Lame Excuse Right at the Top
I was traveling this last week for the Fight Laugh Feast conference, which was wonderful, but it did burn a lot of daylight. The end result is that this letters feature today will be a little light. It is still here, as you can see by merely scrolling down. But, alas, there won’t be nearly as many letters as usual, and apologies to the writers whose letters I would have usually answered.
I am a pastor in Tucson, Arizona and I have been immensely blessed by your leadership and teaching over the last year. I am thankful to God for his work through you.
I am being asked by several of my parishioners to help them apply for religious exemptions for the vaccine mandate. Apparently, some employers are offering exemptions based on religious convictions. Forms are being sent to me this week to fill out on behalf of people in my congregation. Specifically, one of my parishioners works for the federal government and she informed me that religious exemptions are being considered. I am desirous to help them. The issue is that we don’t have a problem with vaccinations per se. However, we do have a problem with following a tyrannical mandate. I could argue that following unconstitutional mandates is a violation of Romans 13. I feel equipped to make that argument. However, I don’t think this argument is going to be sufficient. If you were to write a religious exemption from a mandatory vaccine, what major points would you include?
Thank you for your time and ministry.
Jeremiah, our denomination, the CREC, has issued a statement that our pastors are using on behalf of their parishioners. Thus far we have had some success with it.
A Point of Grammar
I was listening to the YouTube interview with you and James White concerning the Federal Vision debate, and you used Ephesians 2:8-9 (“And by grace are ye saved through faith, and THAT not of yourselves . . .” emphasis on “THAT” added) to show that saving faith on the part of believers is itself a gift from God. I lean strongly toward this same view based on the overall tenor and theme of Ephesians 1 and 2 up to that point (and several other passages of Scripture), but I didn’t think 2:8-9 was a proof text for faith being God’s gift to the elect, since most of the commentaries (even the Reformed ones) I’ve read say that both “grace” and “faith” in 2:8 are in the feminine-noun forms in the Greek, whereas the pronoun for “that” is in the neuter. Is that a reasonable view? Could it be that the “that” just means that the whole act of salvation is all of God, and that it is not specifically referring to the “faith” as being God’s gift (even if we believe that the faith IS in fact God’s gift, based on other considerations)?
Bernard, my understanding is that abstract nouns, like these, can take the neuter. If better grammarians than I challenge this, I will have to hunt for my reference.
Support After Leaving?
I live in a liberal city in a deep-blue state. The prospect of ongoing mask mandates, vaccine mandates at most employers, and the discussions of medical care being withheld from the unvaccinated, are together making me think there is little future here for my family. I am self employed, so it is tolerable for me now, but I don’t expect my sons to want to stay here when they grow up. I have the means to move to an area that will be much better for my family.
The only reason I would have to stay is that I am concerned for our church. Our church is very good, it’s just small and always has been, and is located in a lousy area (see above). Many members have moved out of state over the years, and there are several other families considering a move out of state now. We can barely fund our pastor’s small salary. I think the main reason we haven’t grown is that people don’t stay after visiting our church because we are so small (40-50 people, few young families).
I believe I know what’s best for my own family, but I’m concerned for the welfare of my church if I take that option. How should I think about this? Are there ways I can still support this church if I move away? Perhaps continue sending part of my tithe to them (assuming my new church is doing well financially)?
R, I believe that you have a responsibility to do what you believe is best for your family. That said, I do not see any scriptural restriction on continuing to support your old church with a portion of your tithe, or even all of your tithe for a time.
Principles and Methods Again
Hi Doug, was reading through Nancy’s “Fruit of Her Hands” and ran across this quote.
“The biggest danger arises when people begin to think their own methods of applying biblical principles are more spiritual. If we fall into this trap, then methods become an issue of first importance for us. The result is a feeling of superiority over others who differ. This obviously leads to self-righteousness, envy, jealousy, defensiveness, and quarrels.”
I’m just curious to know how to approach someone who is using a quote like this to defend putting their children in a public school. I know before you have discussed how it is your belief that parents are in sin for having done this/if they are doing this. What would be your response to this?
Samantha, the principle is that Christian kids should receive a Christian education. There is no sin called “having your kids in a public school”—provided the kids are actually getting a Christian education. So day school v. home school is a simple methodology question. And government school would be the same thing also, provided the parents say, “yes, we know we have a responsibility to see to it that our kids receive a Christian education. That is why we read all our kids’ textbooks, have all their teachers over for dinner regularly and know their spiritual state, and have an hour and a half time of debriefing every evening to make sure no unbelieving assumptions have gotten through.” To this you should reply, “Well done. You do know that you could start a Christian school with half the effort . . .?”
Reading Some Tea Leaves
Sir, chief cook and bottle washer, why do you think Obama is pulling Biden’s strings as opposed to one of the Clintons or Soros, or even an EU leader?
Stephen, I draw this (tentative) conclusion from things like Obama’s recent birthday party, where Washington functionaries had to dance attendance to his tune—some of them coming to Martha’s Vineyard to then not be invited. The court is where the courtiers are.
I just watched 2 videos from you on the Right Response Ministries YouTube channel (published within the past week).
In one you talk about resistance to tyranny and the true “law of the land” in the U.S.A. and in the other one you talk about obeying the law of the land in a pagan country (e.g. China). In these 2 short videos you have clarified the whole issue. AND it appears that your position is really not that much different that the pietist position. The only difference being that the pietists may be ignorant/uninformed/miss informed, etc. about the nature of our government and the biblical response to it. But I believe your advice to the e.g. Chinese Christian IS the Pietist position. Would you agree? Thank you,
Robert, I believe that in a heathen mission field, my behavior would be much the same as a pietist missionary. The difference would be in what each of us expected to develop long-term as a result of our efforts. I would be expecting a civilization, and the pietist would be expecting pietist churches, and perhaps a few more of them.
Why do you use the old KJV? We don’t speak that way today. It makes it more difficult to interpret. My Reformation Study Bible is in both ESV and KJV (new) versions. This is language I can understand.
Sam, I prefer the KJV for three reasons—manuscript tradition, translation philosophy, and copyright issues. The ESV gets one out of three, the NKJV gets two out of three, and the KJV gets three out of three. But I frequently quote from the first two also.
My Old Erroneous Self
Pastor Wilson, your “explanation” for why you supported quarantining the unvaccinated isn’t an explanation, you just handwave it away. You speak as if your mention of “unvaccinated” was simply an error when it was the entire thrust of the article. And you ignore the earlier paragraph where you declared: “Now I do have views on the efficacy of vaccines, but I want to address another element of this — the idea that even if they were effective, a requirement that everyone get vaccinated is necessarily statist and tyrannical. Why isn’t this a matter of personal choice and conviction? The answer is that it is not a matter of personal choice because everyone else is involved.”
As well as this line from May 2020:
“Kevin, I am against forced vaccinations. But I do believe that a family with whooping cough can be lawfully quarantined. And I also believe that if they break quarantine, and someone else catches it from them and dies, then they are liable. And the fact that they did not “believe in” vaccinations would not soften the sentence, but should rather be an exacerbating factor.”
Jonathan, this simply means that by this point you are not following the argument. My position, poorly stated in 2015, is that societies have a right to defend themselves through sane vaccine policies. I still believe that. But I don’t believe they have the right (for example) to mandate a vaccine for the common cold. With serious diseases, there should be options for the unvaccinated, and these should be options that keep the responsibility where it belongs—with the person who needlessly infects another. There is one other factor now, and that is what the last year and a half revealed to us about the power lust among our public health officials. We have to guard ourselves there now also.
Angry Red Pill World
Doc Wilson—After seeing your “angry red pill world” video, I have to encourage you again to read Gurri’s “Revolt of the Public.” He complements your point precisely. Example, in brief: he talks a lot about many aspects the “Arab Spring” protests. One aspect he discusses is that these protests brought together people around a common goal—dissatisfaction with the ruling powers. “We hate you.” But he goes on to identify a common problem with the protests— everyone could only agree on what they hated. There was no consistent and cohesive plan for what would come next—it was all “anti” and no “pro.” So in most cases, what came next was either “new boss, same as the old boss”—or general chaos, which was even worse.
So it is with “Angry Red Pill World.” It’s good to get to the point of being red-pilled and disillusioned with our beclowned liberal elite— but it cannot stop there, at the “anti” level. You have to get to the “pro” level and believe in something that can come next. What comes next? As Christians, this is where we need to be prepared.
Anyway—once again, I strongly encourage the book.
Austin, yes, thanks. I think it was at your earlier recommendation that I got and read the book. It was outstanding. Highly recommended.
I am a senior in college and recently began a relationship with a young lady from back home. She is also a a Christian, but experienced some pretty significant church trauma from a well-known SBC church. She is very sweet and has a heart for Christ, but struggles with some other parts of the faith. Namely the issues of complementarian roles, same sex marriage, & the seriousness of sexual purity. For example, after being sexually assaulted by a church leader and then coming out as gay, her friend faced some serious bullying & hatred from the church, her family was chastised for adopting an African daughter, & any teenage girl who fell into sexual sin was considered a whore whereas the boys were not held accountable, just to name a few of the more horrific things she has shared with me. This makes it a bit more difficult for me to sell her on the finer points of submission & modesty, as well as how we can still love our gay friends without supporting their lifestyles (i.e. attending a pride parade, which she did after her friend was kicked out of her house and faced other similar abuses). I truly believe her heart is in the right place and she is just misguided on how to love people and what true biblical Christianity is, because of all the hypocrisy she experienced. It would be greatly appreciated if you could provide some guidance for how I can lovingly and productively shepherd her without seeming legalistic or insensitive, but still standing firm in the truth. Thank you for your time.
We have began doing a devotional by Paul Washer together and attending church together whenever we see each other, but when she is home with her friends these issues come up a bit more.
P.S. I would like to remain anonymous if this becomes a youtube video, but would love to discuss this topic further with you or another pastor if possible.
DA, I do not want to say anything about the hypocrisy your friend has encountered, because that kind of thing really does happen, and is a very real possibility. The issue is what kind of response to such hypocrisy is appropriate. Right now you are not agreed on the appropriate response, and you are not really in a position to lead her because being “in a relationship” with her is not the same thing as being in covenant with her. And Scripture asks if two can walk together if they are not agreed.
Regulation of Firearms
I have a question about Romans 13 and the state’s ability to regulate firearms.
In a blog post from April of last year you wrote:
“The way our system was designed to work is through challenges. Your governor says that the right to keep and bear arms means, in his lexicon, that you do not have the right to keep and bear arms. You, being literate, say something like “that is not what it says,” and you continue to keep and continue to bear. You get arrested, and the case goes to court.
This is not an instance where the existing authorities are trying to do the job that God assigned to them, and you are proving to be singularly uncooperative. Rather, it is an example of one portion of the existing authority (your leftist governor) is trying to supplant another part of the existing authority (you, your gun, your rights as a free man, and your Constitution), and you won’t let them. Good for you.”
“This is because the Constitution was written down for a reason, and it is because the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Those who allow their governors to simply abrogate their rights, plainly outlined in the text of the Constitution, are themselves rebels. They are rebelling against lawful authority by submitting to unlawful authority.”
My question is, since I am living in the People’s Soviet Republic of California, my AR-15 must have a fin-grip instead of a regular pistol grip. If I were to replace the fin-grip for a normal grip like an American rifle would have, am I violating Romans 13, or is the California legislature? Then again, it is merely a piece of plastic held by a single screw, I guess if the σκύβαλον were to hit the fan, I could just screw on the normal one before joining the fight. Thoughts?
Gary, in this case, the California legislature is the culprit.
Right. Permission Denied.
After yesterday’s totalitarian press conference, are you sure we can’t take the bait yet? Really want to take the Bait. To be clear, asking for permission to take the bait.
Dwayne, super duper denied.
Over the few years that I’ve been keeping up with your blog, videos, and having gone through several of your books, one things that has repeatedly struck me is your joy. You are such a jolly and glad man, and I really covet that. Brother, how can I have that joy? I think I have forgotten the joy of my salvation and I need help coming back to it.
Could you please kindly provide some directions for true and deep joy in the Christian life? On one of your podcasts you mentioned your daughters who do a lot of kingdom work, laughing the whole time. How can I do this as well?
Thank you very much,
Jake, this is obviously a huge subject, and a deep one, worthy of far more than what can mention here. I will just refer you to this, and also suggest that you type joy in the search bar and follow the trail. There is an awful lot of Scripture to instruct us here.
A Ticking Clock
I’m writing because you’re not afraid to read the writing on the wall… And I have a very deep fear that the writing on the wall says it will not be long before the state starts removing children from homes due to the scourge of Christianity. My children are 3 years and 15-days-to-slow-the-spread (you know . . . 18 months) old, and I’m trying to be faithful through all of this but the thought is too much to bear. They’re so small and I have a terrible feeling time is shorter than what I’ll need to teach them what they need to know. What’s a mom to do? My heart is broken.
Heather, that is certainly something they want to do. I don’t think we are far off from the conflict, but I certainly do think we are quite a ways off from the end of the conflict. Stay strong.
The Full Preterist Temptation
You’ve jacked me up and I invite you to unjack me. This invitation is quite exclusive, for few possess the sight to hear my quandary, let alone the grounding to dispel it. Before I synopsize my claim, there are a few things you should know. I have been reformed now for 5+ years (of course this as the culmination of a consistent diet of God’s Word coupled with a variety of teachers including you). I was introduced to Post-Millennialism shortly after concluding my study on the Doctrines of Grace. It didn’t take long for me to grasp the idea. Since that time, God’s Word has begun to take on a whole new shape (Kingdom reality). I’m still studying to reach a “conclusion” concerning my eschatological view, but having seen the Post-Millennial view in Scripture, I can’t see myself reverting back to any sort of pre-mill view (or A-mill for that matter). So why am I not yet concluded if I see Post-Mill in the Word? I would venture what I’m about to propose, you have either: 1. Already considered and worked through. 2. Not considered for how outlandish it sounds 3. Perhaps in a similar place as myself i.e. considering the implications of the truth of this proposal and the impact it would have on the Church.
For fear of hyping it up too much… here we go… 2 verses and a statement:
Isaiah 9:7 “There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace”,
2 Corinthians 5:8 “but we are of good courage and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.”
Jesus is NOT returning visibly.
BOOM!!! … boom??? I would not expect these two verses to illuminate for anyone the entirety of how such a statement can be made. It is only through my coming to the reformed faith and subsequently Post-Millennialism that I was able to have any chance at drawing such a conclusion. Likewise, I would expect anyone would need to be able to connect many dots and in proper order and context to reach this end. I began this letter saying, “You’ve jacked me up.” I’m fairly certain, whether true or false, I will be jacked up. I’m either jacked up in my understanding of Scripture (which selfishly is what I hope) or I’m jacked up because my understanding is sound (which would then carry with it a great burden, considering my calling). To the latter all I would say is . . . it’s good the Kingdom has no end, because it may take that long for people to come to terms with this one. 😊
I respectfully and sincerely appeal to your wisdom and knowledge as I seek at least some resolve in this matter. After all, you are, at least in part, responsible for this most confounding predicament I find myself in. 😊 As I’m sure you could fathom, my spirit awaits this resolve with bated breath. As Abraham Lincoln aptly said, “I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong.”
I’m not looking for a book deal, nor a renowned friend. I’m looking for peace in this matter.
If I may ask you to indulge me yet further, I anticipate what is likely. Any answer to this proposal will be founded on one or multiple scriptures which I have already found to be consistent with this proposal. In this instance, I would hope for the opportunity to respond in kind, that you might consider more fully the perspective which leads to this conclusion. However, I am not a zealot for this “newfound Doctrine of No Return.” I would prefer to be wrong and you may swiftly help me see the error of my way. In which case, I have no desire to aimlessly banter for banter sake. I will gladly and gratefully accept “defeat.” In God’s grace, you may trust these words.
Ultimately, I will follow your lead, in supposing you do. By the by, should you prefer I lead I would be happy to oblige.
I await your answer or preference for how to proceed.
Hoping this is a “Well-written and fair-minded” letter, not to be featured in a post, but to merely be taken seriously,
Josh, that is quite a responsibility to have laid on me. Let me respond to you by posing two questions for you. If there is no visible return of Christ, then precisely when will Christ turn everything over to the Father, that God may be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28)? And second, if there is no visible return of Christ, then precisely when will the cosmos be liberated from its bondage to decay (Rom. 8:22-23)?
While working through our Bible classes and home-school work while using Veritas, Omnibus, Wilson’s intro to logic, etc. our 9-yr-old son asked a question that I can’t seem to find a reasonable answer to. His question: “if there is no sin in heaven, what caused Satan to “fall” into sin? If so was he in Heaven when this act occurred? There is quite a bit more of his inquiries but I trust you see his foundational inquiry.
On a side note, I am in a state of contradictory “feelings” and “emotions” due to you and your doings. I use quotations in the manner or “air quotes” because I understand feeling and emotions are not a substitute for facts. My issue is the fact that we have found the highest grade of education in and through Veritas, Classical learning, Latin courses and so on which has caused me to realize how stupid I actually am. My 12yr, 9yr, and 6yr old are far more knowledgeable about everything educational than I am. (Yes, I know it’s a good thing hence my contradictory feelings) I however am still advanced in the knowledge of combustible engines, for now. Their lessons have been slowly done as events emerge. Even the 2yr old is picking up the Latin and can answer the Catechism questions. It was once said( either by you or one of your daughters) that to be effective at homeschooling all we have to do is stay one day ahead of them. I am a lost cause but thankfully my lovely wife is more than capable. Thank you for everything you and your teams have done and please reach out if you could use a good hand for anything hands on related that would have us move to Moscow and be surrounded by awesomeness.
P.s. Because or your lovely family’s influence we have started a “Sabbath Celebration Dinner” on Saturday.
P.s.s. Every time my wife listens to anything the ladies put out she has a severe urge to move to Moscow and become friends with them.
Joshua, that is a great question. The same question could be asked about our first parents in a perfect world. My best answer is that when God creates finite selves in any given environment, He is at that moment creating a situation where various elements of the world could be arranged in a way that creates the temptation to sin. That arrangement in the Garden was explicit, indicating that God wanted that temptation to happen. I assume that something comparable happened in Heaven.
Where Boz Got His Quote
The original post from Barnhart . . .
Adam, thank you.
An Abolitionist Response
I am a fellow reformed minded, postmill brother, though I am Baptist in my view of church ecclesiology and the ordinances. I just watched your take on the incrementalism and abolitionism debate. I am an abolitionist and I want to lovingly challenge your perception of abolitionism. Below I have included a resolution I wrote for our state convention that I believe argues a biblical case against what is traditional incrementalism or gradualism as William Wilberforce would have called it. It is lengthy but much of my work and the work of brothers like Bill Ascol is to educate solid brothers like you to embrace abolitionism.
Here it is:
(1) WHEREAS, the unborn are not second class image-bearers of God from the moment of fertilization, they are full image bearers of God, and we believe that humans are created in God’s image by, through, and for Jesus to the glory of God, as Scripture declares that all souls belong to Him (Genesis 1:27; 4:1; 21:2; Isaiah 7:14; Colossians 1:16; Romans 11:36; Ezekiel 18:4), and
(2) WHEREAS, as God’s image-bearers, all humans display His divinely-given dignity, power, and attributes, and possess equal, objective worth before God, not varying on the basis of incidental characteristics such as ethnicity, age, size, circumstances of conception, mental development, physical development, manhood or womanhood, potential, or contribution to society (Rom 1:19-20; Gen 1:27; 9:6; Matthew 18:6), and
(3) WHEREAS, the premeditated murder of any preborn image-bearer of God is a sin, violating both the natural law of retributive justice as set forth in the Noahic covenant, as well as the sixth commandment forbidding murder, and as such, is ultimately an assault on God’s image, seeking to usurp God’s sovereignty as Creator (Gen 9:5-6; Exodus 20:13; Proverbs 6:17), and
(4) WHEREAS, God’s Word clearly declares that all human life is a sacred gift and that His Law is supreme over man’s life and man’s law (Psalm 127:3-5; 139:13-16; Rom 2:15-16; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 1 Corinthians 4:5), and
(5) WHEREAS, God commands His own people to “rescue those who are being taken away to death and hold back those stumbling to the slaughter” and holds them responsible and without excuse when they fail to do so (Prov 24:11-12), and
(6) WHEREAS, God establishes all governing authorities as His avenging servants to carry out His wrath on the evildoer; and commands these authorities to judge justly, neither showing partiality to the wicked, nor using unequal standards, which are abominations to God (Psa 82; Prov 20:10; Rom 13:4), and
(7) WHEREAS, in 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States rendered an iniquitous decision on Roe v. Wade, and in doing so set a precedent of depriving the innocent of their rights and usurped God and His law (Isa 5:23; 10:1-2; Psa 2; Matt 22:21; John 19:11; Acts 4:19; 5:29, Rom 13:1), and
(8) WHEREAS, in the Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court of the United States subverted the U.S. Constitution namely, the Preamble, as well as the Fifth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments without any legal authority (Article 6, Clause 2 “Supremacy Clause”), and
(9) WHEREAS, governing authorities at every level have a duty before God to uphold justice asserting their God-ordained and constitutional authority to establish equal protection and justice under the law for all, born and preborn, by intervening, ignoring, or nullifying iniquitous decisions when other authorities, such as the Supreme Court, condone such injustices as the legal taking of innocent life (Daniel 3; 1 Kings 12; 2 Kings 11; Jeremiah 26:10-16; 36:9-31; 37:11- 21; 39:7-10), and
(10) WHEREAS, over the past 48 years there have been more than 63 million abortions in the United States, unbiblical pragmatic pro-life laws, which have been supported and praised by well intending brothers and sisters in Christ that we love that we acknowledge also want to see abortion abolished, but have failed to establish equal protection and justice for the preborn and on the contrary have appallingly allowed politicians who have no true intention of ending abortion to create careers by establishing gradual regulatory guidelines for when, where, why, and how to obtain legal abortion of innocent preborn children, as a side effect with incremental legislative actions and should Roe v. Wade be overturned would themselves keep the abortion industry in business, and
(11) WHEREAS, At the 2021 Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, a majority of Southern Baptists representatives called for the complete abolition of abortion without exception or compromise, and
(12) WHEREAS, our confessional statement, The Baptist Faith and Message 2000, in Article XV, affirms that children “from the moment of conception, are a blessing and heritage from the Lord”; and further affirms that Southern Baptists are mandated by Scripture to “speak on behalf of the unborn and contend for the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death,” now, be it therefore
(13) RESOLVED, that as people of the Word of God, as our final authority on all matters of life and practice, do hereby state unequivocally that abortion is premeditated murder of an image-bearer of God, and we reject any position that allows for any exceptions to the legal protection of our preborn neighbors, compromises God’s holy standard of justice, or promotes any God-hating partiality (Psa 94:6; Isa 10:1-2; Prov 24:11; Psa 82:1-4), and be it further
(14) RESOLVED, that we call for the complete and immediate abolition of elective surgical and chemical (RU486) abortion, and be it further
(15) RESOLVED, that we, without reservation, support our local pregnancy centers that do amazing work on behalf of the unborn and the mother, and be it further
(16) RESOLVED, that we affirm that those who are complicit in the murder of preborn children must incur the same legal punishment as those who murder any other image-bearer of God, and be it further
(17) RESOLVED, that we humbly confess, lament, and repent of any apathy to the social injustice of the premeditated murder of the preborn and of our limited action in not seeking to completely end this holocaust with equal protection and equal justice for our preborn neighbor, and be it further
(18) RESOLVED, that as the Southern Baptists of Ohio we will engage, with God’s help, in establishing equal justice and protection for the preborn according to the authority of God’s Word and call upon all legislators, judges, police officers, city council officials, city mayors, county commissioners, and governors to use their positions as lesser magistrates to abolish abortion without exception or compromise and thus protect the rights of the unborn from conception, and we call on all pastors and all ministry leaders to use their God-given gifts of preaching, teaching, and leading to abolish abortion, with one unified, principled, prophetic voice and be it finally
(19) RESOLVED, that, because abolishing abortion is a Great Commission issue of loving God and our preborn neighbor, we must call upon governing authorities at all levels to repent of this sin of legislating premeditated murder, turn to Christ, and “obey everything that [Christ] has commanded,” exhorting them to bear fruit in keeping with repentance by faithfully executing their responsibilities as God’s servants of justice, and working with all urgency to enact legislation using the full weight of their office to interpose as lesser magistrates and defy Roe V. Wade on behalf of the preborn, abolishing abortion immediately, without exception or compromise (Mark 6:18; Matt 28:18-20; Rom 13:4, 6.)
Would love to hear your thoughts. May the grace and peace of God in Christ be with you and yours,
Mike, thank you for your kind words, and thank you also for sending me this. I agreed with an awful lot of it. I believe that you represent the kind of abolitionist that I could talk to.