Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.25: The Problem of Evil

Posted on August 19, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

This chapter of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics tackles the problem of evil.

Related are the appendices dealing with hell and Old Testament issues.

Groothuis tackles this issue last because one problem should not defeat the entire cumulative case for Christianity and against atheism–it doesn’t exist in a philosophical vacuum.

The Problem of Evil: 

Either: 

a) God is able to prevent evil, but is unwilling (and thus not omnibenevolent), or 

b) God is willing to prevent evil, but unable (thus not omnipotent),  

Therefore: 

The existence of evil is evidence against God’s existence.

Groothuis dispenses with 5 false answers to this problem: atheism, a finite god, a god who is not good, nonexistent evil, and karma/reincarnation.

In order for evil to be a problem, it can’t just be an illusion, as various pantheistic religions believe it is. There must be objective evil–which requires that there must be objective goodness…for evil cannot exist without something to pervert. Various pantheistic religions make the moral judgment that “Being concerned with right and wrong is a ‘sickness of the mind'” — it refutes itself in saying that such a moral judgment is itself sick. Atheism can point to nothing in reality that is always as it should be. Neither a finite god, nor a god who is not good, is as god should be (omnipotent, omnibenevolent). Religions that believe in karma and reincarnation deny the reality of the self–but then, if that’s true, there are no enduring individual selves to reincarnate, no selves for karma to act on…and an impersonal system like karma cannot evaluate or govern.

By contrast, the Christian view grounds goodness in God’s unchanging love-despite-adversity, accounts for evil with human free will to depart from God’s image in us (whether or not we evolved), and redeems the wreck we are in with Jesus’ death and resurrection, and the promise of a new heavens and new earth.

The section on free will: I disagree that libertarian freedom contradicts God’s sovereignty–and counter that a compatibilist view of “freedom” (genuine agency is compatible with the determination of the agents actions by factors outside of the agent) contradicts the possibility of human responsibility. See Geisler’s moderate-Calvinist resolution in “Chosen But Free.”

The Christian view defends God’s allowance of evil– “A good God will eliminate evil as far as he can without either losing a greater good or bringing about a greater evil.” (Plantinga, p. 631 of Groothuis) One biblical example is that Joseph’s brothers sold him into slavery, but God meant it for good (Genesis 50:20). There are no gratuitous (pointless) evils. The ultimate example of good triumphing over/through evil, is Jesus’ death and resurrection. The idea of “redemption” will set everything right in the end.

I want to end with a quote from C.S. Lewis, mentioned in Keller’s “The Reason for God” — “They say of some temporal suffering, ‘No future bliss can make up for it,’ not knowing that Heaven, once attained, will work backwards and turn even that agony into a glory.” (34) Also see the Dostoevsky quote that precedes it in that chapter by Keller.

Book Discussion Index 
Posted in Apologetics, Evil as Privation of Good, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Predestination, Problem of Evil & Hell, Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Defining the good: The Golden Rule

Posted on August 15, 2013 by Maryann Spikes
http://www.pflaum.com

IN DESPERATE NEED OF EDITING/UPDATING, DON’T JUDGE!

A major argument for God’s existence is that, if there is no God, there is no “true” good, because truth is that which corresponds to reality, to real being. A common counter-argument heard from atheists, agnostics, and skeptics is that this does not account for the definition of moral goodness. If God is the source of goodness, does he define what it means to be good via his commands (hence, it is fiction, not truth), or is it a standard he himself follows (hence, he is not the highest absolute)? In other words, theists cannot define goodness just by grounding it in God’s nature. True, but we don’t claim to.

When we do attempt to define goodness (a separate issue from its grounding), the skeptic’s counter-argument becomes that our definition of goodness would be true whether or not God exists. For example, a successful argument in favor of the Golden Rule means that the Golden Rule is true on its own two feet and does not need to be grounded in God. However—if God does not exist, to what is the Golden Rule true? What being in reality does it describe? So we need both—we need moral truth to be grounded in real being, and we need to know what it means to be good. Those more experienced in philosophy might recognize this is Plato’s “justified true belief,” Hume’s “is ought distinction,” and the resolution to Euthyphro’s dilemma.
Many apologists I come across claim that we don’t need to define goodness, but many skeptics view this as a cop-out. Therefore, this essay, rather than centered on grounding goodness, is centered on defining it (while also insisting it is not true unless grounded in real being). The Golden Rule will be stated out front, referred to throughout, and finally defended.

“In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” (Jesus, Matthew 7:12)
Made up laws, or laws that are true to nothing, are sandcastles for the tide. Nihilists admirably claim this is why there is no moral truth—because there is nothing in reality to which it can be true. But, if the Golden Rule is true to nothing, why do we find it in every major culture throughout history? This seems to indicate a universal hunger for true meaning and goodness. But to what is it true?—what in reality does it describe? Does it have rival theories in Ethics? Indeed, it does…
We are going to survey how the major ethical theories measure up to eachother when they answer questions like “What should our character be?” “What should we do as far as our conduct or duty is concerned?” and, “What is the ultimate end or consequence?” –all as pertains to the Other/self. So many theories are some attempt at improving the Golden Rule, which might come up in many chapters of an introductory Ethics text, but ironically never gets its own. This time, we’re going to give it its own section at the end. But first, let’s see how all the other major theories work out.
Greek Virtue Theory – Character
Greek virtue theory answers the questions of Ethics by emphasizing a virtuous (rational) character. Happiness is an important consequence only achieved if we fulfill the real purpose for our character, built when our conduct is according to the Golden Mean between a vice of deficiency and a vice of extremism.  Virtue ethics considers character to be more fundamental than conduct, because, in Aristotle’s words, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.”
Plato’s virtue theory, with its producers, warriors, and rulers, is racist, classist, etcetera, thinking that certain types of humans are essentially different from others and therefore have different essential moral obligations and rights.
Aristotle improved on Plato by proposing that what humans do best (men, in particular), is reason, or contemplation. Moral virtue involves reasoning out the Golden Mean on a consistent, character-building basis. For example, the Golden Mean between destructive criticism and deficient criticism is constructive criticism.
One might get things right on accident using the Golden Mean, but there is the potential to get things wrong, because reason is emphasized over love. Making a rational character the highest virtue leaves the Other out of our moral considerations. Although we should behave rationally in our dealings with the Other, “reasoning well” (like being powerful) does not even require an Other (even one’s self) to be in existence. A mindless computer programmed to make decisions according to the Golden Mean would be considered virtuous.
The ancient Chinese philosopher, Confucius, also came up with the mean, the middle state of moderation, but unlike Aristotle, Confucius expressed a version of the Golden Rule. “For Confucius the superior man is one who shuns pride and strives for humility; Aristotle would have considered such a man to have insufficient self-appreciation.” (507) But there is nothing in reality to which Aristotle’s virtue theory can always be true—there is nothing in reality it always describes.
However, here’s something my introductory Ethics text failed to mention: Though you won’t find the Golden Rule in Aristotle, you can find the Golden Rule in ancient Greece. And perhaps when Socrates talks about “the god” (Apology, 3b, 14c)—that is the being to which the Golden Rule corresponds?
Atheist Existentialism – Character Revisited
In atheist existentialism the questions of Ethics are somewhat answered by emphasizing an authentic character, valuing that we take responsibility for our choices, and considering important the consequence of responsible freedom.  The answer to the question isn’t as important as experiencing it as true or creating it by choice.  Soren Kierkegaard, the Christian father of existentialism, is an essentialist, finding authenticity in freely choosing, despite adversity, the human responsibility to love (Golden Rule), whereas Jean-Paul Sartre, the father of atheist existentialism, is a voluntarist rejecting discovered purpose and finding authenticity in freely creating how we think humans should be. “In choosing myself, I choose man.” But this is just a restating of the Golden Rule…which we are free to choose responsibly.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative – Conduct
Whereas the Greeks thought they discovered moral value in developing one’s character according to a built-in purpose, Immanuel Kant, though valuing a virtuous disposition (a good will), thought he discovered the answer to the questions of Ethics in the categorical imperative:  “Always act so that you can will that your maxim can become a universal law.”
Important is the consequence of everyone’s moral sense being respected, but to determine whether or not our intentions are to do the right thing, we do not have to wait and see how the consequences pan out. We simply “determine whether we could imagine others doing to us what we intend to do to them. In other words, Kant proposes a variant of the Golden Rule. … (It) draws on the same fundamental realization that I called a spark of moral genius in the Golden Rule: It sees self and others as fundamentally similar.” (224-225) We share the same rationality and the same moral sense by virtue of being human beings, and so the rules are the same for all of us.
A common, though not universal, interpretation of Kant is that he “had harsh words for the old Golden Rule. He thought it was just a simplistic version of his own categorical imperative and that it could even be turned into a travesty. If you don’t want to help others, just claim you don’t want or need help from them!” (224-225) However, instead of viewing the GR as “more simplistic,” one could view it as “more basic” or “more essential.” Kant’s criticism is answered this way: The Golden Rule (treat the Other how you would want to be treated; love the Other as self) includes the Platinum Rule (treat the Other how they would want to be treated), considering we would want the Other to put themselves in our shoes in their interactions with us.
Ultimately, this stands or falls on what it means to be a self that wants what it ought to want. If not grounded on such a self, there is nothing in reality to which Kant’s categorical imperative can always be true—there is nothing in reality it always describes.
Relativism – Conduct Revisited
Relativism answers the questions of Ethics by requiring that we respect and be tolerant of the norms of other cultures, whether or not they agree with ours, and by logical implication, that we conform to our own cultural norms. The basic impulse driving this view is the admirable, merciful feeling that, just as we would not want another culture’s values forced upon ours, we should not force our culture’s values on other cultures. This is golden irony, for this is the Golden Rule incorrectly applied, suggesting again that the Golden Rule is more basic than any of its rivals.
There is much to be said for respecting and preserving cultural diversity. However, to claim such respect as essential, transcending culture, is to contradict the impulse behind cultural relativism. Further, the tolerance of relativism is ineffective in cultures without that impulse.
And note that the absolutist view is not that we force our values on (or adopt the values of) cultures that do not share whatever values are in question, but that absolutes are discovered in and transcend every culture while maintaining the precious diversity that does not destroy common ground.
Lastly, to not hold all cultures accountable to a transcultural standard (except that of tolerance, of course) is to insult the moral autonomy of each culture’s members—their status as free persons able to discern moral truth and make moral choices. It is to claim that Hitler, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mother Theresa are morally equivalent. It is also to exclude different cultures from the benefits of following the transcultural standard—like universal human rights.
Utilitarianism – Consequences
In utilitarianism, the questions of Ethics are answered by bringing about the consequence of the greatest happiness in the greatest number of people. Conduct is determined by the greatest happiness principle, and a happy character is valued in ideas like ataraxia and eudemonia. Jeremy Bentham’s principle of utility, or the greatest-happiness principle, is as follows: “When choosing a course of action, always pick the one that will maximize happiness and minimize unhappiness for the greatest number of people.” What Bentham did not account for is that, if only a few suffer from the consequences of the act, then the overall pleasure (the end) justifies their suffering (the means).
John Stuart Mill (Bentham’s godson) attempted to resolve this by suggesting utilitarianism is just a general policy for general situations, but others after him have come up with rule utilitarianism, which would be phrased, “Don’t do something if you can’t imagine it as a rule for everybody, because a rule not suited for everyone can have no good overall consequences.” (201) According to Rosenstand, this is another attempt to fortify the Golden Rule. This differs from Kant’s categorical imperative, because it is focused on overall consequences, whereas the cat imp is supposed to be followed even if we calculate that it will not result in the common good.
Emphasizing the “end” allows for evil means and character—there must be a standard that judges the means, the character, and the end to be right. There must also be something in existence to which this standard is always true.
Egoism – Consequences Revisited
In egoism, the questions of Ethics are answered by emphasizing good consequences for the person taking the action, considering selfishness a virtue, and finding it important to act in one’s own self-interest. Egoism is Utilitarianism zeroed in on the individual. Rather than focusing on group happiness, egoism focuses on self-happiness.
Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophy of rational self-interest is this in a nutshell: “the actor must always be the beneficiary of his action.” Put another way: “The rights of the self/Other end where the rights of the Other/self begin”—that’s just the Golden Rule, restated: “Respect the rights of the Other, as you would have them respect your rights.”
Egoism, however, discourages fellow-feeling and a natural concern for the Other, both essential to a cultivated moral sense. Egoists would only follow the Golden Rule to avoid conflict with the Other (if they perceive such avoidance benefits self), rather than living out the empathy implicit in the timeless, self-, other-, and culture-spanning Golden Rule. And to what is Rand’s “Objectivism” objectively, always true? What self in reality does it always describe?
The Golden Rule – Character, Conduct ‘and’ Consequences
It has been shown how the Golden Rule is a more basic and essential aspect of each major theory in Ethics. Aristotle thought every man’s virtue is built in to reality, and Socrates perhaps grounded the Golden Rule in “the god.” Sartre restated the Golden Rule when he said, “In choosing myself, I choose man.” Kant grounded his categorical imperative in fairness to everyone’s shared moral sense. The impulse of relativism simply misapplies the Golden Rule. Bentham and Mill grounded their universalized happiness principle in our shared need for happiness. Ayn Rand thought the happiness of the self is just as important as everyone else’s happiness. They were all right – we are all free and responsible to choose the best purpose; we all need to be happy, to love and be loved, despite circumstances; we all share a moral sense; and the highest virtue is only always true if it always describes something essential to reality, not just in-the-moment behavior.
The Golden Rule—love the Other as self—best accounts for the questions of Ethics:
“What should our character be?” We should be someone who always loves the Other as self.
“What should we do as far as our conduct or duty is concerned?” We should always love the Other as self.
“What is the ultimate end or consequence?” Always this: That the Other is loved as self.
“In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” (Jesus, Matthew 7:12)
And to what being in reality does this truth correspond? Who does it describe? There is only one candidate. The Golden Rule describes that essential being (“character”), demonstrated ultimately on the cross (“conduct”) when Jesus took our moral failings on himself, and gave us his moral perfection, loving us despite circumstances—the ultimate point or consequence (“consequences”).
That’s what goodness means. If that isn’t true, there is no good.
Posted in Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment

Bible Study Methods

Posted on August 10, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

51rzXL9o+PL._SL210_I panned Rick Warren’s “Bible Study Methods” for nuggets which can be used in this Bible Narrative Project study.

The emphasis will be on observing, asking questions, interpreting and applying—recording everything in a journal, and sharing at least some of it at the Project.

Tools:  Zondervan’s NASB Study Bible.  I also have an exhaustive concordance, a Bible dictionary, lexicons, atlas, a Bible handbook and other tools.  I will also use www.biblestudytools.com for additional translations and easier-to-use lexicons, as well as commentaries, et cetera. Continue reading →

Posted in Bible Narrative Project, Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch. 24: The Challenge of Islam

Posted on August 9, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

This chapter of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics covers the truth claims of Islam and its objections to Christianity.

My Background in Islam (skip this to discuss the chapter) 

I’ve noticed an odd fascination with Islam in the U.S. post-9-11, a sort of national Stockholm syndrome…the way some women are attracted to bad boys. My awareness of Islam first began just before the new millennium. My husband was stationed in Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, and we bought a computer with tax return money shortly after he got home from a deployment to Panama. All my unanswered questions from high school poured through my fingertips as I tapped them out on whatever search engine was popular back then. Among other things, I found a lot of Islamic material against Christianity–Paul, in particular. I didn’t know any better. I thought I was duped my whole life to believe a lie. I didn’t convert to Islam, but I did become an atheist for a while. The Islamist material didn’t make a case for Islam, but even so, converting to Islam (instead of atheism, for me) would’ve been like switching from belief in Santa, to belief in the Tooth Fairy.

I have read a *bit* on the history of Islam, but nothing chapter-length that laid its beliefs out systematically.  Most of my curiosity had to do with why Israel is so hated, how much progress has been made towards peace there, how far back the conflict goes, where it started, who is preventing peace from being attained, and so on. Vaguely I remember studying it (& the Crusades, et cetera) in public school in various history classes.

When 9-11 happened, we had just moved to Arizona. My mother-in-law woke me up with a phone call and asked me if I had the TV on, and told me to turn it on when I said I hadn’t yet…I saw the footage of the planes flying into the Twin Towers, heard that it was terrorism and cried for my country. Like everyone else, I was glued to it as events played out (Pentagon, et cetera), watching for survivors. If I didn’t have two young boys, I would have joined the military. The unit my husband left behind in NC were deployed to Afghanistan. The unit in Arizona started 12 hour shifts. Discrimination against a Muslim in the unit was nipped in the bud. At some point, my dad knew bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan. The anthrax letters happened shortly after that, and I wondered how bad things would get. 

Post-9-11, I’ve been exposed to material arguing for why terrorism-spawning Islam is not “extremist” but Quran-based (and how that compares to “genocide” in the Old Testament). I have watched part/all of a debate between a Christian and a Muslim that weighed the truth claims of each against the other. I’ve read a bit on who Islam thinks Jesus is and how it perceives his crucifixion/resurrection, who it thinks inherited the promises (Isaac or Ishmael), and stuff like that. I’ve read stuff warning against the spread of Shari’ah Law, and U.S. women actually *wanting* to wear those hijabs (prolly same sort of women who write letters to serial killers in jail). (Sorry…that’s culturally insensitive of me, isn’t it?) (Honestly, sometimes, when my complexion is particularly bad, I would welcome a hijab.)

A woman in a hijab scared the crap out of me in a Books-A-Million when we lived in North Carolina. Not something you expected to run in to as you turned a corner back then. Years later, I worked with a Muslim. She was a very nice girl, and she translated all the religious terms into American terms, like “church” and “pastor.” I think she didn’t want to trigger any unwarranted fear. She fasted during Ramadan, but didn’t expect everyone else to, like you see in the news these days. She didn’t wear a hijab…she sort of went the opposite direction in the clothing department, which sort of confused me. But she was genuinely nice, and well-liked. But the show 24 featured an American woman who had converted to Islam and become a terrorist. It’s just TV, but it speaks to a genuine fear, because the news actually talks about people who grow up in the U.S. and train as terrorists overseas after they convert. The terrorists on 9-11 had lived here for a while. Consider the bombings in Boston. Sometimes I wonder why the U.S. is not more war-torn. Alternatively on TV, there is Arastoo Vaziri, a ‘squintern’ in one of my favorite shows, Bones. There’s also the kalam cosmological argument. That’s my background in Islam. Pretty ignorant. What’s yours?


On to the Chapter

Two things, from reflecting on my background, that I notice Dr. Groothuis didn’t talk much about in this chapter. War and women (All is fair in love and war?). He doesn’t put emphasis on the claim that Islam is a violent, anti-Jew religion that disrespects women. He focuses more on the truth claims as measured against Christianity. He mentions in the introduction that the majority of terrorists are Muslims, as if to get it out of the way. He does go somewhat into the reality that the traditional penalty for apostasy is death. The rest of the chapter is just on beliefs.

Allah (God) is not a Trinity (they consider it polytheism, and replace the Holy Spirit with Mary…Quran 5:1116), and humans are his slaves, not friends or children (John 15:16, James 4:7-8, Romans 11:33-36, 1 Peter 4:11, Romans 8:15-16). There is no petitionary prayer, only reciting of parts of the Quran and invoking Allah’s power. There are angels & demons, but there are also jinns (good & bad ones). Two angels keep a record of wrongs. Jesus is just one of the prophets, and Muhammad is the last–the Hadith is his biography. The holy books are the Torah, Psalms, Gospels and (unique to Islam) the Quran. The Quran is the one through which the others are seen and was revealed by the angel, Gabriel. God’s judgment is emphasized over heaven in almost every chapter of the Quran. Salvation is works-based and uncertain (rather than grace-based and certain, as with Christianity), unless one dies in a genuine jihad. A Muslim must do 5 things: 1. Confess Allah as God and Muhammad as his prophet, 2. Five daily prayers facing Mecca, 3. Give alms (2.5% of profits), 4. Ramadan fasting for one month every year at the same time, and 5. At least one pilgrimage to Mecca.

Muslims say the Bible has been altered and distorted, either in its original form, or tampered with after the fact. However, the Qur’an says to consult the Christian Scriptures for verification of the truth of Islam, and in so doing, Islam contradicts itself (Qur’an 10:94; see also 5:47-51, 72; 19:29-30; 21:7; 29:46-47). Muslims are repulsed by the belief that Jesus was divine, but also say Jesus was not crucified–he merely ascended–whereas secular historians affirm Jesus’ crucifixion as historical.

And that about covers it, briefly. The chapter is short, but not this short.

I want to end with a quote from Tim Keller’s The Reason for God — “If Christians are right about Jesus being God, then Muslims and Jews fail in a serious way to love God as God really is, but if Muslims [or] Jews are right that Jesus is not God but rather a teacher or prophet, then Christians fail in a serious way to love God as God really is.” (4).

See the Book Discussion Index for evidence that Jesus is who he claimed to be.

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch. 23: Religious Pluralism

Posted on August 8, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

This chapter of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics covers the objection that all roads lead to God.

The Blind Men and the Elephant

The famous “elephant and the blind men” parable is introduced and, later in the chapter, dismantled. The contradictory claims of differing religions are more like this: They say conflicting things about the same body parts. Ultimate reality cannot be both impersonal and personal. Our problem cannot be both a) we’re ignorant of our divinity/nothingness, and b) we’ve lost touch with our Creator. Our spiritual freedom cannot be both a) secured by grace demonstrated on the cross, and b) secured by knowledge of our own divinity/nothingness. And it is just “assumed” that there is this “whole elephant” they are all talking about–the very “essence” this parable claims every religion only captures partially. How is the parable maker able to capture this essence in whole, in order to formulate this parable, when all the world’s religions have failed to capture it? No religion thinks they are the blind man. To suggest the elephant exists is to cease to be the blind man. Contradictions cannot be reconciled.

Groothuis defines religion as “a set of beliefs that attempts to explain the nature of the sacred and how humans can become in harmony with it.” So this chapter does not assert that atheism is a religion/worldview. That whole issue is avoided altogether. I like how Tim Keller defined worldview and tackled this issue in The Reason for God.


But I like how Groothuis fleshes out that religions all grapple with what our problem is, and how to solve it. Where they differ is what the exact problem is, and what the exact solution is. 

Perennialism tries to unite the “core” or “esoteric” truths while labeling conflicting beliefs as “peripheral” or “exoteric” and thus nonessential. This reminds me of the “In essentials unity, in nonessentials liberty, in all things charity” of The Christian Apologetics Alliance’s website disclaimer. Groothuis compares the core teachings of Christianity, nondualistic Hinduism and Buddhism, concerning ultimate reality, the human condition, and spiritual liberation.


Christianity views God as a Trinity and recognizes a Creator-creature duality, that we are in the image of God but have lost touch with him, and that the solution is to accept the Way back to him: grace demonstrated on the cross. Nondualistic Hinduism believes all is Brahman/divine, that all duality is illusory–the real reality is the self is indistinguishable from Absolute Self, and the solution to our uneasiness is to recognize all of that. Buddhism believes the real reality is Nirvana–absence of self/desire, the solution to our suffering. These conflicting core beliefs about the same parts of the elephant cannot be reconciled.

John Hick recognizes that this dismantles perennialism. Instead, he proposes that none of the religions have got at the elephant (he calls it the Real), though they all try. The Real exists, but we cannot get at it, through divine revelation or philosophy or otherwise. Ultimate reality is ineffable. (Problem: Isn’t saying that it exists and explains the world’s religions a form of getting at it? How does it explain them, if nothing can be said about it?–that’s like saying, “This death is explained by the fact that I have no idea who or what caused it.”) 

I don’t like Groothuis’ criticism involving exclusive disjunction, because Hick already said–no religion gets at the Real. The exclusive disjunction objection only applies to perennialism, which Hick denies. Hick would likely affirm the Real needs to be either/or. What he denies is that we can know which the Real is. Maybe I’m wrong about that, because Hick says, “None of these descriptive terms apply literally to the unexperienceable reality that underlies that realm” — that does seem to go a bit further than “We just can’t know.” It seems to move closer to affirming non-duality/monism.

However, Groothuis has a good point that Hick cannot say, “The Real is neither personal nor nonpersonal,” while also saying, “The Real is neither good/loving, nor evil/hating.” If he is noncommittal on the personhood of the Real, then he has to commit to the fact that the Real is as able as a rock is to be good/loving/evil/hating. Also, Groothuis is right when he criticizes Hick for inconsistently saying that an impersonal (not good/evil) Real is behind this: When religions get it accidentally right and are in accidental alignment with the Real, they produce saints. Can an impersonal/ungood Real produce saints? If the Real is neither purposive, nor non-purposive, can it “produce” saints? Besides the inconsistency between impersonal/saints–Christianity says nonChristians can be good without God. They, too, are in God’s image and have his law written on their hearts (Romans 2:14-15).

While Hick’s hypothesis attempts a sort of pluralism, it is the highest form of exclusivism, because it essentially says everyone–everyone–is getting it wrong about the Real. No one is even able to get it right–the blind men were completely mistaken about the parts of the elephant they encountered.

Hick acknowledges: “If Jesus was literally God incarnate, and if it is by his death alone that men can be saved, and by their response to him alone that they can appropriate that salvation, then the only doorway to eternal life is Christian faith.” (Groothuis quoting Hick, p. 585 of “Christian Apologetics”)

What about those who have never heard?

The important words in this discussion are particularism versus inclusivism.

Does God send the ignorant to hell?

We should consider eight things while we address this question: 1. Don’t twist the Bible to be in line with other religions. 2. Remember the Great Commission of world evangelization (Matt. 28:18-20, Luke 24:44-47, Acts 1:8). 3. Look for the common ground that exists between Christianity and other religions (see Don Richardson’s “Eternity in Their Hearts”). 4. Make sure that common ground is not a perversion of the truth. 5. The Bible never says people will be judged according to what they could not have known (Romans 1:18-32, 2:14-15; Ps. 19:1-6). 6. None of us deserves redemption. 7. Whatever their fate, Jesus is the only one who redeems (Matt. 11:27, John 14:6, Acts 4:12, 1 Tim. 2:5). 8. Some will reject God and choose the alternative.

Groothuis offers possible solutions:
1. Their fate is in the hands of a just, holy and loving character, however he works it out.
2. Inclusivists believe salvation is possible for those who have never heard the gospel.
3. Particularists believe salvation is only possible for those who have knowledge of the gospel.

Some inclusivists put greater emphasis on faith than on the object of faith–this is unbiblical (Eph. 2:12, Acts 16:31). Other inclusivists require that a person realize the present object of their faith cannot save them and “cast themselves on the mercy of God.” This is more probable biblically (of the two), but Groothuis goes in for particularism (referring to Psalm 145:18, Acts 4:10-12, Romans 10:9-17).

He answers two objections to particularism by stating that 1) Cornelius, though considered a righteous Gentile, was not saved until after Peter told him about Christ (Acts 10), and 2) believers in the Hebrew Bible were saved (Galatians 3:8, Luke 2:29-32) who anticipated the Messiah in Scriptures and sacrifices.

Will more be lost than saved (Matthew 11:27, John 14:6, Matthew 22:1-44, Luke 14:15-24, Matthew 7:13-14)? Groothuis answers that those passages refer to Jews of Jesus’ day, and that Luke 13:22-30 shows this. Groothuis also points out the “many” in Matthew 20:28, Hebrews 2:10, Romans 5:19, Matthew 8:11 and the “multitude” in Revelation 7:14.

Groothuis also says:
1. Those who die very young are likely redeemed through God’s mercy.
2. Christians may always have been in the minority until very recently, but history is not over.
3. Humans are not the only messengers–angels can preach the gospel (Revelation14:6, Acts 9).

My thoughts: On number 7 above, it mentions it is Jesus’ name that saves. I would like to point out that his name is not a magic word. It is what Jesus stands for–that is what the OT saints anticipated. Jesus is God’s grace. It is God’s *grace* that saves. Jesus came to demonstrate it — it already existed, and his coming was planned before the world was made. So whether or not anyone hears, it is grace that saves. But God wants us to know and experience the reward of a relationship with our Creator and Savior–as soon as possible. Hence, the Great Commission.

No mention is made of verses that say we are only held accountable for the revelation (light) we have been given. See Acts 17:30 (barring this interpretation, which is false, though I love Piper), Luke 23:34/Acts 3:17, 1 Timothy 1:13, Matthew 11:21-24, Luke 12:48. If God can, in his mercy, make an exception for the young, he can make an exception for other examples of ignorance. If you have heard all the evidence of God’s demonstration of grace on the cross in Jesus, and you reject it–then you reject the light you have received, and you have made your choice. If you choose to remain in a state of “I don’t know”–that is the same as rejecting it.

There was a time when I rejected it, but he saved me out of it. I do consider it a time of ignorance. So, I have hope for you, if you are currently in a state of rejection, or “I don’t know.” And I know that God will do everything he can to get you to see the Point before he lets you choose the alternative. “The doors of hell are locked on the inside,” (C.S. Lewis). And there are many doors to hell.

More on my take on the problem of the unevangelized: Hell or Heaven: What about those who have never heard the gospel?

Book Discussion Index

Posted in Apologetics, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Adding A Canonical Link

Posted on May 13, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Hello…this is a brief tutorial on how to add a “canonical link” to the source of a blog post whose content consists of an off-site blog post. This is important because search engines will not list duplicate content. If you add a canonical link to every copy except the original blog post, you keep search engines happy with all the sites involved.

You know what’s really great about demonstrations? They help you understand how to do things by showing you, instead of ranting endlessly about theory.

If you look below the box where these words appear, you will see the word “Canonical” above the words “Canonical link for this page” which are to the left of the address “https://ichthus77.com/2013/05/13/adding-a-canonical-link&#8221; <—that is the canonical link. It is not enough to simply type:

The real deal is located here.

Screen Shot 2013-05-13 at 4.48.04 PM

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Request Project

Posted in Freelancing Tips and Tricks | Leave a comment

May 2013 Christian Carnival: #Gosnell & #INHUMAN

Posted on May 1, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Welcome to the May 1, 2013 edition of Christian Carnival!  This month the carnival is Gosnell centered. Especially if you haven’t heard of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, please digest and share these articles.

Dr. Gosnell, Abortion, the Church and Adoption on Intelmin by Michael Boling

The hot button issue of abortion is nothing new in today’s society. The passing of the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case legalizing abortion is unfortunately celebrating its 40th anniversary. Outside of the yearly demonstrations on the anniversary of the passing of Roe v. Wade and demonstrations at local abortion clinics around the country, the approximately 1 million abortions that take place annually in the United States happen seemingly behind the scenes as an accepted fact of life. Some states have begun to pass legislation in an attempt to tighten the reins on abortion clinics, in particular those operated by Planned Parenthood with some degree of success. READ MORE…

The Gosnell Trial and Destroying the Image of God on The Confident Christian on Christianpost by Robin Schumacher, saying, “This post describes the cultural and spiritual aspects of the Gosnell trial.” 

Kirsten Powers’ recent article on the trial of abortion “doctor” Kermit Gosnell, which ran in the April 11th edition ofUSA Today, is something not to be missed. Powers rightly calls out the odd suppression and, in some cases, revisionism being practiced by the media where the current Pennsylvania abortion trial is concerned. Her concerns are echoed by others such as Jon Healey in the Los Angeles Times. 

Let’s be clear about what this trial is all about. During some abortions, Gosnell delivered babies alive and then literally beheaded them in his abortion clinic, according to staff that observed the procedures. Performing about 1,000 abortions per year, prosecutors assert Gosnell made millions from taking the lives of both newly born and unborn children. READ MORE…

What Christians Should Know (And Do) about the Gosnell Case on The Bible Archive by Rey Reynoso, saying, “I read through the Grand Jury report and highlighted some keypoints to point out who is to blame and what should be done about it.”

This post will be gruesome and depressing.  Not because I am making it more gruesome or more depressing but because the case just is that evil.I’ve lost sleep reading about the Grand Jury report. I’m crying. It’s probably the most evil thing I’ve read or seen.

WHY AM I WRITING ABOUT THIS?

The Gosnell case has been ignored by the national media (both liberal and conservative) except for the first day of the trial so the stuff you might read here could be for the first time (unless you’re a follower of Breitbart which has been following the story).  I’m not a reporter. I’m a guy who has tried to follow the local news story and has worked through theGrand Jury Report. So can you. READ MORE…

The Strange Story of Dr. Kermit Gosnell and the National Press | Part 2 | Part 3 on Christian Apologetics Alliance by Mark McGee

The legal guilt or innocence of Dr. Kermit Gosnell will soon be in the hands of a jury, but the larger question is how we got here in the first place. How can we as a supposedly civilized people question whether the mass slaughter of human beings is a crime? Let me share some historical perspective that may help. 

I remember when the debate began. I was a young reporter, talk show host and atheist at the time. Reporting about illegal abortions came up from time to time, but not often enough in a local broadcast market to give it much thought. Abortion was classified as a crime in most states, though legal under certain circumstances in some. The issue of abortion was not something we debated in the newsroom at the time. That was until the case of Jane Roe. READ MORE…

Is #Gosnell #INHUMAN? | Why do I tweet so much about #Gosnell? | #Gosnell tweets you are free to snag the first one posted at Christian Apologetics Alliance (new authors welcome!) and the last two posted at Ichthus77 by Maryann Spikes

Happening now is the #INHUMAN TweetFest, from 8am-8pm in whatever timezone you happen to inhabit. The goal of this event is to raise awareness about late-term abortion.

A legitimate question was raised on the event page by Sandra: “Is this supposed to be ‘Inhumane’? It just seems a little strange to call another person inhuman when he is indeed human. It is his behavior that is not human.”

“Tolerance applies only to persons and never to principles. Intolerance applies only to principles and never to persons.” ~ Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

I had the same feeling when I first heard that, in closing statements, the prosecution asked Gosnell if he was human (WhoIsGosnell?). Gosnell giggled. Hearing that felt like hearing the anti-story to the parable of the Good Samaritan.

In that parable, Jesus doesn’t make the injured man the example of a neighbor…he makes the man who helped him (the Good Samaritan) to be the example of a neighbor (of how a human ought to be). It is better to value the stranger (out group, marginalized, other) on the same level as we value our own self. If the balance is tipped either way, we need to reevaluate. It is better to err on the side of too much compassion…to consider fully human our enemies, the outcast, the unborn, the innocent-until-proven-guilty, et cetera…so that we do not lose our own humanity. Part of being fully human, is acknowledging in others their full humanity–that which is shared between us. READ MORE…

Also check out a good 8 pages of Gosnell posts by Christian Apologetics blogs.

That concludes this edition. If your submission didn’t make it into this edition, you can always try again for next week’s carnival.  Submit your blog article to the next edition of Christian Carnival using our carnival submission form.

Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.  Have a blessed week :)

Posted in Carnival | Leave a comment

Call for submissions to the Christian Carnival: #INHUMAN

Posted on April 30, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Calling all bloggers: 

Wednesday, May 1st, 8am-8pm, will you please publish and/or tweet (across all your social networks) a post on late-term abortion, using the #INHUMAN hashtag?  

There is going to be an #INHUMAN tweetfest: https://www.facebook.com/events/118639345001205

Here are a selection of pro-life posts you may tweet: http://www.apologeticalliance.com/blog/category/cultural-apologetics/culture-and-ethics/pro-life-2

I’ve scheduled a post to publish at 8am on May 1 at Christian Apologetics Alliance (new authors welcome and invited!).

If you let me know you are going to schedule a blog post to publish and/or be tweeted/shared the same day, I will include it in the Gosnell carnival (for the Christian Carnival) that will be published here at Ichthus77 on May 1. Just give me your permalink.

Schedule Hootsuite to share your blog post to all your social networks, using the #INHUMAN hashtag.

See the event page for further details–like a list of relevant tweets (feel free to snag a bunch of mine from the #Gosnell tweetfest), and how to participate if you don’t have a Twitter account.

Posted in Carnival, Gosnell | Leave a comment

#Gosnell tweets you are free to snag

Posted on April 27, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Please use these tweets to spread awareness about the Kermit Gosnell trial. Fill in any leftover characters by hash-tagging local and main stream media, and your politicians.

Join the #inhuman Tweetfest Wednesday, May 1, 8am-8pm.

***For tweet coverage on Gosnell trial as it comes to a close, follow @jdmullane @whoisgosnell @bryankemper @SeanGOSullivan @JoeSlobo*** Here are 12 news stories from 28th-30th.

I will be (re-)scheduling these out on Hootsuite and encourage others to do the same, but if you’d rather retweet mine, follow me @Ichthus77, or if you want to share, follow me on Facebook (here’s my page). These will also be found at +Ichthus77 (which will receive from Hootsuite, whereas my profile will not).

There are three sections below: 1. Media Coverage, 2. Socio-Political Landscape, and 3. Blogs, Adoption & Memes. Have at it:

1. Media Coverage

Jury returns today for Pa. abortion case closings http://abcn.ws/15T1HDW via @ABC #Gosnell

Tune in to @FoxNews May 5 at 9 EST and share this event to spread the word. http://fb.me/FoMJ7tH8 #Gosnell

April 8 vid of @GovMikeHuckabee show on babies born alive during abortion http://video.foxnews.com/v/2287315199001 #Gosnell

Unlike the majority of media outlets @WORLD_mag has been covering from the beginning http://www.worldmag.com/topic/gosnell_trial #Gosnell

The #Gosnell infanticide case: http://wp.me/pqyhO-9yt abortion via @USAtoday

#Gosnell “House of Horrors” late-term abortion, overdose death trial http://ow.ly/jYMEK via @Ichthus77

#Gosnell had problems 38 years ago http://www.philly.com/philly/news/year-in-review/20100225_W__Phila_abortion_doctor_had_problems_38_years_ago.html May 1972, 15 preg women from Chicago rcvd “super coil” abortions via @phillydotcom

Receptionist: Unlicensed doc fled Pa. clinic raid http://t.co/Gen4Czk4iD Ty for covering this @modbee via @AP #Gosnell

The trial of corrupt #Gosnell has produced some horrifying testimony: http://articles.philly.com/2013-04-09/news/38376465_1_jack-mcmahon-west-philadelphia-kermit-gosnell via @phillydotcom

RT: Reading the grand jury report on the #Gosnell case. Where was the state oversight of this house of horrors? via @ac360

#Gosnell: truly horrifying allegations of the murder of babies http://fb.me/241mkLLoU

#Gosnell tweets raise profile of abortion doctor’s murder trial http://bit.ly/10QLV6B

“…there is so much awful there…” ~ @JeffreyToobin on the deaths in #Gosnell clinic and how he treated white and black patients differently.

Thank you Anderson Cooper <3 for having courage to cover #Gosnell @andersoncooper @AC360

#Gosnell preys on minority women, collects pieces of babies, 10yrs no health board inspection http://bit.ly/ZKBdn0 via @StevenErtelt

Washington Post writer explains why she refuses to report on #Gosnell case: http://wp.me/pqyhO-9yF via @Wintery_Knight

“It’s just the story of a potential mass murderer who operated for decades as government regulators did nothing.” http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/04/12/kermit_gosnell_the_alleged_mass_murderer_and_the_bored_media.html via @Slate #Gosnell

Dead babies, exploited women, and racism: Why #Gosnell trial should be a front-page story http://theatln.tc/10QvaZ3 via @TheAtlantic

Late-term abortionist #Gosnell kept severed baby feet on display http://bit.ly/XEnWuD via @ORnational

#Gosnell aborted this baby at 32wks then joked baby “big enough to walk me to bus stop” http://t.co/gse6TloIbN via @ORnational

#Gosnell snipped spinal cords of babies born alive http://bit.ly/12MB4fp via @ORnational

Why I didn’t write about #Gosnell trial–and why I should have http://thebea.st/10Zvrrw via @thedailybeast Thanks for saying so

Video of @andersoncooper’s segment on #Gosnell http://fb.me/Eb3YvFtr via @AC360

Another look at the gruesome Philadelphia story via @Peter_Wehner http://bit.ly/114axtU #Gosnell

Video: Media criticized for lack of coverage of #Gosnell trial http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/12/media-criticized-for-lack-of-coverage-of-abortion-doctors-trial via @CNN Blogs

Thanks for covering #Gosnell @CBSnews: http://www.cbsnews.com/crimesider/?keyword=kermit+gosnell via @crimesider

‘Fundamental culture change’ on abortion: Conservatives make gains on restrictions http://t.co/jSU1PhFtFG via @NBCnews #Gosnell

#Gosnell clinic workers snipped babies necks b/c the job market is bad:  http://bigstory.ap.org/article/philly-abortion-clinic-workers-saw-few-options via @AP

Proof that #Gosnell is undercovered: Snopes had to put up a page affirming that it is NOT an urban legend http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/gosnell.asp via @snopes

5 pg archive of @TwitchyTeam #Gosnell coverage, w/extensive trial coverage ==> http://twitchy.com/page/5/?s=gosnell

“The baby drew in its arms and legs and curled up inside in a fetal position” http://ow.ly/kcy8T #Gosnell via @ABC via @AP

Clerk admits she sedated patients, changed dosage at murder trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor http://ow.ly/kcrqz #Gosnell via @FOXnews

#Gosnell ex-employee said she alerted authorities http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20130419_Gosnell_s_ex-employee_said_she_alerted_authorities.html via @phillydotcom

PA abortion clinic worker: I saw more than 10 babies breathe, 3 move limbs during abortions #Gosnell http://ow.ly/kcsfe via @washingtonpost

#Gosnell trial: Baby born alive in toilet, ‘swimming,’ ‘trying to get out’ http://ow.ly/kczhb via @GoliadGal

Toilet in abortion clinic needed to be lifted to ‘get the fetuses out of the pipes’ http://ow.ly/kfAl8 via @CNSnews #Gosnell

THIS is why choicers want #Gosnell story dead http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/16/gosnell-worker-toilets-backed-up-with-body-parts-from-abortions/ via @StevenErtelt

#Gosnell assistant testifies she administered anesthesia, drugs http://ow.ly/kcrYu via @WashingtonPost ATTN: @PHLPublicHealth

58 horrific details from the #Gosnell trial that you do not want to read http://ow.ly/kcsNC via @DCexaminer

What the #Gosnell horror reveals about abortion debate http://ow.ly/kcsA7 via @JewishDailyForward

Guide to the Philadelphia abortion #Gosnell murder case http://ow.ly/kcsnh via @YorkDispatch via @AP

Legalizing abortion did not prevent back-alley hacks, it legitimized them. Read the cryptic cause of death: http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/breaking-medical-examiner-says-abortion-complications-caused-morbelli-death via @ORnational #Gosnell

#Gosnell abortion trial meritS more coverage http://ow.ly/kcte4 via @tldtimes

#Gosnell and abortion’s darkest side: http://ow.ly/kcsZ9 via @baltimoresun

#Gosnell is not an outlier –> Abortions suspended at Delaware clinic after similar conditions reported

#Gosnell accused of Holocaust against infants http://ow.ly/kcunR via @Rockland_News

#Gosnell staffer testifies she saw at least 10 babies breathing http://ow.ly/kcv03 via @delawareonline

7 dead newborns ‘no ordinary crime’ http://ow.ly/kcuLv via @WorldNetDaily #Gosnell

Phila. abortion doctor’s assistant testifies on untrained staff http://ow.ly/kcuCI via @PittsburghPG #Gosnell

#Gosnell kept babies’ hands, feet as trophies http://www.christianpost.com/news/gosnell-kept-babies-hands-feet-as-trophies-much-like-serial-killers-says-prosecution-94172/ via @ChristianPost

#Gosnell trial April 18 http://lisahaggerty.com/?p=152 via @Lisa_Haggerty

#Gosnell condemned by pro-abortion rights groups via @ABC http://ow.ly/kjLib

Eminent bioethicist on the dangers of a world increasingly indifferent to matters of human dignity http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324493704578428843742209304.html?KEYWORDS=Gosnell via @WSJ #Gosnell

How the DEA finally caught #Gosnell via @TheAtlantic http://ow.ly/kjLpD

Gruesome testimony renews debate over abortion http://usat.ly/ZK0RRX via @USATODAY #Gosnell

Back alley abortion never ended http://ow.ly/kjLJr via @WSJ #Gosnell

Michael Reagan (son of Ronald): #Gosnell ‘Clinic of Horrors’ http://ow.ly/kjLEf via @delawareonline

Devastating: Philly-area columnist asks a key, yet horrifying, #Gosnell question http://ow.ly/kjLZK via @TwitchyTeam

If #Gosnell had killed puppies or with *gasp* GUNS!!! the msm would be all over it.

Why is the press ignoring the #Gosnell story? http://t.co/NJte6PXlo5 via @BloombergView

“To sin by silence, when they should protest, makes cowards of men.” 
― Abraham Lincoln #Gosnell

“…because this makes the pro-choice case look really bad, the MSM media has silently agreed to ignore it.” http://fb.me/Cg279fJc via @FOXnews

#Gosnell trial reveals ‘a house of horrors’ http://youtu.be/yD_ohwNaa94 & http://fb.me/L5FGu9u6 via @CNN Blogs

Vid: At press conference, woman cradling newborn premie turns it over and snips its neck with scissors. #Gosnell whoisgosnell.com 3801lancaster.com

#Gosnell trial witness unsure if babies were alive http://t.co/HdnpDaLb4w via @phillydotcom #shouldhavebeensure

The #Gosnell trial: We’re asking the wrong questions http://t.co/laTaY4SxAz via @KristenHowerton

2. Socio-Political Landscape

Read this insane article condoning the murder of live-born babies in the Journal of Medical “Ethics” http://t.co/QTT3sPNbzz via @JME_GMA BMJ #Gosnell

5,000,000+ late-term abortions since RvW: http://www.guttmacher.org @PPact okays it: http://ow.ly/jZAYq (vid) #Gosnell

“…women would sometimes come to PP, complain to staff about the conditions there.” http://t.co/soOqh7HVPB via @phillydotcom #Gosnell

Planned Parenthood knew of #Gosnell abortion horrors http://t.co/1OrpFKjfo8 via @FoxNews @PPact

Imagining how Planned Parenthood (@PPact) might respond to #Gosnell http://t.co/TZ6BgHJWBL via @TGC

Obama has “no comment” on baby killer #Gosnell but commented on Trayvon Martin & Skip Gates w/in days http://shar.es/Jtt8T via @weeklystandard

I love your prepared statements to Boston and West, TX. What have you prepared for Philly? @BarackObama #Gosnell

One wonders how a live-born aborted baby isn’t “the patient” while still in the womb? Infanticide, either way http://t.co/SU6tD0UVfp (vid) #Gosnell

You opposed life saving treatment for babies born alive during abortion in IL Senate. Does this explain #Gosnell silence? @BarackObama

PP and @BarackObama reject infant-saving legislation (http://ow.ly/kcr7D) (vid) No way #Gosnell is isolated pic.twitter.com/4XLBe4M8ET @PPact

Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast http://fb.me/GTeFff1a (vid) @barackobama @ppact #Gosnell

Please address how to prevent future #Gosnell @BarackObama

Petition @BarackObama to personally address #Gosnell trial & describe steps 2 fix future clinic massacres http://ow.ly/k9bSW via @WhiteHouse

Obama backed out of Planned Parenthood keynote address http://wtim.es/11kXlQ6 via @washtimes #Gosnell

“God bless @PPact” says @BarackObama. Bless w respect for humans before, during & after birth. U knew about #Gosnell & did/do nothing.

Congressmen and women deliver 1-minute speeches on House floor re: abortionist #Gosnell http://t.co/YYu5TiHCGO (playlist)

72 members of Congress write letter to @ABC http://ow.ly/kczst @CBSnews http://ow.ly/kczx2 @NBCnews http://ow.ly/kczCD #Gosnell

Thank you Rep Scott Perry for standing up for the defenseless – The Hill’s Floor Action http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/293257-gop-lawmaker-blasts-obama-press-for-ignoring-pa-abortion-trial via @flooraction #Gosnell

Thank you for bringing the unconscionable actions of #Gosnell to light on the floor of the House @RepStutzman

Please read the #Gosnell trial grand jury report for yourself, and report, blog, tweet & update on it: http://ow.ly/k19R9 via @PhiladelphiaGov

Read this and weep: the #Gosnell grand jury report. It could well be the Uncle Tom’s Cabin of the abortion issue. http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf via @PhiladelphiaGov

Have u read the #Gosnell grand jury report yet? http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf How can u make sure it isn’t happening in ur city?
1. Email
2. Call

Email and call local places that refer, perform, or regulate abortions. Ask them to describe steps to prevent future #Gosnell

HOW did #Gosnell abortion clinic go 17 years without being inspected? ATTN: @PHLPublicHealth

Whoever failed to inspect and/or ignored the red flags for over 10 yrs is every bit as responsible as #Gosnell ATTN: @PHLPublicHealth

Why didn’t the state shut #Gosnell clinic down?

ATTN: Mayor @Michael_Nutter & @PHLPublicHealth Did you know what was happening in your city? @PPact Do you have anything to say about it? #Gosnell

#Gosnell settles the issue on whether legislation prevents bad judgment calls on late-term abortion, and should spark checks & balances!

#Gosnell should spark media-covered inspections of all known abortion clinics, and investigations of all red flags ignored until now.

#Gosnell should spark legislation that requires reporting gestation, whether or not born alive, procedures used, and method of disposal.

All the #Gosnell -type mass murderers/minions should quake in their mass murderer boots and turn themselves in.

#Gosnell is not isolated. In Steven Chase Brigham’s abortion center were discovered the remains of 35 late-term aborted babies in jars.

Legalizing abortion did not prevent back-alley hacks, it legitimized them. Read the cryptic cause of death. http://t.co/xzSRkBXI56 via @ORnational #Gosnell

Back alley abortion never ended http://t.co/1ofFNfAOAr via @WSJ #Gosnell

Send to your politicians: “We request that you outline steps to prevent future incidents in abortion clinics in [state].” #Gosnell

Please address the #Gosnell murder trial and describe steps to prevent future abortion clinic massacres in California. @JerryBrownGov

Please address the #Gosnell murder trial and describe steps to prevent future abortion clinic massacres in California. @RepJeffDenham

Please address the #Gosnell murder trial and describe steps to prevent future abortion clinic massacres in California. @SenFeinstein

Please address the #Gosnell murder trial and describe steps to prevent future abortion clinic massacres in California. @SenatorBoxer

#Gosnell How to find your representative:
 http://www.house.gov/representatives/find

#Gosnell & intelligence failures, cont’d http://ow.ly/kcrIm via @TheAtlantic ATTN: @Michael_Nutter @PHLPublicHealth

It’s surprisingly hard to report a shady abortion provider like #Gosnell
 http://t.co/T71nvfjCqQ via @TheAtlantic

Witness, #Gosnell files tell a lot http://ow.ly/kcu8m via @delawareonline ATTN: @Michael_Nutter @PHLPublicHealth

RT: Bravo to the pro-lifers who made #Gosnell a national story. Your work is desperately needed to ensure such a horror never happens again. via @SenTedCruz

Raising awareness about the grave atrocities committed by #Gosnell against innocent lives http://fb.me/2NzItmLqw via @RosLehtinen

Thank you @RepScottPerry for standing up for the defenseless http://t.co/F9FtkWSi7z via @flooraction #Gosnell

Rep. Margo Davidson speaks: http://t.co/8sK4IWZaaq via @3801Lancaster #Gosnell

Abortion clock: http://t.co/DVyk3fXj5R Safe, legal and rare? http://t.co/Y4Beb3zVdN (vid) #Gosnell

#Gosnell defense painted the clinic as normal, saying abortion is rough. Should set up a “score by assist” for pro-life.

Sad about charges being dropped related to the baby feet #Gosnell kept unnecessarily. Judges have too much power.

RT: Defense rests in #Gosnell trial without calling any witnesses http://bit.ly/ZOXuZX via @NBCPhiladelphia

Why didn’t the #Gosnell defense call expert witnesses to back up the scientific claims he was making? My theory: he couldn’t find any.

No expert witness called to back up the inexpert judge’s fickle tossing around of charges. #Gosnell

If u see someone breathing on their own, do u automatically think, “Oh, no, definitely dead!”? #Gosnell

3. Blogs, Adoption & Memes

#Gosnell’s defense paints prosecution as racist. Fact: Gosnell harmed or killed more minority than white babies and women.
Who is #Gosnell? whoisgosnell.com via @WhoIsGosnell
#Gosnell an American tragedy: How Christians should engage the pro-life issue http://t.co/hBS9gJhsEV via @ApolAlliance
Bethany Christian Services http://www.bethany.org Down with abortion; up with #adoption. @Bethany #Gosnell
Who is #Gosnell? Check out this info-graphic: http://bit.ly/gosnell-numbers via @PAfamilyInstitute
Abortion is wrong because it is the killing of an unborn child created in the image and likeness of God. #Gosnell
** had sex? pregnant? have questions? need help? ** You are not alone. We are here for you. Free & confidential http://www.modestopregnancycenter.com #Gosnell
The #Gosnell trial & destroying the image of God http://fb.me/vWcTc2kq via @ApolAlliance
Wonder how many babies Canaan sacrificed compared to the U.S., and how long we’ve got b4 the cosmic crap hits the fan? #GodhelpUS #Gosnell
Watch this 20 minute documentary on #Gosnell (3801lancaster.com) and SPEAK OUT LOUD if you have experienced anything like this! <3 via @3801Lancaster 
Abortion doc #Gosnell ran a “house of horrors” where newborns were murdered.
The #Gosnell trial is a BIG deal http://whoisgosnell.com/top-tweets
We offer counseling to pregnant women experiencing unplanned pregnancies. Bethany’s counseling services can also… http://fb.me/PNJokjy3 @Bethany #adoption #Gosnell
8 reasons for the media blackout on #Gosnell http://fb.me/RH2SGtYB via @TGC
‘Fetal pain’ measure that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks sent to North Dakota governor http://bit.ly/1158dmo via @AP #Gosnell
You formed my inward parts; You knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully & wonderfully made. Ps. 139:13-14 #Gosnell
What do you have to do to make page 1? http://fb.me/1tyZbJ2gz via @RCP_articles #Gosnell
5 sparrows for 2 pennies, yet not 1 of them is forgotten before God | you are more valued than many sparrows #Gosnell
Fact: For every newborn released for #adoption, there are 30-40 couples waiting, and 11+ babies murdered by abortion #Gosnell
What the #Gosnell groundswell shows: http://fb.me/2EUjAMnli via @PatheosEvang
The extremely high death count of abortion in this apathetic world is a symptom. If we miss the Point and place our hope elsewhere, we are choosing death. #Gosnell
News roundup: #Gosnell & more: http://ow.ly/keMZD <3 Thanks! @PastorMark
Wondering: Did #Gosnell ever deliver a baby and let it live?
MT: #Gosnell, Boston, and God. http://dsr.gd/11huPhc Thanks! @JohnPiper
Proud of men, like @JohnPiper and @PastorMark, who are getting the word out about #Gosnell <3
Mother who chose life brings baby back to abortion facility to thank sidewalk counselor http://fb.me/GiPvGhgi via @4ChristianNews #Gosnell
#Gosnell tragedy: Too awful to believe http://ow.ly/kjM0Z via @ChristianPost
The strange story of #Gosnell and the national press http://wp.me/pH3FL-1kI via @MarkAMcGee
Remember when your babies were born, how precious they were, how they smelled like newborns, how they were innocent and perfect? #Gosnell
Part 2: The strange story of #Gosnell and the national press http://fb.me/QhLv7Zas via @MarkAMcGee
Important #Gosnell coverage from a Biblical worldview http://servantsofgrace.org/2013/04/13/important-gosnell-coverage via @ServantsofGrace
Adorable vid of 9wk old infant in utero (fetus until born) <3 http://fb.me/2tUuBgaON #Gosnell
Why do I tweet so much about #Gosnell? http://ichthus77.blogspot.com/2013/04/why-do-i-tweet-so-much-about-gosnell.html via @Ichthus77

#Gosnell tweets you are free to snag http://ichthus77.blogspot.com/2013/04/gosnell-tweets-you-are-free-to-snag.html via @Ichthus77

Posted in Gosnell | Leave a comment

Why do I tweet so much about #Gosnell?

Posted on April 24, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Before I heard about the Gosnell murder trial, I posted very rarely on abortion, out of sensitivity to the women who have made such a painful choice. I also figured there was no point swimming against the unchangeable culture-of-death tide on this issue, and I assumed current regulations would prevent doctors like Gosnell from practicing.

I was wrong. The Gosnell murder trial opened my eyes: The regulations often go unenforced, and when complaints are made, they are often ignored. People look the other way. After all, most the women who complain are poor, and the babies can’t complain.

The main stream media had to be bullied into covering this story when everyone got all tweet-angry (pt.2 going on now) about their blackout (including me) and 72 members of Congress wrote a letter to and  demanding they cover the Gosnell trial.

Things are looking up. Mainstream media is paying at least more attention, and Fox News will even air a one-hour special on Gosnell, May 3 at 9pm. The most recent news is that the defense rested without calling any witnesses!

Indiana Rep. Congressman Marlin Stutzman is scheduled to lead House members on the floor Thursday after votes to expose the Gosnell horrors. The House floor is viewable at www.C-SPAN.org. Sample tweet: “US Congressmen speaking out about #Gosnell house of horrors and trial tonight on #cspan View the House floor: http://www.C-SPAN.org.&#8221; Please livetweet the members’ speeches to amplify their bold stand.

I have been tweeting and Facebooking articles from mainstream media since I first heard about the Gosnell trial (even if I disagreed with their spin). I wrote an article on Examiner.com, as well. I followed Planned Parenthood (including locally, and Family Planning Associates), Obama and other local politicians on Twitter and Facebook, and contacted them through those channels, as well as through more standard channels. Here is how to find your representative.

I found out what local places help pregnant women with alternatives to abortion and will continue to do what I can to promote and support them and become involved with the Pro-Life movement.

To find out more about the Gosnell murder trial and why his clinic was called a “House of Horrors,” there are two places to go: Who Is Gosnell? and 3801Lancaster.com. You can also follow the tweets. #Gosnell #GosnellMurders #3801Lancaster #KermitGosnell. Also, you can do a Google News search.

And please speak up until Gosnell-preventing legislation is in place AND regulations enforced. Bare minimum will be a huge victory, and a giant step toward a culture of life.

Thank you.

Posted in Gosnell | Leave a comment