Editors Note: TruthScript does not hold to a specific stance on abortion abolition vs. incrementalism, but welcomes varying viewpoints on the subject of ending abortion.
I was really thankful for a recent online debate, which seems very strange to say. Thankful for an online debate? What’s wrong with you? Often, online debates devolve very quickly and somebody gets embarrassed by their behavior…or at least they should be embarrassed. However, this particular debate was between two Christian men who kept their cool and were able to have a cordial conversation from different perspectives. It helped that they were face-to-face (on video anyway) and not just keyboard warriors yelling at each other in some comment section. Each man was seeking to be persuasive as to why his position was the/a legitimate biblical position, trying to do so in good faith without ungodly personal attacks. Each man represented himself honorably and charitably, and that alone is a reason to be thankful. It is possible and very much needed, to have honest debates between people who genuinely disagree as we seek greater unity in the body of Christ.
I was also thankful for the particular debaters and their subjects. The debaters were men of considerable renown. T. Russel Hunter is a staunchly outspoken abortion abolitionist leader in his 30s from Oklahoma. He is well-known in the abolitionist movement. Doug Wilson is a current church leader in his 70s in Idaho, with considerable reformed evangelical bona fides. He has over 40 years of preaching, writing, and godly troublemaking under his belt.
The subject they were debating was the Christian approach to the great evil of child sacrifice (abortion) and what to do about it. The two strategies on the table were Hunter’s version of abolitionism and Wilson’s “smash-mouth incrementalism,” or as he has described elsewhere, a “run all the plays” approach to ending human abortion.
At Odds With Pastor Wilson
I love pastor Wilson. He is a personal hero of mine, right up there on my personal Mt. Rushmore of living Christian heroes with John MacArthur, Voddie Baucham, and James White. I subscribe to Canon+ and I appreciate much of the ministry that comes from Moscow, even though some of my friends don’t. They can be wrong if they want…it’s a free country. But just like all of my heroes, they do not receive from me unquestioned or absolute allegiance. We follow Christ above all, and to the extent that faithful men follow Christ, we are welcome to follow them. With that said, I have found myself at odds with pastor Wilson on this subject, and this debate confirmed the matter even further as to why I do not follow his lead in this area. All my comments are in the spirit of love and appreciation for Pastor Wilson, wanting him to see his own blind spots as we pursue a unified Christian vision for ending this abominable evil.
The debate hinged for me on Wilson’s inability to respond to Hunter’s use of Scripture. Isaiah 30:1-3 speaks of the problem of pursuing a pragmatic plan of human wisdom that is not in accord with God’s plan. Deuteronomy 16:18-20 is God’s call to Israel to not distort justice, to be impartial, and to pursue “justice, and only justice.” This is the responsibility of all God’s deacons (Rom. 13). Wilson simply acknowledged his agreement with those passages (no problem passages), but he could not answer why he would support legislation that did not do justice, and yet still be properly applying these acknowledged texts. His aim is to “save as many babies as I can,” while allowing for perverted justice to be the acceptable means.
Now, if you watched the debate, you may not be tracking with the abolitionist argument because you may not have fully understood what was behind Russell Hunter’s argument. You see, a heartbeat bill or a ban on abortion after a certain week of gestation, are not bills that do justice and only justice. These laws acknowledge a false category, “abortion,” as if it is something other than what ordinary murder laws would cover. Furthermore, they codify murder of the pre-born into law and they show partiality based on gender to someone who commits murder. These laws also justify the murder of the unborn if certain conditions are met (no heartbeat detected, then you can kill him; if he is younger than 15 weeks, then you can kill him) and they do not have teeth to hold an abortive mother accountable for her actions. If a man strikes a pregnant woman so as to kill her and her unborn baby, the man is charged with double murder, plain and simple, and rightfully so. But a woman can murder her unborn baby and pro-life laws protect her from accountability. Pastor Wilson said he would sign those bills if he were a governor, for instance, because in his view, he is taking a step toward ending all abortion. But he did not answer how that accords with Deuteronomy 16 and why he was not following the foolish reason of Israel as indicated in Isaiah 30. Following the debate, pastor Wilson put out a follow-up video to the debate where he did address Deuteronomy 16 and suggested that text only applied to those who are establishing a new government in an ideal situation. Apparently, after the initial start-up, justice and only justice becomes a dream of nostalgia and not a standard for governing. In the debate and after, he suggested that in a complicated world where the people and rulers are wicked, believers just take what they can get.
The Lordship of Christ
I have several problems with Pastor Wilson’s approach. First, I thought we were all about the Lordship of Christ. I thought we were calling the rulers of the earth to “kiss the Son” (Psalm 2:12) and that isn’t a Judas kiss on the cheek where they claim friendship and then betray Him with injustice, but a kiss of His feet as they bow before Him in a posture of submission to His commands. Since Jesus is Lord, why wouldn’t “Governor Wilson,” a Christian magistrate, declare that the law of Christ must be honored and true justice codified? Why won’t Wilson kiss the feet of Jesus and submit to His Law? Christ is King, after all, not the state legislature. Kiss the Son and don’t pervert justice. “How about we stop doing the things that make God (King Jesus) angry,” Pastor Wilson has repeatedly said. What would be the value of a Governor Wilson? Idaho’s horrible and ungodly governor has already signed a heartbeat bill. We don’t need a Wilson administration for that kind of compromise to justice. What good is a theonomist if when he gets in office “you shall not murder” is something he can compromise on? However, what if “Governor Wilson” promised, “I will do justice and only justice.” Then we would have a leader we can believe in.
Now, Mr. Hunter affirmed that incremental steps could be taken in pursuit of total justice, but those steps must be just. For instance, you can have a law that bans all surgical abortions and not immediately address all chemical abortions. If all surgical abortions are outlawed, meaning all babies are protected and all perpetrators are prosecuted, then you have a just law, though partial in scope… addressing the conditions of murder. Abolitionists would support a bill that banned all murder by means of a firearm, even if it didn’t address murder by machete. It’s obviously weird, but we would. Why? Because the law is not partial against a human being and the penalties apply to all gun-wielding murderers. If you banned all surgical abortions, that is where you come back again to address the chemical abortions and seek to do justice in those cases as well. A “# week ban” addresses the scope of a baby’s age and shows partiality to persons by determining at what point/age a baby may be murdered and may not be murdered. That is unjust. A heartbeat bill deals with the scope of a detectable heartbeat and says when a baby’s condition is such that it may be murdered and when he may not be murdered. And both laws do not prosecute the murderous mother for her violations. That is unjust. In each case, some people are deemed ok to protect while others are not. Equal protection under the law is how we submit to Christ’s lordship as the one who created man in His image. It’s not more complicated than that. If Christians would just agree with that, abortion could be abolished in multiple states, including Idaho, tomorrow.
Second, pastor Wilson suggested that the model for his view of “governorship” was the “good kings” of Judah. Those kings walked with the Lord, obeyed the Lord, and instituted great reforms, but they failed to tear down the high places. They still had a commendation from the Lord, even though they stopped short of tearing down the high places of idolatry. And once again my response is, I thought we were here to declare the lordship of Christ, not to follow the compromises of the “good kings of Judah” who fell short of God’s standard…which is why we needed the only one who is truly good (Mark 10:18), the last and eternal King of kings and Lord of lords. Jesus is our standard bearer, not Joash. Some of Judah’s kings were even operating without a copy of the Law of God to consult. And yet, our Christian American magistrates are without any such excuse. We have the whole counsel of God and “Governor Wilson” would also be without excuse. The Left’s high place, their sacrament, their altar of sacrifice to Molech is abortion. “Governor Wilson” suggested that if he signed a heartbeat bill, even though it was not a just law and did not serve to actually tear down the high places, he could have a clean conscience that he could still be a “good” governor. Sadly, his admittance to being willing to sign any bill that purported to curtail abortion means that those unjust bills would be the only bills he would ever see, and the high places would remain under his administration. Why would “Governor Wilson” never see a bill of abolition come across his desk? It is because leadership that says it is willing to compromise on fundamental definitions of justice will never lead anyone to show the courage their head is unwilling to take. Leadership, when justice is concerned, must be uncompromising. “Justice and only justice,” is not an ideal for a fledgling nation. It is a declaration that Jesus is Lord, but that is not where “Governor Wilson” says he would go. Even President Reagan said, “Tear down this wall.” Pastor Wilson admits that “President Wilson” would say, “I really want you to tear down this high place, but if you just remove one of the stones, that will do for now.”
The Value of Charity in Disagreement
We must demand better from our Christian leaders and we need to pursue, not only charity in disagreement but one-mindedness on this issue. I’m thankful for the debate and hope that Pastor Wilson will use his voice to shun compromise and get on board the abolition train. Let’s pray for that and that God would help us abolish child sacrifice in our land.
