Abortion is Murder, 7-11, December, 2009

Formerly Stop the Killing of Young People (skyp) and soon, perhaps, Stop Killing Preemies

December, 2009 Vol. 7 No. 11
PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603
Phone – cell—484-706-4375, machine -- 610-396-0332
Email – johndunk@ptd.net
Web – skyp1.blogspot.com
Circulation – 65
John Dunkle, Editor

Abortion is Murder, a weak, pathetic response to baby murder, is sent out at least once a month. If the gestapo hasn’t jailed you for defending the innocent realistically, you either have to tell me you want it or go the website. Faxes and emails are free but snail-mail is free only for POC’s, $100 for others.
Because I believe we should use every legitimate means, including force, in our attempt to protect those being tortured to death, I want to hear from people who’ve been forceful. I’d also like to hear from those who disagree with me.

Prisoners of Christ:
1. Evans, Paul Ross 83230-180, USP McCreary, P.O. Box 3000, Pine Knot, KY 42635
2. Gibbons, Linda - Vanier WDC, 655 Martin St.
P.O. Box 1040, Milton, ON, Canada L9T 5E6
3. Griffin, Michael 310249, Okaloosa Correctional Institution, Crestview FL 32539-6708 9/11
4. Howard, Peter Andrew 57760-097, FCI, Box 900, Safford, AZ 85546
5. Jordi, Stephen 70309-004, FCI P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute IN 47802 6/30
6 Knight, Peter CRN 158589, Port Philip Prison, P.O. Box 376, Laverton, Victoria, Australia
7. Kopp, James 11761-055, USP Canaan, 3057 Easton Tpk., Waymart, PA 18472
8. McMenemy, David Robert 08168-030, FCI Elkton, P.O. Box 10, Lisbon OH 44432
9. Richardson, Alonzo Lee 12898-021, PO Box 474701, Des Moines, IA 5094
10. Roeder, Scott, Sedgewick county Jail, 141 West Elm, Wichita, KS 67203
11. Rudolph, Eric 18282-058 US Pen. Max, Box 8500, Florence CO 81226-8500
12. Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A, P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093 3/31
13. Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, United States Penitentiary, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg PA 17837 8/25
14. Weiler Jr., Robert F. 39385-037, FCC - Delaware Hall, Box 1000, Petersburg VA 23804 (new)
15. Whitaker, Vincent 18851-056,Federal Medical Center
PO Box 14500, Lexington, KY 40572

The Lord has asked people to make sacrifices related to opposing abortion which all but a handful have had too weak a heart to make. And they’ve looked for any pretense they could conjure up to claim that the sacrifice wasn’t required. They even deluded themselves, as people often do, into “believing” the pretense was real . . . When they get what they’ll get, they’ll fully deserve it. Peter Knight
-----------------------------------------------

Dear John, Thank you very much, dear brother, for all the back issues of skyp. This will keep me in good reading for quite some time!
Wanted to make a few comments concerning the article out of your June issue titled “Kansas Coalition for Life Condemns the Shooting of Abortionist George Tiller.” This is preaching to the choir and we’ve all heard these arguments before, but isn’t it interesting how the article starts out by stating that a true pro-life
person leaves life and death decisions to God Himself.
So then, according to those who believe this way, would they be willing to protect themselves or their families from an intruder attempting to take their lives? It sounds like a broken record using this illustration, but it gets the point across. If someone broke into your home and was attempting to murder you or one of your family members, would you just sit back and allow this to happen? This all sounds gallant and noble to leave life and death decisions up to God, but how gallant and noble would it be to stand by and watch one of your family members die? In reality, the claim of leaving life and death decisions up to God is a shield for cowards to hide behind. Next, the whimper that the pro-life movement might be set back 25 years is pathetic! We need to agree with Dan Holman and others who hope that the pro-life (poor life) movement will die, let alone get set back 20 years!
Granted, the movement has done a good job of exposing these crimes against humanity over the years, but only within the confined perimeters of their comfort zone. Take, for example, Troy Newman of Operation Rescue. After the shooting of George Tiller, federal marshals were giving murder mills more protection. At the same time, Troy was crying for more protection for him and his ministry. He has the audacity to ask this while claiming anyone who would dare to protect the preborn babies is a lunatic! I’m sorry but is this not the epitome of hypocrisy? Not to mention cowardice! To cry out for protection of one’s self and at the same time condemn someone who protects preborn babies is the height of lunacy itself! Actually this is the height of lunacy, hypocrisy and cowardice all rolled up into one!
Next is the claim that all good pro-life people obey the law, seeking change through the legislature process. First of all, we’ve had 37 years of “seeking change” through the legislative process. How’s that been working out for ya? Shall we wait another 37 years and allow another 50,000,000 babies’ lives to be snuffed out while seeking this change? If you were the preborn child slated to have your life taken in the next few hours, would you want someone to protect you? Or would you rather have them call the legislature and plead to have the “laws” changed? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this one out! This is just one more attempt to cover up the fact that those who advocate these policies are cowards. Laws are made (or should be made) to protect the innocent for the good of society. Anything contrary is to be considered null and void from inception. Actually, Scripture tells us there is only one lawgiver and if anytime man-made laws go contrary to His law, they must be disobeyed. We’re all familiar with Thomas Jefferson’s statement, “Disobedience to tyrants is obedience to God,” and Peter in Acts 5:29 when he said, “We ought to obey God rather than man.”
There will definitely be more comments concerning this article in the future. Thank you for providing your newsletter as a sounding board for those desiring to express their viewpoints. And thanks again for sending all those back issues!
Until next time, May our Heavenly Father and His Blessed son watch over you and yours, Scott Roeder
PS, Maybe you can include the enclosed illustration in your newsletter? (My wife came through – p. 6)


Dear Scott, One Tobra, a long time fan of prisoners of Christ, called yesterday declaring joyfully that we who pray and cheer for you ought to call ourselves Roeder Rooters.
It is certainly slow and grueling in there for you. How much better it would be if you were out and working on your defense and praying with those who love you.
I hope you received my last letter dated 25 September in which I rambled on about Socrates and musings about his circumstances and yours.
My prayers go daily upward for you. I interviewed with HDNet, some cable channel that has a program called World Report. It will air on November 10. I was a bit dull but it may come out all right. Fortunately, the reporter and producer do not seem to be hostiles. Dan Rather works for this channel/business or helped form it after he was fired. On Friday I will interview with a company called 60 Minutes (Australia) which is not connected with the company in the U.S. by that name. I hope to do better at that meeting. These opportunities to speak the truth come because of the deeds you are jailed for. The truth goes out and words are broadcast when they are accentuated with deeds.
I will say again that I will be your advocate and do whatever I can to promote your defense and your well being. I will seek support for that defense, and your efforts to continue to serve “the least of these,” His brethren.
I trust that you are still meeting with Tony, Gene, Regina and others. We pray for them as we pray for you.
Maintain discipline. Preach the Word. Listen to Him as you pray. He will lead you and all who share with you the love of God and the zeal to seek justice and show mercy.
Pray for us and we seek our Lord as to the best way we can help you. What does your lawyer say, even this late, about getting you out on bond so that you can think clearer and enjoy the encouragement of friends? Will the judge allow real estate pledges? At peace in Him alone, Michael Bray
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric’s Chapter 3, The Debate, continues:

Classical liberals put too much faith in reason, when man is primarily irrational. Will, instinct, passion, emotion, fear, superstition, individual identity—influence a man’s behavior far more than reason. His social arrangements reflect this fact. Humans are never seen apart from a social group. From the moment of birth, man is a member of the most basic society—the family. And the basis for the social group is shared culture identity, not an abstract social contract. The outward reflections of this identity are seen in connections of blood, language, religion, race, shared history—culture. The terms “man” or “human being” are abstractions. A man is a unique individual, born at a particular time, into a particular class, into a particular culture. He has unique talents, intelligence, and will. His moral universe is unique, and is defined by these existential conditions. He will live and die in his particular world. A man’s environment conditions him, but doesn’t fully define him. He must do this himself. And ultimately the differences between individuals and groups originate from these internal defining forces unique to the individual or group.
What is identity? Ultimately it is spiritual. In so much as I am able to possess something, I am at once connected to it, and also have distance from it. I possess an attribute such as an idea, a belief, a desire, an experience—in other words, it is mine rather than yours. But I also have a distance from my attribute—it is mine, but it is not me. Even if I lose an idea, or my desires change, or I am subjected to different experiences, I am still the same “I.” The invisible “I” is my identity. Although my identity is separate from my attributes, without my attributes I am unable to define myself. Thus certain attributes become more important than others in defining my identity. As an idea, a belief, or experience becomes more central to accomplishing my aims in life, the less I posses it and the more I am possessed by it, until finally the attribute becomes indistinguishable from my identity.
Similarly, the organic social group has an identity, a culture identity. It’s a super personal identity, but an identity nonetheless. The culture identity uses attributes to define itself. But the culture identity is not the sum of its attributes and experiences. Ultimately it is a spiritual unity. Culture attributes include blood connections, religion, language, race and customs. What seems insignificant to one group is vital to another. Religion is important to some cultures. Others like the Zo’e of South America consider a tube of wood inserted in the lower lip an essential attribute of their tribal culture identity. Experiences like wars, revolutions, migrations and persecutions help define the culture identity. The Civil War, for instance, is a defining experience for the American culture identity. Six hundred years of English occupation is a defining experience for the Irish. The organic culture identity acquires or loses attributes and undergoes new experiences, but a certain continuity remains.
Only those who share this culture identity are able to feel this connection with the past, and a continuity with the future. More important than attributes or past experiences is a shared purpose. The culture identity dies when it has no plan for the future. Life is moving forward. The cliché about “living in the now” is a lot of nonsense. The only people who “live in the now” are corpses. Life is about living into the future. The culture identity is healthy and under effective leadership when its plan for the future leaves the group healthy, secure, powerful and growing. Similarly, the individual is healthy when his plans for the future fulfill his destiny. As every identity is unique, so each requires a different
plan of action, one that is suited to that identity at that stage of development. Thus there is no such thing as a template for the perfect society, the perfect economy, or the perfect social contract, just as there is no such thing as a template for the perfect life. Each has a unique journey, in keeping with its unique identity. The history of the world is the history of identities in motion—defining themselves, asserting themselves, in conflict or cooperation with other identities, living, growing, declining, dying.
Man has free-will, but he is not “born free,” as Rousseau and Locke would have it. He is born a dependent to family and community. As he is raised into the society, a man earns rank and freedoms and privilege. Even the smallest of social groups—family, band—are governed from the top-down. The Marxist nonsense about primeval egalitarianism is a lie. As social groups grow into tribes, chiefdoms, and states hierarchy becomes even more pronounced, and classes develop. Minorities give form and direction to society. In every society there is internal competition
between those who have power, and those who want more power. At any given time, the definition of justice is dependent on these competing interests within society. As the social group grows or declines, competing interests change the definition of justice, sometimes organically, other times artificially.
By observing the various cultures of the world one can arrive at a set of universal laws. Aristotle’s definition of justice as fairness is, as far as I can tell, a universal virtue. The problem is that every culture has a somewhat different definition of fairness. And the definition of fairness changes as the circumstances of justice change. Any concept of justice is dependent on an organic culture identity’s comprehensive moral or religious definition of the good as applied to the circumstances of justice. “The circumstances of justice are the circumstances that give rise to the virtue of justice.”5 Society is a cooperative endeavor for the mutual benefit of individuals, and is marked by the clash as well as the cooperation of interests. Persons unite their interests for the mutual benefit, but they also clash over how common assets should be distributed and on what grounds individual interests should prevail against the group’s interests. And there are conflicts between competing individual interests. There must be principles of justice in order to come up with arrangements for sorting out these competing claims. The underlying conditions that make these arrangements necessary are the circumstances of justice. What need have you of justice when there is no clash of interests? And how can you decide which claim should prevail unless you first examine the circumstances that gave rise to the clash?
Generally, states are overthrown as a result of a disjunction in identity, not because of a violation of an abstract social contract. When a culture identity disjunction becomes great enough, no abstract social contract, however “just,” will restore the former social order indefinitely. Social groups are established and grow in size under pressure from external threat, or as a result of conquest. Never in the history of the world have a bunch of similarly situated sovereign men sat down and traded rights for protections in the manner of Locke or Rousseau. Leaders of little societies, as well as big ones, are jealous of their independence and will not merge with other societies unless forced to do so.
Usually a society is in a state of crisis when faced with external threats. At such times it is the leadership that acquires more power to make decisions for the group. And thus it is the leaders, not the people, who decide the terms of the new social contract. For example, before the 1730s the Cherokee Indians were divided into 30 to 40 chiefdoms, of about four hundred people each. Then, as white settlement started to encroach upon their lands, they formed a defensive confederacy. By 1758 a Cherokee council met regularly at their capitol, Echota, to discuss issues, pass laws, and shape a concerted policy for all Cherokee. Similarly, the leaders of the American colonies banded together in response to the threat of England. And after the Revolution, disunion among the states and Shay’s Rebellion caused the American leaders to meet in secret and form a more powerful central government with their Constitution of 1787. After several failed attempts, the German states finally formed a central government in order to meet the threat of war with France (1871). In every case, these societies were coerced into becoming larger. (tbc)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Kayhaitchers (killers’ helpers) love blogs, and I love to read them. I find some of my best material there – like Anne Sexton’s poem, “The Abortion.” (Thank God kayhaitchers are illiterate, too, because they thought it was pro-death!) My favorite kayhaitcher blog is The Abortioneers, you know, like “pioneers”! How sick is that? Look at this excerpt from a young lady is who is about to go through with “the procedure”:

I always thought if i did it, it wouldn't be a big deal. I am so desensitized to everything. When i donate blood, i "race" with friends to see who can fill the bag the fastest. Now i'm getting the heebee geebees. Hell, i doubt there'll be any protestors but still, if there was even one...that would freak me the eff out.
I'm trying not to cry. He's watching South Park. It's 10:30pm and i have so much work due tomorrow. I can't think.
I can't even figure out how far along I am. Apparently they calculate how far along you are based on the start date of your period. Which puts me at 4 weeks, 2 days. But i did one of those pee stick things to tell when you're ovulating (don't ask), so that would put me at 3 weeks.
Going insane thinking about this.

Just one protester? Gives you hope, doesn’t it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

This morning, Toni Najor and I were praying outside of Womancare. The first abortion client, a young girl with her mother, had already gone inside the building when I arrived. Just as Toni finished telling me about them, a car pulled up and a young man got out. He had a sad expression on his face and explained to me that it was too late to save his baby. His girlfriend had already had the laminaria put in yesterday. She had a terrible, painful night, and they had talked briefly about whether it was possible to stop the abortion now and have the laminaria removed, but they didn't seriously consider it.
My immediate fear was whether she might already be in the building, but he walked around the back and confirmed that her car wasn't there yet. He told me that he wouldn't be mad at her if she continued the pregnancy, and said that he really did want to see the baby...and so I asked him gently, "Do you know if they injected digoxin in the baby's heart yesterday to kill it or not? If they did that, there is nothing we can do."
When I said that, a large tear fell down his cheek and he admitted that he didn't know. A few minutes later his girlfriend arrived. He met her behind the car in the parking lot and urged her to walk over to talk to us on the sidewalk. At first it didn't seem like she would change her mind, even though she was obviously struggling inside. I was holding my "I regret my abortion" sign and after a couple different approaches didn't seem to be connecting, I finally said to her, "God threw me so many lifelines to try and help me change my mind, but I didn't take them. He is throwing you a lifeline now. Please, let us help you!"
She agreed reluctantly to follow me to The Problem Pregnancy Center, where I asked her more about her situation. After describing what the doctor had done the day before, it didn't sound like he had used digoxin. I asked her, "Can you feel the baby move?" She said sadly, "No."
"Then we will have to just see what's going on when we get to the doctor," I said. There are several strongly pro-life doctors in the area, although I was nervous about whether they would actually see her. This is the first time I have ever had a client change her mind at this stage. The very first doctor on the list
said "Absolutely!" and so we were on our way to his office a few minutes later.
The staff at this office were beautiful to her, and her boyfriend. They made on over them, excited that they had changed their minds, and just surrounded them with love. I waited in the lobby for what seemed like ages, but when they came out, both of them were beaming.
The baby's heartbeat is a very strong 150 beats per minute, and there is an absolutely adorable ultrasound picture that shows without a doubt that their baby is a boy!
One of the most beautiful things I have ever seen is the expression on that father's face when he told me, "As they did the ultrasound, he turned over and waved at us!"
Please keep them in constant prayer. The situation is the best that could possibly be hoped for, however it's still critical. The abortionist put in 7 laminaria - but failed to puncture the amniotic sac (which would have practically doomed her baby to die of an infection.) Her cervix is long (great) and, considering how many laminaria were in place, it is surprisingly little dilated. The doctor is very hopeful that her cervix will close completely by Monday, when she is scheduled to go back to see him.
If she develops an infection, her risk of miscarriage is high. The doctor put her on two different strong antibiotics, and now it is in God's hands.
We will be working to try and get her money refunded to her. The abortion clinic collected $200 from her the day they did lab-work and the ultrasound (not refundable), and $800 from her the first day of the procedure. They are only allowed by law to keep what reasonable charges apply to the portion of the procedure that was done. The rest they have to give back to her. I am not sure how to go about that, and may need some legal advice!
When we determine which portion of the money is non-refundable, I would love to take up a collection to reimburse them for that amount so that they are not out of pocket....the main reason they considered abortion is financial. I just think it would be a kind gesture from those of us in the faith community!
Pray, pray, pray! and trust God now....

What beautiful fruit from our 40 days! Michelle
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In London Dr. Edward Erin was found guilty of adding poison to drinks he gave his girlfriend to kill the baby she was carrying. Rev. Michael Bray protests:

Hey! What about a father's rights? Why does the woman have all the rights to kill her child? Fathers ought to have the right to kill their children! Blood! Give us more blood shed!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Motion sickness On October 21st my attorney’s argued a motion to drop concealed weapon charges before Judge Mark Goldsmith.
The state is always attempting to beef up its case. The original police report contained pages of Goggled Internet articles about our position on abortion, along with pictures of our van. But the prosecution objected to us introducing their photographs of our van into evidence at the Preliminary Hearing.
The state’s Motion to Resist Bail included a gossipy letter from Glynis Bethel, a woman who pretended to be Donna’s friend. Shakespeare so eloquently put it “nothing comes out of nothing” so little should come of little.
Attorney Robert Fleming argued “If having a hammer in a vehicle is ‘Carrying a Concealed Weapon’ (CCW), than so potentially is a tire iron.” Concealed Weapons statute MCL750.227 is limited to proscribed stabbing type instruments. Previous case law excluded an ax handle as a dangerous weapon.
People v. Robert Early Smith 393 Mich 432 (1975, on appeal, excluded a loaded M-1 carbine in a vehicle)

Robert Fleming is one of three attorneys defending me. He is a former sheriff’s deputy, and is presently a law professor in Lansing Michigan. Mr. Fleming is volunteering his time though the Alliance Defense Fund.
Chicago attorney Tom Brejcha is volunteering time, money, and investigative resources through Thomas Moore. Mr. Brejcha spent 25 years fighting Planned Parenthood’s RICO case against Pro-life Action league, and other defendants. Had Planned Parenthood prevailed, RICO would have taken the teeth out of the pro-life movement. We could not be on the street speaking up for the babies if RICO applied to our activities.
Attorney Anthony Lubkin from Owosso, Michigan has been defending me since the beginning. Mr. Lubkin wrote a brief on CCW which I have attached to this e-mail.

Think about the implications of being convicted of a CCW with such things as a hammer. Are hammers among the objects we are to apply for licensing? Will the legislature require safety standards by eliminating its sharp claw? Will those convicted of “Hammer CCW” be banned from future use of a hammer?
Judge Goldsmith is writing a decision on this motion. It is the 2nd written decision in this case. He also wrote a decision regarding my bond.
I am charged with two felonies: CCW and “Felony Assault.” The “victim” told police that I approached her vehicle with a hammer in a threatening manner. I told the police that I merely displayed the hammer at a distance as I was boxed in at the first light. At the 2nd stop light I approached her vehicle without a hammer. My display of the hammer at the 1st light is the reason for the state charging me with Felony Assault.
The “victim” is lying throughout this incident. At the Preliminary Hearing she testified that her road rage toward me was because my vehicle “drifted into her lane.” She did not notice what message was on our van until the incident was over. The 911 tapes tell a different story. She tells the operator that she cut in front of us to avoid her son viewing our pictures. The first sentence out of her mouth was about the awful abortion pictures.
The assistant DA told the judge that he hopes to “resolve this case before it goes to trial.” He told me outside the courtroom that he believes in what we are doing.
In the early 1990’s I was in a trial with Matt Trewhella and Edmund Miller for blockading abortionists George Woodward’s vehicle at his home. We sat by the wheels so he could not leave the driveway for his bloody days work. We were found guilty and a juror approached us after the trial. He told us that he agreed with what we are doing but was compelled to find us guilty because all the other jurors were putting pressure on him.
He reminded us of the soldiers who crucified Jesus. There might have been a sympathetic brute among them who was just following orders. While pounding in the nails he might have said to Him “Now, this is going to hurt!” Dan Holman
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear John, The number one supporter of legal abortion is the Pope, number two is the Mormon Church, and number three is the Republican Party. Then way back in the peanut gallery we have the Democratic Party and Planned Parenthood.
Let's first expose the Pope's modus operandi. . . .

Gentle Reader, I will skip here Cal’s attack on the Church and refer you instead to our exchanges in the third and fourth issues of Volume 6 (May, 2008). We continue with the Mormons:

Let's expose the Mormon Church as well. When senator Jesse Helms and representative Henry Hyde proposed the Human Life Bill at the U.S. Congress, the Mormons swiftly responded with the Hatch Amendment to defeat it, proposed by Mormon senator Orin Hatch. It is easy to predict that an amendment that condemns abortion but refuses to close the latch on personhood will be defeated, because it lacks substance. So the Mormon Church proposed the Hatch Amendment to derail the Human Life Bill, finding an eager co-conspirator in the Catholic Church. Both Churches wanted to defeat the Human Life Bill because it would have closed the latch on personhood to take away abortion. Instead, the two Churches only want to deny complicity, while letting Mr. Wolf operate.
Why? Well, let's look at the Mormon predicament with the aid of statistics. In the Mormon Church they have what are called "singles wards" where Mormon boys go to meet Mormon girls. The boys think the girls are all virgins. The actual statistics, however, are that over 40% of the girls have already been there and done that and then disposed of the evidence at the abortion clinic. The repeat factor averages 1.8-1.9 abortions each. Do you think Mormon boys are going to peddle around on bikes for two years, with their hair trimmed wearing white shirts and black pants, along with fellow "elders"--do you think they are going to pay 10% to the temple tithe--only to end up with a girl who has already had abortions with other guys? Without legal abortion, the Mormon boys would find out the truth. Without legal abortion, they would need a child daycare center at every singles ward! So Mr. Wolf is very convenient for the Mormon Church. With Mr. Wolf in business it is easy to say, "You're mistaken. Those statistics don't apply to us."
The Catholic Church tried to say that. But Catholics got slapped in the face by statistics showing Catholic girls actually have slightly higher abortion rates than their Protestant counterparts! Without Mr. Wolf in business, Catholic schools would have to have daycares for the girls' children, and pregnant girls would be walking around campus. The pews would have Catholic girls showing up pregnant on repeat pregnancies that would have otherwise been aborted along with the first. People at home would wonder what is the point of being Catholic or sending your kids to Catholic school.

Cal’s right here about the Anti-Catholic Catholics (“only Catholics have abortions anymore because Jews and Protestants choose sterilization”), but the Mormons will have to speak for themselves. However, as I’ve told Cal, I lived through the clash between the Human Life Amendmenters and the Hatchers. I thought both sides at fault, with the HLAs slightly more so.
Next issue I’ll continue with attacks on Republicans and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here’s more of Peter Knight’s letter, continued from No. 9:

That fact (that child killing would remain legal) wouldn’t do anything to explain why any of those who refuse to use Paul Hill’s methods haven’t gone to Hawaii and taken such actions there. If someone was capable of working out that there are hundreds of abortionists in North America, then he is surely capable of figuring out that there would be only one or two in far remote Hawaii.
However important it is to save the lives of unborn children though, and however many you might be able to save, saving their lives is not the number one duty of any true Christian.
The other thing that is said in regard to Paul Hill’s actions is that it is asking too much of people to take his actions. More than what is required of them to be true Christians. And so, it is wrong to demand that they do and to condemn them when they don’t. Those who say this, when describing Paul Hill, often use such words as fanatic and extremist.
A fanatic and extremist from older times, Jesus of Nazareth, wasn’t wishy-washy or backward when it came to laying down the law as to how much is required of people. MT 7: 13-14, MT 10: 37-39, LK 14:25-33. Verse 33 of the latter says, “Anyone who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.” But the parts of the Gospel which tell of Jesus’ crucifixion give an even clearer picture of the standard that people are required to measure up to. And they also reveal what the true Christian’s principal duty is. It’s a duty which very few people make any attempt to carry out, and which very few people accept they have. As with almost all duties which people have and deny, they deny this duty because they do not want this duty.
If there’s one thing that people have heard about Jesus it’s that he was unjustly crucified and rose from the dead. Jesus knew that he would be crucified when he went to Jerusalem on that final occasion. MT 20. 17-19. One of the truths about Jesus which has been very much falsified is the reason why it was necessary for him to lay down his life and why he willingly did so. The explanation given by many preachers goes like this: People right from the time of Adam and Eve had sinned. And God demanded that a penalty be paid for that sin. That someone be made to suffer to pay the penalty. And he didn’t much care who paid so long as someone did. And along came the innocent Jesus to square the ledger.
Now, have you ever heard of anything more unjust and silly? What just person is there who, if someone committed a crime, committed a sin, in order to obtain punishment payment for that crime/sin, would have an innocent person pay in place of the guilty party? The only thing that’s necessary for people’s sins to be washed away and forgiven by God is for them to repent. And if they don’t repent then nothing anyone can do will save them.
When it is said to the preachers who put forth this ridiculous explanation that it doesn’t make sense, the reply is, “That’s the way God is. He’s beyond human understanding. He and his ways are a mystery.” It’s similar to the one I heard some “scientists” use – “If the descriptions and explanations we give you of the workings and origin of the universe seem to get more and more crazy, then that’s not because we’re crazy, it’s just because that’s the way the universe is. The universe is crazy. It’s not us that’s crazy.” And the preachers who give this explanation say the same – “It’s not us that’s crazy. It’s God that’s crazy.” (tbc)
-------------------------------------------------------------------