Addressing the guilt of abortion with grace and truth
By / Aug 26

Editor’s Note: Visit the ERLC’s page for the current Planned Parenthood videos.

Millions of women and men, both in society and in our churches, are suffering under the guilt of abortion. The heavy emotional burden of abortion isn’t limited to those who’ve had one. A schoolteacher in her forties said, “Advising my daughter to have an abortion led me into a long, suicidal siege. I’m not over it yet.” (Another group of people affected are those who work in abortion clinics. Check out this article, “Mugged by Ultrasound,” about why so many abortion workers have become pro-life. Wow.)

I encourage you to read through the following perspectives from Diane Meyer, a close friend of ours. In fact, she’s like a third daughter to me and Nanci. She lived with us when our daughters were small, and she was a young unwed mother. We had the joy of seeing her come to Christ and helped her place a baby for adoption.  (Just this last year she was reunited with her 33-year-old son, and it was our privilege to be there with Diane’s family and the adoptive parents.)

Over the years, we’ve seen Diane honor Christ and serve the needy, with a great heart for women damaged by abortion (She, Dan Franklin and I spoke together about abortion to our church several years ago; video is available on our site.) I can’t express how deeply my wife and I respect Diane. She’s a courageous and insightful voice who deserves to be heard. She has helped countless women, including those she’s worked with in prisons, come to terms with their abortions and seek forgiveness and healing in Christ.

Diane’s thoughts that follow remind us that as we continue to speak out about abortion, we should do so in a spirit of grace and truth, always pointing to the hope and forgiveness found in Jesus Christ. Christ died for the sins of all of us; and his forgiveness is freely available to all: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” Here is what Diane says:

Diane’s perspective

Because of the mountain of blogs, posts, statuses and tweets on social media concerning the Planned Parenthood videos, I hesitated before adding my own voice. But then I remembered that I am a witness, and it is my job to speak the truth.I am encouraged by these videos being released because it is good that, however horrible, this truth is coming out and is being discussed. It is being seen.

The really difficult part for us to stomach is not so much the profit being enjoyed by Planned Parenthood but rather the simple truth that there are baby body parts to harvest because there is a baby’s body.

Along with many thousands of other women, I don’t need to watch these Planned Parenthood videos (in fact, I cannot) because I’m a firsthand witness to what happens at abortions. I have my own unwanted videos that play in my head. There is no unseeing that, there is no unhearing that and there is no unknowing that. I am a witness to the truth. Not “my” truth. THE truth.

These videos are so enflaming because they are making us actually see what is happening.

The truth of these videos may make women who have chosen abortion, or had abortion chosen for them, lash out in self-righteous indignation and bitter anger. They cannot face this truth because it would mean that they ended the life of their own child. Or they may howl in pain and despair because how are they supposed to live, supposed to go on, supposed to breathe at all, knowing what they did? We are missing our babies.

You have an opportunity to be [like] Jesus here. Cry with us as we miss our children. Show grace. Show love. Be kind. Be gentle. I want to gather all these women up and hug them until they don’t hurt anymore.

Please convince me, convince all of us, we are wrong. Show us that Planned Parenthood is not actually harvesting children’s body parts; that [they are] just unorganized, unrecognizable blobs of tissue. Don’t just tell us; prove to us that we didn’t really kill our children. Show us evidence that they could feel no pain during the violent procedure that took their lives. Tell us that the parts weren’t taken for profit. Convince us mothers that we’ve not experienced great loss and that we should not grieve for our children.

I wish you could do that. But you can’t, nor can anyone else. Because I am a witness to the truth. So how am supposed to live with myself? I can’t. I don’t. It is only because of Jesus Christ who forgives me for even this, and it is he that lives in me. Can you imagine that God that would come live in me? Amazing grace is what that is. He redeemed me from shame and sin and death, and he calls me his own. And I, who am more unworthy than most, will proclaim this unbelievable, preposterous truth until the very end. Praise God.

God’s forgiveness and community help

As Diane shares, because of Christ’s work on the cross on our behalf, God freely offers us forgiveness, for abortion and every other sin. Here are just a few of those offers:

He does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities. . . . As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him. (Ps. 103:10, 12–13)

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9)

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. (Rom. 8:1)

If you or someone you know has had an abortion, there are Bible studies designed for women, and others for men, offering compassionate help and healing. Many online resources can help you find the support group you need. Those in the Portland, Oregon area can learn more at Portland Heart. For those in other areas, see Silent No More, Heartbeat International’s Abortion Recovery Ministries or Hope After Abortion to connect with a post-abortion healing group in your area.

This article originally appeared here

“Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom”
By / Aug 11

Phillip Bethancourt sits down with Ryan Anderson of the Heritage Foundation to discuss his book “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom.”

“The Stories We Tell: How TV and Movies Long for and Echo the Truth”
By / May 12

“The Stories We Tell: How TV and Movies Long for and Echo the Truth”
By / May 6

Dan Darling interviews Mike Cosper about his book "The Stories We Tell: How TV and Movies Long for and Echo the Truth" and how to think more deeply about the stories we consume.

It’s time for Christians to tell the truth about abortion politics
By / Apr 10

This week the pro-life movement was handed a once-in-a-decade moment to change the debate on politics of abortion. Will Christians have the courage to take advantage of this opportunity?

Here is a breakdown of what happened.

Sen. Rand Paul announced his bid for the presidency on Tuesday, and by the next day reporters were already pressing him to defend his position on abortion. An Associated Press reporter asked Paul whether he would allow some exemptions in abortion policies. The senator answered,

The thing is about abortion—and about a lot of things—is that I think people get tied up in all these details of, sort of, you're this or this or that, or you're hard and fast (on) one thing or the other. I've supported both bills with and without (exceptions), you know. In general, I am pro-life. So I will support legislation that advances and shows that life is special and deserves protection.

According to Bloomberg Politics, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) pushed that interview out to reporters at 1 p.m. Within minutes Paul was asked by another reporter to respond to the DNC’s email and clarify where he stood on exemptions:

What's the DNC say? We always seen to have the debate wayyyyyy over here on what are the exact details of exceptions, or when it starts. Why don’t we ask the DNC: Is it okay to kill a seven-pound baby in the uterus? You go back and you ask [FL congresswoman and DNC chair] Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she’s OK with killing a seven-pound baby that is just not yet born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when she’s willing to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, come back to me.

Within hours Wasserman Schultz issued a statement responding to Paul that said:

Here’s an answer … I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved. Period. End of story. Now your turn, Senator Paul. We know you want to allow government officials like yourself to make this decision for women — but do you stand by your opposition to any exceptions, even when it comes to rape, incest, or life of the mother? Or do we just have different definitions of ‘personal liberty’? And I’d appreciate it if you could respond without ’shushing’ me.

When Paul was asked about the statement on CNN, he said,

Sounds like her answer is yes, that she's okay with killing a seven-pound baby. . . But Debbie's position, which I guess is the Democrat Party's position, that an abortion all the way up until the day of birth would be fine, I think most pro-choice people would be really uncomfortable with that. So I don't know — I really think she's got some explaining to do.

In her defense, Wasserman Schultz was merely doing her job by restating the Democratic Party platform:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way.

That statement is carefully worded for maximum obfuscation. Knowlegeable abortion supporters know it means opposing any restrictions on abortion from the moment of conception until the baby has left the birth canal.

Many “pro-choice” advocates support Roe because they believe it puts restrictions on third-trimester abortions. It does not. Contrary to the popular perception, Roe does not limit abortion to the first trimester but institutionalized abortion on demand in all 50 states throughout all phases of a pregnancy. As the Supreme Court wrote in the 1992 case Casey v. Planned Parenthood, “we reject the trimester framework, which we do not consider to be part of the essential holding of Roe.”

Because Roe protects partial-birth abortion, the Democratic Party platform endorses at least some forms of infanticide (the question of where to draw the line on killing viable babies, inside or outside the womb, is left unclear).

The platform statement also refers to “doctors” helping the women to make the decision. As Wasserman Schultz said, “I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved.” When most people hear the word “doctor” they think of a primary-care physician. But in this context it is referring to an abortionist.

The Doe v. Bolton case, decided on the same day as Roe, states that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to “protect her health. That determination about health is made by the “attending physician,” which, as Ramesh Ponnuru has explained,

The 'attending physician'—in real life, very often an abortionist with a financial stake in the decision—can always say that in his medical judgment, the abortion was necessary to preserve the woman's emotional 'health,' especially considered in light of her 'familial' situation. Any prosecution would have to be abandoned as unconstitutional. In other words: The Supreme Court has effectively forbidden any state from prohibiting abortion even in the final stages of abortion.

This radical support for abortion without restriction from conception to partial-birth is outside the mainstream of American’s views on the issue. Almost two-thirds of Americans (71 percent) support some restrictions, especially on late-term abortions (80 percent believe that abortion should be illegal in the last three months of pregnancy).

If more people were aware of where the Democratic Party stood on the issue, it might force them to moderate their position. But they are able to maintain their radical view in large part because many Christians, including pastors and religious leaders, refuse to speak freely.

Too many Christians refuse to directly criticize the Democratic Party’s position on abortion because of a fear of being considered “partisan.” The assumption is that any direct pushback of the Democrat’s abortion policy is considered a tacit endorsement of the GOP. This is not just wrong, it is dangerous. While we may align with a political group, Christians should not be beholden to any party. We should hold all political parties accountable when they are espousing unbiblical and anti-human ideas. If this gets us called “partisan,” then that is the price we must pay. The American church has a serious problem if we are more worried about being mislabeled as “partisan” than we are in protecting innocent human life.

By refusing to speak up we are not only failing the weak and vulnerable, but also failing our fellow believers. The reality is that there are a large number of committed pro-life Christians who are still completely unaware that the Democratic Party not only supports third-trimester and partial-birth abortions but that the party expects us to pay for them as well, regardless of whether it violates our conscience.

The reason our brothers and sisters in Christ remain unaware is that even when pastors and leaders speak out against abortion they often refuse to acknowledge who is enabling this policy. The reality is that the reason unrestricted abortion continues in American is not because of Planned Parenthood or the National Abortion Rights Action League but because of the Democratic Party. And they do so with both the direct and indirect support of the Church.

It shouldn’t have taken a partisan politician to inform the public that one of the two major political parties supports the right to kill a seven-pound baby who is days away from being born. That information should have come from the mouth of every pro-life Christian leader. But now that more Christians know, we need to ask what we plan to do about it. What are we all, as the Body of Christ, going to do to limit the radical abortion politics of the Democratic Party?

Lessons on Truth-Telling from Journalism’s Biggest Fraud
By / Jan 30

In 1998, one of the country’s most respected political magazines was rocked by what would eventually be dubbed “the most sustained fraud in the history of journalism.” The New Republic, boasting at the time to be the “in-flight magazine of Air Force One,” confessed to its readers in June that writer Stephen Glass had fabricated all or portions of 27 articles.

At the time of his exposure, Glass’s reporting was feverishly popular. His work “covered” everything from the bizarre to the outrageous, featuring incredible encounters with corrupt public health officials, millionaire teenage hackers, and carnal Presidential aides. Almost none of it was true. Glass had faked his way to stardom, at The New Republic and other publications.

What makes Glass’s story still arresting after more than fifteen years is the herculean effort he made to cover his tracks. Glass faked original reporter’s notes, created dozens of phony email accounts, built websites and printed business cards for people who didn’t exist, and even recruited his brother to portray an imaginary software executive. As the walls closed in around Glass’s fictions, he reached for more and more lies (the story of his exposure is told in the excellent and accurate 2003 film Shattered Glass).

How did Glass get away with it for so long? Many of The New Republic’s staff have testified since the scandal that Glass was able to avoid hard questions about his work through his ingratiating, self-deprecating demeanor with co-workers. Additionally, Glass’s stories were always fun to read. They were funny and colorful and generated positive attention for the magazine.

This isn’t just a problem for secular media. The temptation to obscure, avoid or even suppress the truth is a universally human one, one that can affect average Christians just as much as journalists. Sometimes American evangelicals have been caught proliferating outright falsehoods, like widely circulating emails about everything from the President to Harry Potter to imaginary “bans on Christmas.” Even some evangelical historians have used revisionism to generate a more pro-evangelical narrative on American history.

A few months ago an organization that produces web browsing accountability software tweeted the following: “68% of Young Guys watch porn every week; parents, this is your daughter’s dating pool.” Alarmed, I clicked the supplied link. After some careful reading, I was disappointed to discover that the 68% figure came from a Danish survey of fewer than 700 adults. The comment about “your daughter’s dating pool” was sure to generate more interest in the informational packet, even though it misled readers about the source and scope of data.

I wondered aloud why a Christian organization that is on the frontlines on the fight against porn would even feel the need to put out misleading innuendo. The reality of the scourge of pornography on churches is alarming enough without embellishment. Why even exaggerate? That’s when I thought of Stephen Glass. When Glass’s final article was published—the one that would get him caught—he was a budding superstar with freelancing contracts totaling somewhere near $50,000. Why was that 27th piece ever written? Why didn’t Glass simply rest on his laurels and start reporting on real people?

I think the answer is that sin has no cost benefit analysis. It’s part of human nature to want to bend reality a little further, or make ourselves look just a little smarter or our work just a little more important than it might be. This temptation is compounded exponentially when we think the stakes are high. For evangelicals engaged in crucial cultural conversations, the urgent nature of the work will often seem to justify obfuscations of truth, whether through sweeping generalizations, fallacious logic, or alarmist rhetoric.

Christians should not fear the truth, even when it seems to implicate ourselves or fellow believers. Earlier this month The New York Times published a piece by reporter Mark Oppenheimer featuring World Magazine, an evangelical news publication that has gained a reputation for objectivity in reporting scandals in the evangelical world. World editor-in-chief Marvin Olasky was quoted as saying, “We don’t have to cover up, because we do have faith that God forgives and saves the sinner.” Olasky is correct: The basis for Christian pursuit of truth should be the conviction that God is in control and uses the truth to redeem people.

Christians should take no part in deception, even when the facts intrude on our public or self-image. We should be on the forefront of the truth-telling business. Belief in a sovereign God is the belief that all truth ultimately points to Him, even when we cannot immediately see how that can be so. In the end, what motivates a commitment to telling even uncomfortable truths is the belief that God is both a God of truth and a God of love. Even when the facts hurt, they are meant only for the good of those that love God and are called according to His purpose.

Stephen Glass thought his fictions were better than reality. Christians know that no fiction can be better than the Gospel. The Truth is too good to not be true.

Chief Kelvin Cochran suspended for telling the truth
By / Dec 18

Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed has suspended the city’s Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran from his position. It is a month’s suspension without pay.

I know Chief Cochran. He is a Georgia Baptist – one of us. Chief Cochran is a member of Elizabeth Baptist Church in the Noonday Association. He serves there as a deacon and a Sunday School teacher. He is a humble, dedicated, faithful servant of God. However, Chief Cochran has been suspended without pay for one month, because he authored a Christian book in which he describes homosexuality as a “perversion.”

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported, “Mayor Kasim Reed’s spokeswoman Anne Torres said the administration didn’t know about (Cochran’s book) “Who Told You That You Are Naked?” until employees came forward with complaints last week. In addition to suspending Cochran, Reed’s office has now opened an investigation to determine whether the chief discriminated against employees.

“Cochran has been ordered to undergo sensitivity training and barred from distributing copies of the book on city property after a number of firefighers said they received them in the workplace, Torres said.”

Kelvin Cochran was born in Shreveport, LA in 1960. He was the fourth of six children and his father died when he was five-years-old. After his father’s death the family moved to a “shotgun” house on Rear Snow Street in an impoverished section of the city. His mother never remarried and struggled to make sure her children were fed and clothed.

One Sunday after church Kelvin and his family heard fire trucks headed down their street. The house across the street from where they lived had caught fire. Kelvin watched as the firefighters put on their equipment and got their fire hoses to extinguish the inferno. It was then, as a five-year-old boy, that Kelvin decided that he wanted to become a firefighter.

He had been taught that if you put your faith in God, get a good education, respect your elders and treat others as you would have them treat you that your dreams will come true.

During those years there were no blacks in the Shreveport Fire Department, but Kelvin was never discouraged from dreaming his dream. Kelvin grew up under the ministry of Rev. E. Edward Jones, who became the pastor of Galilee Baptist Church in Shreveport in 1958, and who continues to provide godly leadership for the church.

Pastor Jones became a father figure and a role model for Kelvin. He also observed the character of godly men with good families. Upon graduating from high school Kelvin went to Louisiana Tech in Ruston, but it was a shortlived academic endeavor. He left the college and went back to Shreveport to fulfill his goal of becoming a firefighter. His dream was realized when he earned his place with the Shreveport Fire Department in 1981. ithin four years he was promoted to fire training officer and served in this capacity from 1985 to 1990, when he became assistant chief training officer and continued to earn promotions until he became the department’s fire chief in August of 1999. That was also the year he received his bachelor’s degree from Wiley College. Ultimately, he went back to Louisiana Tech, reversed his earlier academic misfortunes and earned a master’s degree.

On January 2, 2008, Chief Cochran was selected by Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin to become the city’s Fire Chief. He entered into a Daniel fast prior to making his decision and concluded that God was leading him to accept the position.

He served in that capacity until July 2009, when President Barack Obama appointed him as U. S. Fire Administrator for the United States Fire Administration in Washington, D. C. In that capacity, Chief Cochran was charged with overseeing, coordinating, and directing national efforts to prevent fires and improve fire responses.

On May 8, 2010 Chief Cochran returned to Atlanta to resume the position of fire chief. As the Atlanta’s Fire Chief, Cochran has spent innumerable hours training his force of almost 1200 people. He has shared the principles and values that he believes are essential to a caring and efficient department.

Among those principles, which he has called “The Fire Service Doctrines” is the value which he has called “Ism Free”. He insists that there is to be no discrimination regarding sexism, favoritism, racism, territorialism or nepotism. Under Cochran’s administration that has became the code for the Atlanta Fire and Rescue Department.

Kelvin’s leadership as an Atlanta public servant roots back to his faith and commitment to Christ. Kelvin and his wife, Carolyn, are a part of Elizabeth Baptist Church and serve as an integral part of their fellowship.

Several months ago the men of the church were engaged in a series of studies called “A Quest for Authentic Manhood;’ and when some of the men began to mention their struggles with condemnation Cochran wondered how “saved” men could live under the dark cloud of guilt and condemnation. The question, “Who told you that you were naked?” gripped his heart and mind.

He began to study the word “naked” from a Biblical perspective and concluded that the “naked” were spiritually dead. He thought, “The instigator of spiritual death is Satan. The progenitor of spiritual death is Adam. And when Adam and Eve succumbed to Satan’s provocative temptation they realized that they were naked.”

Cochran also studied the word “clothed” and realized that it was a reference to redemption. He surmised, “When a man is adequately covered, he is confident and accountable – that a redeemed man is no longer ‘the naked’, but with Christ he is ‘the clothed.’”

The Fire Chief sensed that through his study the Lord was leading him to write a book that he chose to call “Who Told You That You Were Naked?”

Cochran has never tried to market his self-published book, but has shared the book with his church and has given books to his colleagues at work. After work on Monday the Chief has hosted a Bible study for those who were interested. Other colleagues have frequently sought him out for spiritual counseling. He consistently provided counsel by sharing truths from the Word of God.

Even when he gave his books to colleagues he never signed the books as the Fire Chief, because he did not want to appear to use his position in an untoward way. However on page 82 of Cochran’s book he wrote that uncleanness “is opposite of purity; including sodomy, homosexuality, lesbianism, pederasty, bestiality, and all other forms of sexual perversion.”

Those words, which are consistent with the teaching of the Bible, are the words that prompted Cochran’s suspension. But this issue is bigger than the impact it has had on Kelvin Cochran. It impacts every Baptist and every person of faith in Georgia and in the nation.

I realize that our churches are open and our religious institutions continue to function and everything on the religious front may look copacetic. But when you begin to look beneath the surface, cknowledge the threats and analyze them, you begin to realize that our religious liberty is under an organized and concentrated assault.

Recently there have been multiple attempts to prevent Christians from speaking to the cultural issues of the day. The Christian Index have attempted to communicate to you, our readers, of some of the moves to silence believers, to push activist agendas, to stifle freedom and to intimidate our pulpits.

In Janet Folger Porter’s book, The Criminalization of Christianity, she writes, “As a Christian in this country, you may be understandably reluctant to speak out on moral issues like abortion, homosexuality, or pornography. But while we have the right to remain silent, that’s not what God calls us to do.

“Because if the world can silence the truth, it will silence the Gospel.”

Speaking truth to power: Thomas Helwys and our Baptist heritage
By / Jul 11

In 1612, the proto-Baptist Thomas Helwys published a book entitled A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity. In an original edition of the work preserved in the Bodleian Library at Oxford University, there is a handwritten note on the flyleaf of the work addressed to King James I from Thomas Helwys. This volume was apparently a dedication copy to be presented to the King of England. Helwys, who had just returned to England from the Netherlands with a band of baptized believers,* intended to make a statement to the King regarding religious liberty. Apparently, the King received the message as Helwys was unsurprisingly arrested shortly thereafter and languished in the infamous Newgate Prison until he died four years later in 1616. Helwys’ courageous address to the King of England deserves to be read and remembered as we consider the Baptist contribution to religious liberty. Baptists have a rich heritage of speaking truth to power, often at great risk.

Below is a transcription of the text of Helwys handwritten note to King James I: 

Heare, O King, and dispise not ye counsell of ye poore and let their complaints come before thee.

The King is a mortall man and not God, therefore hath no power over ye immortall soules of his subiects, to make lawes & ordinances for them, and to set spirituall Lords over them.

If the King have authority to make spirituall Lords & lawes, then he is an immortall God and not a mortall man.

O King be not seduced by deceivers to sine so against God whome thou oughtest to obey, nor against thy poore subiects who ought and will obey thee in all thinges with body life and goods or els let their lives be taken from ye earth.

God save ye Kinge

Tho: Helwys.

Spittlefeild
neare London.

This article was originally published here.