes in and begins the exam, you can no longer contain your curiosity. Whose baby is it? Why is there even a baby in the office?
“Oh, yes,” the doctor says matter of factly, “that baby was abandoned by her parents. Nobody wants her, so when I get finished with your check up, I’m going to torture her to death and then sell her organs to medical researchers.”
Your jaw hits the floor. Your stomach turns. You can’t believe the monstrous words you’ve just heard.
“How could you do such a horrible thing?” you scream over your revulsion. The doctor looks surprised that you should ask.
“It’s really no big deal,” he says. “We only do a few of those a week. The vast majority of my practice is providing health care and counseling for patients like you.”
Let me ask you something—would you use that doctor and think that the care he provides you mitigates his atrocious behavior? I hope not. Yet I have heard people defend Planned Parenthood (an organization which has been torturing babies to death for decades, and, we recently learned, profits from the sale of their organs) because Planned Parenthood ostensibly performs a minimum number of abortions and mainly provides health services, such as the ones mentioned above, to women who need them. Somehow, in these people’s minds, the health care Planned Parenthood provides makes up for the heinous murders they commit day after day.
Does it really all balance out? Of course not.
In fact, let’s say, Planned Parenthood had only ever tortured fifty babies to death (instead of the millions they’ve actually killed). And let’s say they provided free health care to everyone on the planet, cured cancer, and brought about world peace. Those are some wonderful things, but does it erase the fact that they brutally ended fifty innocent lives? Do all those good deeds make up for even one murder?
No. They don’t. Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes. Planned Parenthood’s hands are drenched in blood that all the free health care in the world can’t wash away.
They’re hopelessly guilty. Just like we are.
Apart from Christ, we are Planned Parenthood. We come before God with blood on our hands. Not the blood of millions of babies, but the blood of one child. God’s child. Jesus. We are responsible for His death. It was our sin that caused Him to be tortured to death. Our sin that brutally murdered Him.
We come before God with blood on our hands. Not the blood of millions of babies, but the blood of one child. God’s child. Jesus.
“Oh, but it’s no big deal. I’m mainly a good person. The vast majority of my life is spent doing good things and helping people. That totally makes up for those few sins I’ve committed. My good deeds outweigh the bad.”
No. They don’t. Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes.
But, grace… But, mercy… But the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior intervenes and wipes away the guilt. Washes our hands of Christ’s blood. Cleanses us from all unrighteousness, if we only turn to Him in the repentance and faith that He is gracious enough to give us.
Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes, but the grace of God can.
But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Titus 3:4-7
Good deeds can never make up for heinous crimes, but the grace of God can.
If your theology pretty much matches up with mine (as outlined in my “Welcome” and “Statement of Faith” tabs in the blue menu bar at the top of this page) and you’d like to contribute a guest post, drop me an e-mail, and let’s chat about it.
Mary’s “Unplanned” Pregnancy by Charlotte Staudt
Have you ever heard Jesus’s birth described as an “unplanned” or “unexpected pregnancy”? Unfortunately, I’ve heard that description several times, and it seems to be gaining traction among some conservative Christians. I first heard it when I worked for a Christian public policy group, but I’ve also seen it on Focus on the Family’s website, a pregnancy care center, and even on a car magnet. During this Christmas season, you may come across this description yourself, so I would like to offer a few points as to why this description is wrong and why we can’t use the Biblical account of Mary or any part of Luke 1 to form pro-life arguments.
Unhelpful, Cultural Euphemisms
In today’s culture, “unplanned” and “unexpected” are usually used as euphemisms for pregnancies resulting from illicit relationships. There are exceptions, of course, but for the most part, this is the case. Since those words are generally used to describe pregnancies resulting from sin, should we use them to describe Mary’s pregnancy with Jesus, the Son of God, by the Holy Spirit? Of course not! Using such descriptions is unhelpful to say the least, and it is certainly disrespectful of God’s sovereignty. While such disrespect is probably not intentional, it simply isn’t beneficial to use cultural euphemisms to describe a part of God’s perfect plan of redemption for His people, which had been planned since before the beginning of time.
Ignoring Biblical Context
When reading the Bible, we know that context matters. As we begin a book of the Bible, it’s important to ask and understand answers to some of the classic grade school questions of who, why, when, etc. For this point, I’d like to focus on Luke’s reason for writing, his “why.” He states this himself at the very beginning of his work: “to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:3-4). In other words, Luke is simply writing a complete account for a brother in Christ. He wants Theophilus to have “an orderly account” or a reliable record of the life of Jesus, and in this account, he starts at the beginning, first with the announcement of the coming of John the Baptist, and then the announcement of the coming of Jesus.
While using cultural euphemisms was merely unhelpful, using Luke 1 to argue a pro-life position is eisegetical, the practice of eisegesis. Merriam-Webster defines eisegesis as, “The interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it one’s own ideas.” Costi Hinn expands on this idea, writing, “Eisegesis takes a specific passage from the Bible and isolates it from its original meaning, the author’s original intention, and God’s original purpose.” Thus, when reading this account, or any Bible passage, we can’t make the text say anything the original author didn’t. As we read about Mary, we can’t project our 21st-century ideas and emotions onto the text. That would be eisegesis. We can’t cast Mary as a scared young woman facing an “unplanned pregnancy” and wondering what to do about it. There is no indication of that in the text. In fact, the text indicates quite the opposite. She was “troubled” when the angel first appeared to her, but once she hears his message, she asks one question, and simply responds, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word” (Luke 1:38).
Additionally, some pro-lifers will also cite Luke 1:41, “And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb,” to argue their position. In fact, Roland Warren, president and CEO of the pro-life ministry Care Net, states the following, “If you’re a pro-choice Christian, what this actually does in Scripture is it tells you that late-term abortion and early-term abortion are both killing a life.” Does the Biblical text give any indication of any of this? No. Remember, this is an account, a record of the life of Jesus. Thus, John the Baptist’s leap is simply an action, not a foundation for an argument.
Missing the Biblical Lessons
Since Luke 1:26-45 does not provide us with pro-life arguments, what does it teach us? What lessons can we glean from the text? First, everyone in this passage recognized Jesus as God. Gabriel tells Mary that Jesus “will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High” (Luke 1:32). In other words, Jesus was God. John MacArthur explains this by saying, “to identify Jesus as the Son of the Most High is to declare that He has the same essence as the Most High God.” He also states, “Gabriel’s announcement also affirms the deity of Christ.” According to Luke’s narrative, Mary asks no questions regarding this and simply takes the angel at his word. Elizabeth and an unborn John the Baptist also recognize Jesus as God. In verse 43, Elizabeth calls Mary, “the mother of my Lord,” meaning she realized the baby Mary was carrying was the Son of God. Elizabeth’s explanation of John the Baptist’s leap in verse 44 shows that he also recognized Jesus in Mary’s womb. How would they both know this? Verse 41 tells us that “Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.” Thus, her understanding “must be attributed to the illuminating work of the Spirit,” according to John MacArthur.1 Likewise, the response of John the Baptist was “supernaturally prompted by the Spirit of God.”2
The story of Mary also teaches us about trusting and submitting to God. Her reply, “Behold, I am the servantof the Lord; let it be to me according to your word,” shows complete submission to the will of God. John MacArthur uses “willingly” and “gracefully” to describe her submission. R. C. Sproul refers to it as “subjection,”3 which Merriam-Webster defines as, “one that is placed under authority or control.” In other words, Mary not only recognized God’s authority over her, but she also trusted it. She didn’t ask for a sign as Zechariah did (Luke 1:18), or doubt as many of us may struggle with from time to time. She understood Who God is and trusted Him because of it.
In conclusion, as we read and ponder Luke 1 this Christmas, that reading shouldn’t inspire us to pull verses out of context and argue our position. Rather, the accounts of Mary and Elizabeth should inspire us to glorify God for Who He is and what He has done. As we celebrate and enjoy the Christmas season, perhaps we would all do well to remember these words of R.C. Sproul, “We come at Christmastime, not to celebrate the birth of a baby. We come to celebrate the Incarnation of God.”
1-2 MacArthur, John. “Luke.” In the John MacArthur Bible Commentary, 1274. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
3 Sproul, R.C. “The Annunciation.” In Luke: An Expositional Commentary, 22. Sanford, FL: Ligonier Ministries. ePub.
Charlotte Staudt happily calls the South her home. On any given day, you’ll most likely find her reading and researching, with her calico cat and a cup of tea close at hand. She doesn’t have any social media to share, but she hopes you find her writing encouraging and helpful.
Or maybe I answered your question already? Check out my article The Mailbag: Top 10 FAQs to see if your question has been answered and to get some helpful resources.
A question on your post regarding abortion if I may. I am most definitely pro-life. You stated that every attempt should be made to save the life of the mother and child — including in cases of ectopic pregnancies. Can you direct me to articles of the professionals you mentioned who have stated publicly that ectopic pregnancies can be saved?
My first and only pregnancy was both an anembryonic pregnancy and a tubal pregnancy. I was told that I was 5 minutes until death, and that the tubal pregnancy could not be saved. I have wondered about this for many years but cannot find any information regarding a tubal pregnancy that can be saved. Thank you.
My deepest condolences for the loss of your baby. May the Lord continue to comfort you and give you peace.
I’m so sorry, but I think you may have misunderstood that part of the article. Here’s what it says:
“Abortion isnever necessary to save the mother’s life. Numerous OB/GYNs and other medical professionals have stated this publicly. In cases in which the mother’s life and/or health are at stake (including ectopic pregnancies), the biblical and medically ethical approach is to make every attempt to save both the mother and child (which can often be done through early delivery, not abortion). If the child dies during the attempt to save him and his mother, that is a grievous tragedy, but it is not an abortion. Abortion is the intentional, proactive killing of a child.”
The statement, “Numerous OB/GYNs and other medical professionals have stated this publicly,” refers to the previous sentence (“Abortion is never necessary to save the mother’s life.”) and link. In other words, these medical professionals have stated that abortion is never necessary to save the mother’s life, not that babies in ectopic pregnancies can be saved.
With ectopic pregnancies, “the biblical and medically ethical approach is to make every attempt to save both the mother and child…”. As I understand the situation, at this point in medical technology, it is not possible for a doctor, while attempting to save the mother with an ectopic pregnancy, to also save the life of the baby. However, it is my understanding that, through research, an attempt is being made to discover ways to save these precious babies, possibly through re-implantation or other means.
I think you will find the video below to be helpful as well as its companion article:
One of the things Sarah mentions in the video that I found enlightening is that ectopic pregnancies are fairly rare, and that it is rarer still for the ectopic pregnancy to be nurturing a live, normally developing embryo.
She says that in every case she has personally seen in her career, either the baby in the ectopic pregnancy has already died by the time the mother is treated, or the cells in the blastocyst are so aberrant that normal development of a living fetus would be impossible, or both.
Is there a Biblical way to approach Christian friends about the appearance of vanity when they regularly post pictures of themselves on social media?
It is so kind of you to care about your friends’ reputation in the eyes of others.
There is a biblical way to approach them. There is not a way to approach them that comes with a guarantee that they won’t get mad. Those are two different things. In fact, it is likely no matter how gently and kindly you biblically broach the subject, they will get mad. That’s just how people respond to what they perceive to be criticism these days – even professing Christians.
And (assuming that what your friends are doing actually violates Scripture and isn’t just a matter of opinion – which I have no way of knowing) that’s OK. The fact that they get mad doesn’t automatically mean you weren’t being loving or biblical. As Christian women, we’ve been taught by society and by most of the popular evangelical women celebrities that the cardinal, unforgivable sin is hurting someone’s feelings. And that is what’s not biblical. You won’t find a single passage of Scripture that says, “Confront sin … unless it would offend somebody.”
Since the appearance of vanity is a highly subjective and sensitive issue, and one most Christian women aren’t familiar with, I would suggest broaching the subject privately and gently, keeping in mind that there’s always the possibility that you may be misreading the situation:
“Suzy, you know I love you and care for you, and I love looking through the pictures you post on social media. That picture of your dog last week was really cute! I’m just wondering if there’s a reason why you’re posting so many selfies? I know you love the Lord and I wouldn’t want others who see your pictures to get the impression that you’re vain or self-centered, but rather to see the godly young woman I know and love.”
If she’s teachable and willing to discuss the issue, you might wish to work through these Scriptures with her. (For the 1 Timothy 5 passage, I highly recommend listening to the section of our A Word Fitly Spoken podcast episode, Biblical Women’s Ministry, that explains this passage.)
You might also find the podcast series Amy and I did on modesty to be informative. “Modesty” doesn’t just mean refraining from dressing in a sexually provocative way. It also means dressing and conducting yourself in a way that doesn’t make you the center of everyone else’s attention.
Would you be so kind as to help me Biblically on the single/divorced woman. I would like to know if it’s OK to make my own way in life without remarriage. I am very successful in my profession, and content in my walk with the Lord and being single. (Or direct me to one of your articles)
It’s a great question, and one I’m sure a lot of single and single again Christian women wonder about.
There are a few different possibilities of how you might have arrived at the state of being single:
Your husband initiated an unwanted divorce (abandonment)
If you’ve never married, you’re an older widow, you initiated a divorce for a biblical reason, or your husband initiated an unwanted divorce, my general counsel would be to get up every day and serve the Lord faithfully wherever He has planted you – in life, in your church, in your job, and in your relationships. God says being single can be a good thing:
To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am.
1 Corinthians 7:8
But never say “never”. There’s no requirement for you to pursue marriage, but don’t tell God “no” if He seems to be leading you toward marriage at some point in the future. Marriage is a good thing, too, especially if you struggle to control yourself sexually:
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband… But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
1 Corinthians 7:2,9
If you’re a younger widow, 1 Timothy 5:14 encourages you to remarry (a godly man, under godly circumstances, of course). In our culture, I think the principles behind this particular passage would also include younger divorcees who either initiated a divorce for a biblical reason or whose husbands initiated an unwanted divorce.
If you initiated a divorce for an unbiblical reason Scripture seems to indicate that you should remain unmarried:
To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.
1 Corinthians 7:10-11
If you have not repented for initiating an unbiblical divorce – whether before or after you got saved – you should definitely not remarry, and you need to repent. However, if you have repented, there is some disagreement among reputable Bible scholars as to whether this prohibition on remarriage applies to any divorce you’ve initiated for unbiblical reasons (pre- or post-salvation), or only to post-salvation divorce, since Paul is speaking to Christians in 1 Corinthians 7. If you initiated a divorce for unbiblical reasons, it is imperative that you seek godly counsel from your (doctrinally sound) pastor if you’re considering remarriage.
In fact, in any situation in which marriage or remarriage is being considered, pastoral counsel is a must. And even if you’re contemplating lifelong singlehood, I would encourage you to seek pastoral counsel as well.
Whatever your future holds, while you’re single, steward your singleness to the glory of God.
I read your articles on recommended women to follow but could not find that any of them had a devotional book. I am involved in a ministry at our church and put together goody bags for them. I’d like to give them a devotional book. Do you have any recommendations?
That’s awfully kind of you to make these women feel special and loved. Thank you for serving your church.
May I recommend instead that you give them a lovely copy of “God’s devotional” – the book of Psalms or Proverbs? Here are a few I found (I didn’t vet all of these websites, so I’m not recommending them, just suggesting a few books to consider):
Or if you’d like to go with a copy of the gospel of John, check out these designs from the Pocket Testament League. (I would strongly recommend the ESV versions.) You can even design your own cover!
If you have a question about: a Bible passage, an aspect of theology, a current issue in Christianity, or how to biblically handle a family, life, or church situation, comment below (I’ll hold all questions in queue {unpublished} for a future edition of The Mailbag) or send me an e-mail or private message. If your question is chosen for publication, your anonymity will be protected.
Sanctity of Life Sunday is this Sunday, January 22.
Do you know the differences between the abolition movement and the pro-life movement? It’s a good thing for all Christians to be informed about.
Watch A Storm Comes Rolling Down the Plain, then listen in to our A Word Fitly Spoken interview with Brett Baggett, one of the key figures in the documentary.
I also thought this interview with Samuel Sey, Nathaniel Jolly, and Ekkie Tepsupornchai on the Truth Be Known podcast was insightful and helpful:
Do you know the differences between the abolition movement and the pro-life movement?
It’s a good thing for all Christians to be informed about, but especially for Southern Baptists right now. It’s sure to be an issue at the Southern Baptist Convention next week, after the ERLC recently helped torpedo an abolition bill in Louisiana. (For more info., click here and scroll down to “May”)
Watch A Storm Comes Rolling Down the Plain, then listen in to our A Word Fitly Spoken interview with Brett Baggett, one of the key figures in the documentary. (And please keep Brett in prayer.)
I also thought this interview with Samuel Sey, Nathaniel Jolly, and Ekkie Tepsupornchai on the Truth Be Known podcast was insightful and helpful:
