Does Romans 13 demand unconditional obedience to civil authorities?

The President of South Africa recently (11/01/2021 @20h00) announced that we will remain in adjusted level 3 lockdown. This is devastating news for the church. Many of us hoped the President would allow us to meet again, but unfortunately not. This time he also did not give us a date, but only said, "when the infection rate has dropped to a safe level." This can of course be indefinite as the government already began to prepare the citizens for a third and fourth wave. The situation is very worrying for the church in light of other economic activities that may continue.

Recently, there also were a few sermons and debates around Romans 13 and our obedience to governing authorities. This is of course true, but the question is, "should we obey the government unconditionally?" For example, corporal punishment is against the law in South Africa but as Christians, we should rather obey Christ in this regard. What should we then do with regards to church gatherings?

The government's instruction to completely suspend worship services is against the command of Christ (Ex. 20:8-11; Heb. 10:25). We must obey all the laws of Christ including the 4th command and not neglect the gathering of the saints. When the state’s commands conflict with God’s commands, believers must follow the Lord because Christ is the Head of the Church. God has also appointed different spheres of authority (sphere sovereignty) - family, Church and civil society. Each authority must be respected by all people and may not be suppressed or overturned by another. Romans 13 regulates the relationships between these spheres of authority but it does not override the authority of the Head of all authorities, Christ the Lord. For example, the Church is firstly obedient to the Head of the Church and secondary to government.

In his institutes (Book 4, Section 32), John Calvin writes, "In that obedience which we hold to be due to the commands of rulers, we must always make the exception, nay, must be particularly careful that it is not incompatible with obedience to Him to whose will the wishes of all kings should be subject, to whose decrees their commands must yield, to whose majesty their sceptres must bow. And, indeed, how preposterous were it, in pleasing men, to incur the offence of Him for whose sake you obey men! The Lord, therefore, is King of kings. When he opens his sacred mouth, he alone is to be heard, instead of all and above all. We are subject to the men who rule over us, but subject only in the Lord. If they command anything against Him, let us not pay the least regard to it, nor be moved by all the dignity which they possess as magistrates - a dignity to which, no injury is done when it is subordinated to the special and truly supreme power of God. On this ground Daniel denies that he had sinned in any respect against the king when he refused to obey his impious decree, (Dan 6: 22), because the king had exceeded his limits, and not only been injurious to men, but, by raising his horn against God, had virtually abrogated his own power."

Therefore, the government cannot unilaterally suspend worship services whenever they see fit. They must submit to Christ in this regard by asking the Church how they can work together to protect the lives of people. The Church can then explain their role under the headship of Christ and how we can comply while obeying Christ first as the Head of the Church. However, it is their duty to ensure the safety and religious freedom of society. That means there are certain things in the Church's domain they can regulate for the safety and common good of people but not when and how we worship. For example, they can regulate things like electricity, fire escapes, building regulations, health regulations, etc. In that sense, they can give us regulations to protect people but they cannot suspend worship service completely. That we must learn from Christ and Scripture and not from the government. Doing that they have taken upon themselves the role of Christ as the Head of the Church. They have moved out of their sphere of sovereignty into the Church's domain.

Suspending worship services completely while opening restaurants, malls, cinemas, casinos, etc., are implying the Church is non-essential and unsafe for society while other things are safe and beneficial. That is a massive contradiction because sitting in a restaurant without a mask while laughing and having a good time is not a lesser risk than a Church gathering once a week. Many malls are overcrowded with the closing of beaches. Allowing a sinful act like gambling to continue for seven days a week while the Church cannot gather at all is an act against God. This is an injustice against the Church of Christ and making a value estimation of the Church which is not their place. Christ paid with His own blood for the church to indicate its value and importance. God has ordained the Church to be the most essential institution of salvation, restraining-power, and moral-upliftment of society. Ignoring or acting contrary to this is acting against Christ regardless of the government's intent. That said, let us remember, actions speak louder than words and a tree will be known by its fruit.

Their actions are against the will of God and overstepping the boundary given to them by Christ. Christians, therefore, have the right—indeed, the God-given duty—to disobey the state whenever the government forbids what the Lord commands or commands what the Lord forbids. The principle in the Bible as practiced throughout Church history is that the sick, the vulnerable, and the elderly be protected while the healthy continue to worship. Scientific data shows that the recovery and death rate of the coronavirus is not so severe as to necessitate complete isolation of people. Government is already acknowledging this by allowing economic activities to continue to protect the livelihood of people. Therefore, the sick, the elderly, and the weak can stay home while the healthy continue to attend worship services. The government can therefore ask that we comply with some basic regulations to protect the lives of people while meeting but they cannot completely suspend worship services.

Reformation Day 2020 | A single day changed the world

A single event on a single day changed the world. It was October 31, 1517. Brother Martin, a monk and a scholar, had struggled for years with his church, the church in Rome. He had been greatly disturbed by an unprecedented indulgence sale. The story has all the makings of a Hollywood blockbuster. Let’s meet the cast.

First, there is the young bishop—too young by church laws—Albert of Mainz. Not only was he bishop over two bishoprics, he desired an additional archbishopric over Mainz. This, too, was against church laws. So Albert appealed to the pope in Rome, Leo X. From the De Medici family, Leo X greedily allowed his tastes to exceed his financial resources. Enter the artists and sculptors, Raphael and Michelangelo.

When Albert of Mainz appealed for a papal dispensation, Leo X was ready to deal. Albert, with the papal blessing, would sell indulgences for past, present, and future sins. All of this sickened the monk Martin Luther. Can we buy our way into heaven? Luther had to speak out.

But why October 31? November 1 held a special place in the church calendar as All Saints’ Day. On November 1, 1517, a massive exhibit of newly acquired relics would be on display at Wittenberg, Luther’s home city. Pilgrims would come from all over, genuflect before the relics, and take hundreds, if not thousands, of years off time in purgatory. Luther’s soul grew even more vexed. None of this seemed right.

Martin Luther, a scholar, took quill in hand, dipped it in his inkwell and penned his Ninety-Five Theses on October 31, 1517. These were intended to spark a debate, to stir some soul-searching among his fellow brothers in the church. The Ninety-Five Theses sparked far more than a debate. The Ninety-Five Theses also revealed the church was far beyond rehabilitation. It needed a reformation. The church—and the world—would never be the same.

One of Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses simply declares, “The Church’s true treasure is the gospel of Jesus Christ.” That alone is the meaning of Reformation Day. The church had lost sight of the gospel because it had long ago papered over the pages of God’s Word with layer upon layer of tradition. Mere tradition often brings about systems of works, of earning your way back to God. It was true of the Pharisees, and it was true of medieval Roman Catholicism. Didn’t Christ Himself say, “My yoke is easy and My burden is light”? Reformation Day celebrates the joyful beauty of the liberating gospel of Jesus Christ.

What is Reformation Day? It is the day the light of the gospel broke forth out of darkness. It was the day that began the Protestant Reformation. It was a day that led to Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Knox, and many other Reformers helping the church find its way back to God’s Word as the only supreme authority for faith and life and leading the church back to the glorious doctrines of justification by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. It kindled the fires of missionary endeavours, it led to hymn writing and congregational singing, and it led to the centrality of the sermon and preaching for the people of God. It is the celebration of a theological, ecclesiastical, and cultural transformation.

So we celebrate Reformation Day. This day reminds us to be thankful for our past and to the monk turned Reformer. What’s more, this day reminds us of our duty, our obligation, to keep the light of the gospel at the centre of all we do.

This article is placed with permission by Ligonier Ministries. The original article was titles:  What Is Reformation Day? and can be viewed on their website.

Stephan Joubert se onbybelse siening van God se soewereiniteit

In 'n onlangse skrywe deur Stephan Joubert op e-Kerk se webtuiste sê hy,

“Daardie idees dat alles met ’n rede gebeur en dat alles vooruit bepaal is, kom uit die Griekse mitologie. Zeus en sy drie helpergodinne, bekend as die Moirae, het presies so opgetree.”

Daar is twee groot probleme met Stephan Joubert se skrywe aangaande God se soewereiniteit wat indruis teen die Bybel en ons gereformeerde belydenis. Dit is 'n baie ernstige aanklag dat Stephan Joubert impliseer dat God se soewereiniteit vergelyk kan word met Griekse mitologie.

Eerstens, met sy skrywe ontken Stephan Joubert God se soewereiniteit in alle sake, van die kleinste tot die grootste. Die vrae wat ons moet vrae is: “Is daar dinge en plekke buite God se beheer? Wat beteken God se soewereiniteit?”

Oorlede RC Sproul het gesê,

“There is no maverick molecule if God is sovereign. If He cannot control the tiniest bits of the universe, then we cannot trust Him to keep His word.”

Ons glo dat God, nadat Hy alle dinge geskep het, dit nie laat vaar of aan die toeval of geluk oorgegee het nie (Johannes 5:17; Hebreërs 1:3) maar dit volgens sy heilige wil so bestuur en regeer dat in hierdie wêreld niks sonder sy beskikking gebeur nie (Psalm 115:3; Spreuke 16:1; Spreuke 16:9; Spreuke 16:33; Spreuke 21:1; Klaagliedere 3:37-38; Efesiërs 1:11-12; Jakobus 4:13-15; NGB Artikel 13). Met ander woorde, die Bybel leer dat God alles, van die beweging van die kleinste molekule tot die grootse wêreldgebeurtenis, voorbeskik het in Sy raadsplan en dat Hy seker maak dit gebeur dienooreenkomstig. Alles is deur God beskik om te gebeur ooreenkomstig Sy eie wil en nie gebaseer op die vooruitskouing van menslike keuses nie. Alle gebeurlikhede word deur God bestuur sodat alle keuses, goed en sleg, gemaak word ooreenkomstig Sy raadsplan sonder dat die mens van ‘n vrye keuse ontneem word. Ons praat dus nie hier van absolute vrye wil nie maar eerder van beperkte vryheid binne God se raadsplan. Mense maak keuses binne die raamwerk van God se wil sodat Sy raadsplan uitgevoer sal word. Op die einde van die dag is die Bybel glashelder en eenvoudig, "Voor die begin van tyd het God, vrylik deur Sy heilige wil en vir Sy eie eer, besluit en alles wat gebeur in plek gestel. Niks hiervan kan verander of teengewerk word nie" (Westminster Confession Chapter III).

Dit bring natuurlik die vraag by ons op, “Is God dan die outeur van sonde?” Gewis nie, dit bely ons in ons gereformeerde belydenisskrifte (NGB Artikel 13). God is nie die outeur van sonde nie. Maar hoe God alles beskik en laat gebeur sonder dat Hy ooit skuldig is aan enige sonde of boosheid maak Hom juis God en vêr bo ons verstand. Dit bely ons soos volg in ons gereformeerde belydenis, “Sy mag en goedheid is immers so groot en onbegryplik dat Hy sy werk baie goed en regverdig beskik en uitvoer, selfs al handel die duiwels en goddelose mense onregverdig” (Job 1:21; Jesaja 10:5-7; Jesaja 45:7; Amos 3:6; Handelinge 2:23; Handelinge 4:27-28). Daarom moet ons ook nie, gedryf deur nuuskierigheid, verder ondersoek instel na God se handelinge wat bo ons menslike verstand is nie.

Ons moet met blydskap aanvaar en bely dat God gans anders is en Sy weë nie volledig gepeil kan word nie. As gelowiges moet ons aanvaar daar is ‘n grens waar ons nie God se soewereiniteit presies kan verklaar nie maar dit beteken nie dit is nie waar nie (Deuteronomium 29:29). Deur die geloof wat God in ons gewerk het deur die wedergeboorte sien ons dit in die Skrif en glo ons dit omdat God so sê. Ons buig in nederigheid voor Hom neer as die onsienlike, alwyse, onfeilbare, onpeilbare, en soewereine God (1 Timotheüs 1:17; Romeine 11:33-34). Soos Paulus skryf, “Wie het iets aan Hom gegee dat Hy dit sou moes vergoed? Want uit Hom en deur Hom en tot Hom is alle dinge” (Romeine 11:35-36).

Ons is dus tevrede daarmee dat ons dissipels van Christus is om slegs te leer ken wat Hy aan ons in sy Woord geopenbaar het, sonder om die grense daarvan te oorskry (1 Korintiërs 4:6). Die leer van God se soewereiniteit is ‘n groot troos vir ons as gelowiges aangesien niks buite God se beheer staan en aan toeval oorgelaat is nie. As ons goeie Hemelse Vader heers God oor elke molekule, en beskik Hy oor elke keuse, sodat geen haar van ons kop val en geen mossie sterf sonder dat Hy daaroor beskik het nie (Mattheus 10:29, 30).

Tweedens, Stephan Joubert beperk God se soewereiniteit tot menslike keuses en ruimtes. Hy sê,

“Daarom kan ek kies om Hom te dien. Of nie. Daarom moet ek reg kies. Dan eers kan ek bely dat my tye in Sy hand is.”

Hierdeur impliseer Stephan dat iemand se lewe eers in die hand van God is as hy God kies. Dit beteken daar is ruimtes en keuses buite God se wil waaroor Hy nie beheer het nie. Dit beteken ook God is afhanklik van menslike keuses om Sy raadsplan uit te werk. Die stelling herinner mens aan die tipiese vrye-wil teologie van die Arminiane waar God afhanklik is van menslike keuses om Sy wil uit te voer. Dit impliseer ook dat God se wil teengestaan kan word.

Die Skrif leer egter dat God se raadsplan nie teengestaan kan word nie en tot uitvoering sal kom in die fynste besonderhede (Job 42:2; Jesaja 46:9-13). Elke mens se hart is soos 'n waterstroom in God se hand (Spreuke 21:1). God gebruik omstandighede om dit te lei ooreenkomstig Sy welbehae. Daar is nie 'n ruimte, hoe klein ook al, waar God nie teenwoordig en in beheer is nie (Psalm 139:1-16). Elke keuse wat deur 'n gelowige of ongelowige gemaak word, goed of sleg, was deur God voorbeskik om Sy goeie wil uit te werk. God bestuur alle gebeure op so manier dat Hy nooit skuldig is aan sonde, of dat die mens 'n robot is nie, terwyl Hy presies bepaal wat sal gebeur. Terwyl die mens vrylik kies om te sondig, is God honderd persent in beheer en bestuur Hy elke gedagte, begeerte en keuse om Sy voorafbeskikte raad uit te werk. Die wil van God is egter onveranderd en is voor die grondlegging van die wêreld vasgelê deur Hom (Efesiërs 1:11; Jesaja 46:9-11).

God pas ook nie aan by omstandighede met die verloop van tyd nie. Hy het nie 'n plan B wat verander na gelang van omstandighede nie. Jesus was bv. nie 'n plan B nadat God se plan A gefaal het nie. Die siening staan bekend as “Open-Theism.” Dit het populêr geword in die 90s en poog om ‘n gee-en-neem verhouding tussen God se soewereiniteit en die menslike wil te bewerkstellig. John Frame weerlê die siening in die artikel. As ek Stephan Joubert se skrywe reg verstaan dan neig dit baie hierna – “Daarom moet ek reg kies. Dan eers kan ek bely dat my tye in Sy hand is.” Stephan beskou die klassieke gereformeerde siening van God se soewereiniteit as fatalisme – “Dit is fatalisties, want dit verander God tot die Outeur van alles wat sleg is.” Die Bybel probeer nie ‘n verskoning maak vir die enigste lewende God “WAT IS” nie. Toe Moses vir God vra, "wat moet ek vir die mense sê wie is U," was God se antwoord eenvoudig, “EK IS” (Eksodus 3:14). God alleen is die bron van alles sonder dat Hy die Outeur van sonde is – “Want deur Hom leef ons, beweeg ons, bestaan ons” (Handelinge 17:28). Hy gee en neem lewe (Job 1:21; 1 Samuel 2:6). Die mens wik maar God beskik (Spreuke 16:1-9). Job se verhaal is ‘n klassieke voorbeeld van die uitwerking van God se wil.

Goeie voorbeelde van God se onveranderde raadsplan is die val van Satan, die sondeval van die mens, die kruisiging van Jesus onder Pontius Pilatus, die verloëning van Jesus deur Judas, en Josef se wegvoer na Egipte. Al die gebeure is deur God voorbeskik en het gebeur omdat God seker gemaak het dit gebeur presies soos Hy dit gewil het. 'n Gebeurtenis soos Jesus se kruisiging en die verloëning deur Judas was selfs lank voor die tyd al voorspel in die Bybel. Wie het seker gemaak dit gebeur presies soos dit voorspel was? Wie het seker gemaak dat Pontius Pilatus Jesus sou kruisig? Wie het seker gemaak dat Judas Jesus sou verloën sodat die Skrif vervul kan word? Was daar 'n kans dat Jesus nie gekruisig sou word en Judas anders sou kies? Nee, God het dit beskik daarom sou dit gebeur. Nie weens toeval nie, maar deur God se wil. Al het Pontius Pilatus gekies om Jesus te kruisig, was dit God wat dit beskik en bestuur het om te gebeur ooreenkomstig Sy raadsplan sonder dat Hy ooit skuldig was aan sonde.

God het alle dinge vooraf beskik: goed en kwaad, val en verlossing, die slawerny en die uittog uit Egipte, rebellie en bekering. God het die wat gered sou word voor die grondlegging van die wêreld bestem daartoe (Openbaring 13: 8), wat beteken dat hy ook die sondeval moes voorbeskik het. Hy het sondige keuses beskik soos die verkoop van Josef (Genesis 50:20), die verharding van Farao se hart (Eksodus 4:21), die Dawidiese volkstelling (2 Samuel 24: 1), die Assiriër (Jesaja 10: 5-19) en Babiloniese invalle (Habakuk 1: 5-11), en die grootste van almal, die kruisiging van sy eie Seun (Handelinge 4:26-28). Nie net dit nie, maar die Bybel is duidelik dat selfs die rol van die dobbelsteen deur God bepaal word (Spreuke 16:33), en dat God alles doen wat hy wil (Psalms 115: 3).

Dan is daar natuurlik nog belangrike Ou-Testamentiese frases soos “Gaan uit die mond van die Allerhoogste nie kwaad sowel as goed nie?” (Klaagliedere 3:38), “Die goeie wat van God kom, die aanvaar ons, maar die slegte – moet ons dit nie ook aanvaar nie?” (Job 2:10), “Ek is die Here wat voorspoed bewerk en onheil skep” (Jesaja 45:7), en “As daar teenspoed in ‘n stad is, het die Here dit nie gedoen nie?” (Amos 3:6), om nie eens te praat van die allesomvattende “Een wat alles volgens Sy wil en raad laat gebeur” nie (Efesiërs 1:11). Die Skrif praat herhaaldelik van 'n God wat alle dinge orden, insluitend alle menslike keuses, hetsy goed of sondig.

Lees gerus die Heidelbergse Katigusmus Sondag 9 en Sondag 10, die Nederlandse Geloofsbelydenis Artikel 13 en Artikel 14, en die Westminster Confession Hoostuk 3 (blaai of tot by hoofstuk 3) vir 'n Bybelse uitleg van God se raad en soewereiniteit.

Verdere leestof:

Westminster Shorter Cetechism explained (lees hoofstuk 7)

God's Sovereignty deur RC Sproul uit sy reeks, "Chosen by God."

Outlines of Theology deur Charles Hodge (lees hoofstuk 10)

Systematic Theology - The Divine Decrees deur Louis Berkhof

Exposition of The Westminster Catechism Question 7

Exposition of The Westminster Catechism Question 8

Kwasizabantu: Christian Mission or Cult?

Over the last few weeks a popular news service in South Africa opened up an investigation they did with damning information about a popular mission in South Africa. They labeled them as a cult.

What should we make of these allegations? Is Kwasizabantu Mission (KSB) a cult? Below are some information from a Christian perspective that might shed some light on these questions.

The audio clip below is from Eugen Olsen, the grandson of Heino Stegen (brother of Erlo Stegen). He grew up on the mission. He is now a member at Grace Fellowship Church in Pretoria. I chatted with him over the phone and he gave me permission to share this voice note with people. He is busy counselling many people who came out of KSB.

Eugen Olsen talking on Kwasizabantu

The audio clip below is from Johan Bekker confessing his blindness for 28 years and being accomplice of the hurt Kwasizabantu caused in people's lives. He points out that what they preach and practice is not the biblical gospel.

Johan Bekker on Kwasizabantu

This article below is from Dr Peet Botha who did his PhD at Potchefstroom University. He was also involved with Kwasizabantu for a long time. He concludes that KSB is indeed a cult. He evaluates their leadership from a biblical perspective.

Dr Peet Both on Kwasizabantu

The below book was written by Albert Pilon. For fourteen long years Albert Pilon was one of the leaders of the Kwasizabantu Mission in the Netherlands. In 2002 he resigned from the leadership. Ultimately, having serious doubts about its theology of revival, he left the movement, determined to seek answers to his questions. He interviewed dozens of former members who had left the movement at various times. The testimonies of their experiences formed a coherent picture, fitting together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.

Is this a Genuine Revival? A Missiological Investigation about the Revival among the Zulus by Albert Pilon

Dr Peet Botha has written an article in which he exposes the leadership of KSB as dictators and manipulative. He writes, "The power of the KSB cult is phenomenal. The blind faith in the leaders of KSB is destructive to many adherents. The absolute mind control, social isolation, religious programming, idolization of leaders, economic, sexual, and other exploitations of KSB members so prevalent at KSB and yet, not seen or understood by current residing members, is mind-boggling to say the least." You can read his full report in the article below.

The witnesses are afraid of KSB: A review of Prof. Peet Botha

A church investigation was already conducted in 2000 with damning details of what is happening at KSB. The panel consisted of various churches and church leaders. Some of their concluding points were: "The evidence brought before us in the past few months has led us to believe that KSB is not in totality what it might claim or might appear to be at face value to the Christian public. Extensive testimony points to the existence of a questionable system “within” Kwa Sizabantu. The overwhelming evidence leads us to believe that Kwa Sizabantu is in danger of developing a cult-like behaviour, in seeing itself as an exclusive way, in seeking control over people by misusing authority, and manipulating people through confession and other questionable practices which has created an environment of unquestioning submission to the KSB leadership." You can read the full report in the article below.

Report concerning Kwa Sizabantu Mission by a panel of Christian leaders to the Christian Community

The below links are some of the reports that surfaced after an investigation by News24.

Claims of gross human rights violations at KwaSizaBantu
KZN social development dept vows to follow up on allegations

The information is damning and it would seem that Kwasizabantu has indeed turned into a cult.

Abortion - An Evaluation in the Light of Scripture

Introduction

The postmodern world we live in is characterized by humanism. Ethical values are dominated by human preference in contradistinction to the Bible as the only authority. Even the Church has been influenced by this to such an extent that liberal theology dominates many ethical issues in the Church. Everyone has the right to make his own choices as he sees fit. Individuals make decisions based on their feelings, thoughts and background.

Between a hundred and two hundred years ago the effect of Christianity on society was still visible as human behaviour and laws were reflective of Biblical values. The sixties saw a rebellion against everything that limit human freedom, choices and preferences. This manifested in the hippy era through the sex revolution. The sixties also saw the rise of militant feminism. The result is a liberal postmodern society that creates ethical laws around the self.

This gave rise to an era of sexual promiscuity where unwanted pregnancies are the order of the day. A materialistic society that is driven by greed and money has no room for a pregnant woman who must take time out to give birth and raise her child. Even parents who have children do not focus on raising their children according to Biblical values but are rather driven by selfish greed to make money. And so abortion was one of those issues that were legalized by a selfish postmodern society that the Church should address.

To discover what the Bible says about abortion, this study will attempt to answer the following questions: When does life begin? Is abortion a form of murder? What does the Bible say about the sanctity of life?

1. What is abortion?

Abortion is the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 20 weeks. The pregnancy is terminated by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo. The term abortion most commonly refers to the induced abortion of a human pregnancy (Wikipedia, 2014).

Here are some statistics about abortion to highlight the magnitude of this issue.

An estimated 44 million abortions are performed globally each year, with slightly under half of those performed unsafely. Unsafe abortions, however, result in approximately 47,000 maternal deaths and 5 million hospital admissions per year globally. Approximately 205 million pregnancies occur each year worldwide. Over a third are unintended and about a fifth end in induced abortion. Most abortions result from unintended pregnancies. In the United Kingdom, 1 to 2% of abortions are done due to genetic problems in the fetus. (Wikipedia, 2014).

2. When does life begin?

The medical world acknowledges that life begins at conception. John MacArthur (1992) quoted Dr Jerome Lejeune as follows:

“Life has a very long history, but each individual has a very neat beginning, the moment of its conception. The material link is the molecular thread of DNA. In each reproductive cell, this ribbon roughly one meter long is cut into 23 pieces or chromosomes. As soon as the 23 paternally derived chromosomes are united through fertilization to the 23 maternal ones, the full genetic meeting necessary to express all the inborn qualities of the new individual is gathered, i.e., personal constitution.”

To indicate that everything is present with the unborn baby, which constitute a human being, John MacArthur (1992) quote Dr Jerome Lejeune as follows:

“At two months of age, the human being is less than one thumb-length from the head to the rump, he would fit at ease in a nutshell but everything is there…hands, feet, head, organs, brains. In the fourth week is consciousness. All are in place. His heart has been beating for a month already and fingerprints can be detected. His heart is beating at two months at 150 to 170 beats a minute. To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion.”

Dr Robert P. George wrote a book in 2008 called: “Embryo: A Defence of Human Life.” He said the following about the beginning of life:

“That is, in human reproduction, when the sperm joins the ovum, these two individual cells cease to be, and their union generates a new and distinct organism. This organism is a whole, though at the beginning developmentally immature, member of the human species. Human embryos, whether they are formed by fertilization (natural or in vitro) or by successful somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT — i.e., cloning), do have the internal resources and active disposition to develop themselves to the mature stage of a human organism. Thus, human embryos are what the embryology textbooks say they are, namely, human organisms – living individuals of the human species – at the earliest developmental stage.”

According to Gilbert (2010), there exist two popular views when life begins.

Firstly, there is the metabolic view:
According to this view, there is no single development moment marking the beginning of human life. Both the sperm and egg cells should individually be considered to be units of life in the same respect as any other single or multicellular organism. Thus, neither the union of two gametes nor any developmental point thereafter should be designated as the beginning of new life.

Secondly, there is the Genetic view:
The genetic view takes the position that the creation of a genetically unique individual is the moment at which life begins. This event is often described as taking place at fertilization, thus fertilization marks the beginning of human life. During this developmental event, the genes originating from two sources combine to form a single individual with a different and unique set of genes.

From the above, it can be seen that the medical world does acknowledge that life begins at conception, although some hold to the metabolic view. The metabolic view is in support of abortion. Of utmost importance to us as Christians are what does the Bible say about conception.

According to R.C. Sproul (2010:46), Scripture assumes a continuity of life before the time of birth to after the time of birth. The same language and the same pronouns are used for both stages. God’s involvement in the life of a person extends back before conception. In Psalm 139:13-16, David said: “You knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” In this passage, Scripture clearly states that the forming of the embryo in the mother’s womb is a work of God. David refers to himself as “me” before he was born, and said that all his days were accounted for before birth (verse 16). This means God’s view of human life extends back before conception. According to Sproul (2010), the Hebrew word in this passage for “unformed substance” is “embryo.”

Another passage that proves God’s involvement with life in the womb is Isaiah 49:1-5. From this passage, the following quotes show that the unborn baby is distinct from the mother and was treated with a unique personal identity. “The Lord called me from the womb, from the body of my mother, he named my name” (verse 1). “He said to me, ‘You are my servant’” (verse 3). From this passage, we can see that God knew Jeremiah before he was born. He was known by God in a personal manner and as a personal being before birth. The unborn embryo is viewed by God as a person.

An important question is whether personhood starts at birth. Scripture regards personhood as beginning before birth. David says: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps. 51:5). David recognizes two important things in this passage. David links his personhood and state of sinfulness to both conception and birth. He recognizes his personhood at birth and conception which indicates that there is continuity between a child that is conceived and a child that is born. An impersonal being, a “blob of protoplasm,” cannot be a moral agent (Sproul, 2010:49). If David’s moral history extends back to conception, then his personal history must also extend back to conception.

Another fascinating passage that tells us how God views the fetus in the womb is Luke 1:40-44. This passage describes the meeting between Mary, the mother of Jesus and her cousin Elizabeth, who was pregnant with John the Baptist. Elizabeth said: “Behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy” (verse 44). Firstly, Elizabeth called the unborn fetus in her womb a baby and not just a lifeless or impersonal fetus. Secondly, the personhood of the fetus is shown with the attributes of joy. This shows that before John was born, he manifested mental comprehension and emotions which is attributes of personhood.

3. Conception is an act of God.

So far we have seen that life and personhood extend back before conception. The Bible also shows that conception is an act of God. Conception is controlled by God under His sovereignty. It is God who makes conception possible and it is also God who prevents conception if He so wills. We will explore this further from Scripture.

In Psalm 127:3, the Bible says: “Behold, children are a gift of the Lord, the fruit of the womb is a reward.” Children are a gift from God and He creates all life. Even in a negative sense, God prevents conception. Sarai said: “The Lord has prevented me from bearing children” (Gen. 16:2). In Genesis 20:18 we read: “The Lord had closed fast all the wombs of the household of Abimelech.” In a positive sense, it is God who gives conception. “Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife, and he went into her. And the Lord enabled her to conceive, and she gave birth to a son” (Ruth 4:13). From this passage, it is clear the Lord enables people to conceive. Conception is a Sovereign act of God to grant life. Even the timing is in His control. “Sarah conceived and bore a son, at the appointed time of which God had spoken to him.” (Gen. 21:2). These passages illustrate that God is the power behind barrenness and God is the power behind conception (MacArthur, 1992).

Paul said: “Who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace” (Gal. 1:15). God said to Jeremiah: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you” (Jer. 1:5). These verses imply that God foreordained people before they were even conceived and then He was solely responsible for their conception.

What about deformed babies? Is God the creator of those? “Who has made man’s mouth? Or who makes him mute or deaf, or seeing or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?” (Ex. 4:11). Sometimes it is the purposes of God to make people dumb and deaf and seeing and blind (MacArthur, 1992). Why does God allow this to happen? The disciples asked Jesus the same question. “‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?’ Jesus answered, ‘It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents, but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him’” (John 9:2-3). Babies are born deformed to display the glory of God in their parents’ lives and their own lives. It is only the power of the Spirit of grace that enables parents of a deformed baby to raise him or her and give God all the honour and glory in that circumstance. “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Cor. 12:9). Likewise, when such a child grew up and in his humble disabled state, serve Christ, it is a testimony of God’s grace to even the mentally handicapped. “God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong” (1 Cor. 1:27).

4. God is sovereign over all things.

God is sovereign over all things. Over life and death and good and evil. God directly does the good and He allows the evil to happen without Him being the author of sin. After the death of his children, Job said: “Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord” (Job 1:21). The Lord said through Isaiah: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things” (Is. 45:7). “All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be” (Is. 66:2). After everything played out in Joseph’s life when he was sold into slavery by an evil plan of his brothers, he said: “You (his brothers) meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Gen. 50:20). Everything works out according to the purposes of God for His good (Rom. 8:28). Even the bad and evil in the world. This means that even a baby who was conceived during a rape is not exempt from the Sovereignty of God. We can therefore not conclude that any conception is an unwanted pregnancy and can be terminated. God even allowed that conception to take place through the evil act of rape.

The Bible indicates that unborn babies are considered living human beings before they are born. The Biblical evidence shows that life begins at conception. The Bible further shows that conception is a Sovereign act of God. God grants the life that starts in the womb of a woman. Who are we to intervene and stop that process? Who are we to interrupt the process, which God granted for a new life to begin? It is a violation of the sixth commandment to take a person’s life into one's hand and deliberately terminate it.

5. Is abortion murder?

One of the core issues with abortion is whether it is murder to deliberately abort a fetus? Is the fetus potential life and is abortion the termination of potential life? Is abortion a violation of the sixth commandment of God, not to commit murder?

To answer these questions, we have to look at the sanctity of life. How does God view human life? Who has the right over life and death? We already saw that Scripture shows that life extends back before conception. We also saw that God is Sovereign over conception and that he grants it or prevents it. God is even Sovereign over evil and everything falls within His decrees; good or bad. If this is true, then we are busy with human life, which God views as a person, which He willed to be conceived in the womb of a woman. Do we then have the right to terminate that life? What is the Biblical view of the termination of the life of another person and in this case, the unborn baby who is regarded by God as a person?

Helmut Thielicke said: “Once a man ceases to recognize the infinite value of the human soul… then all he can recognize is that man is something to be used. But then he will also have to go further and recognize that some men can no longer be utilized and he arrives at the concept that there are some lives that have no value at all” (Sproul, 2010:17).

What do we mean when we say life is sacred? In Biblical terms, the sanctity of life is rooted and grounded in creation. Mankind is not viewed by the Bible as a cosmic accident, but a product of carefully executed creation by an eternal God (Sproul, 2010:21). Man is the crown of God’s creation and is assigned high value by his Creator. “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female…God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good” (Gen. 1:26-31). The creation account provides the framework for human dignity. Creation in the image of God sets humans apart from all other creatures. The image and likeness of God by which mankind was created, connects God and mankind uniquely. In creation, humanity was given the ability to mirror and reflect the holy character of God (Sproul, 2010:22). When man fell into sin, the image of God was greatly affected by sin. To such an extent that man lost his sense of God and the ability to see the beauty of God’s creation in man. This caused humanity to have a low view of human life and that is why Cain killed Abel. This also affects people today and is the main reason abortion is practised. Humanity is in slavery to sin and their minds darkened by the fall. They have a low view of an unborn baby as an image-bearer of God and therefore they can easily discard it.

In James 3:9, speaking about the tongue, James says: “ With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God.” James acknowledges that with the tongue we curse that which was made in the image of God. “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man.” (Gen. 9:6). In this verse murder of another person is directly linked to the destroying of the image of God. The Biblical ethic is that because man is endowed with the image of God, his life is so sacred that any malicious destruction of it must be punished by execution (Sproul, 2010:24). This verse implies that assault against human life is considered by God as an assault against Him.

The sanctity of life is also reinforced by the Ten Commandments. “You shall not murder” (Ex. 20:13). “He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death” (Ex. 21:12). Jesus expounded the Ten Commandments even further. “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell” (Matt. 5:21-25). Jesus explained that the anger in a person's heart against another image-bearer of God is viewed by God as potential murder. This is even more clear when Jesus equate lust in a person's heart with committing adultery (Matt. 5:28). A fetus, although not yet a new born baby, is a person with the full potential of an actual human being. Without interference or unforeseen calamity, it will become a living human person. Any act to deliberately disrupt or destroy a fetus is an act of deliberately destroying potential life, which may be viewed as a potential murder.

According to R.C. Sproul (2010:29-30), Jesus sees the law against murder as including not only the act of actual murder but also actions of potential murder. He further notes that the Biblical law against adultery also requires purity. Thus, when the law prohibited negative actions, it implies the opposite positive actions as well. Therefore, a negative prohibition against actual murder implicitly involves a positive mandate to work for the protection and sustenance of life. Abortion does not promote the protection and sustenance of the unborn child, neither does it promote the sanctity of life.

Conclusion

Man is the crown of God’s creation. Even more so, man is created in the image of God. Human life is sacred in God’s eyes. Speaking with slander against an image-bearer of God falls into the category of murder. Humankind is endowed with the ability to make choices and to reason and think about things. He is also endowed with a conscience as a moral compass. God has commanded explicitly that the deliberate termination of another person’s life is murder (Ex. 20:13). Because of his ability to choose between right and wrong, God will judge any person who ends another person's life with eternal death unless he repents and receives God’s forgiving grace in Christ.

Life and personhood extend back before conception. God has decreed all life and He is sovereign over it. God is even sovereign overall good and evil. God gives the power and energy by which people commit evil deeds. Therefore, to regard any pregnancy, even those which result from rape, as unwanted and terminate it, is to deny God’s sovereignty over life and death. It is only God who can allow the termination of life by allowing it under his sovereign decree. We as human beings have no right to deliberately interrupt or terminate the process of life which was started at conception by God. There are difficult cases where the life of the mother is, for example, threatened by a dangerous birth. In those cases, the preservation of life still gets priority in the preserving of the mother’s life for the sake of the unborn fetus.

The ultimate conclusion is thus: abortion at any stage of the developing fetus is murder and God hates it. People who engage in the deliberate abortion of unborn babies are under the wrath of God and must repent and seek God’s forgiving grace. This article does not present all the answers about abortion but rather deals mostly with the normal cases of abortion due to unwanted pregnancies. That said, the principles discussed, relate directly to the difficult cases of abortion and must be prayerfully considered before termination of life by abortion. The principle of sanctity of life must always be maintained. We must always realize that we are dealing with the gift of life, created in the Holy presence of God, under His mercy and love, according to His sovereign decree.

Bibliography

Sproul, R.C. 2010. Abortion: A Rational Look at an Emotional Issue. Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust.

De Bruyn, P.J. 2013. The Ten Commandments. Potchefstroom: Potchefstroom Theological Publications.

MacArthur, J. What is Abortion? http://www.gty.org/resources/sermon-series/2 Date of access: 15 September 2014.

Gilbert, S.F. 2010. When does life begin? http://science.jburroughs.org/mbahe/BioEthics/Articles/Whendoeshumanlifebegin.pdf Date of access: 28 September 2014.

Wikipedia. 2014. Abortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion Date of access: 28 September 2014.