Am I My Brother’s

Keeper?

A Sermon on
The Sanctity of Human Life

Pastor Rodney A. Gray

 This sermon was first preached
January 19, 1992
for Sanctity of Human Life Sunday.
It was also presented in slightly expanded form
at the one day conference of the
Sovereign Grace Baptist Association
hosted by Briarwood Baptist Church,
Ann Arbor, Michigan
May 4, 1996
 “Am I My Brother's Keeper?”
(Toward a New Covenant approach to being Pro-Life)

This is a message about the sanctity of human life. I am asking you to consider this
important subject, possibly in a way that you have not thought about it before. Most people
hold strong and unyielding opinions about abortion. It is an issue over which the lines are
clearly drawn, and rightly so. Most evangelical Christians consider themselves unwaveringly
“pro-life.” Many people who have little or no interest in biblical Christianity consider
themselves “pro-choice.” Yet very few people are consistent with the position they espouse.
For Christians, the challenge of consistency is the challenge of the new covenant of our Lord
and Savior, Jesus Christ. The new covenant is a covenant of life (II Corinthians 3:6; I John
5:11,12). The pro-life movement has sometimes promoted itself under the slogan, "It is not
enough to BE pro-life; as Christians we must DO pro-life.” This is an undeniable fact, but
what does it mean? It seems to imply that, for Christians, the “being” is accomplished simply
because we are Christians. Where we come up short is in the “doing,” which usually involves
becoming more actively involved in the anti-abortion movement. But if we are Christians, we
will think more broadly about both our “being” and our “doing.” We are Christians because
we confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. We believe that if he is not Lord of all, he is not Lord at
all. This is why Christians cannot be “single issue” people. We cannot accept the premise
that a correct position on abortion translates into a correct position on everything else.

A biblical approach to being pro-life is one that accepts the challenge to be consistent. I
began this message by announcing that it is a message about the sanctity of human life. I
hope I can assume that one principle we all hold in common is that life is sacred. At least
with reference to abortion, we take issue with the assumption of the "pro-choice" view that
sometimes death is a better option than life. On the contrary, we say that death is not an
option, and that one human being does not have the right to make such a “choice” for another
human being. Of course we are all aware that there are occasions when someone has to make
a difficult decision on behalf of one who is terminally ill and incapable of making decisions
himself. But often even in these cases such decisions are made in advance. At any rate,
Christians do not make the exception the rule and the rule the exception. The sanctity of life
means that one person cannot snuff out the life of another person simply because he believes
he has good and sufficient reason to do so. Even if he has the power to do it, might does not
make right. The Bible dictates our assumptions, choices, and conclusions because we believe
the Bible is the word of God. We do not take our lead from opinion polls or the changing
winds of social and cultural preference. We do not allow circumstances to mold and shape
our position. We aim for a unified and cohesive world-view that comes from divine
revelation. If the Bible teaches us that we must uphold the sanctity of human life, we strive to
do that all the time, in all circumstances, and in every way.

The sanctity of human life is determined by God, not by man. When we say that life is
sacred, we mean that it bears a special relationship to God. It is a gift from God. It is his to
give and his to take away. I trust that we agree that the unborn child is a human being. This
means that regardless of where a child may be in the process of growth and development,
whether before or after birth, he is a human child from the instant of conception. When we
are talking about human life, we are talking about man’s unique creation in the image of God.
Human life is not generic life, or abstract life. It is life that renders man capable of reflecting
what God is like. It makes him capable of communicating with his Creator. If we accept
these facts, I do not need to spend time convincing you that abortion represents one of the
most hideous assaults imaginable upon the life of a human being. You know that it is an
assault on the image of God. Nor do I need to shock your sensitivities with the tragic
statistics, techniques and descriptions associated with this life-destroying practice. These are
the kinds of things that are often brought to center stage in most discussions about abortion.
But my purpose is to challenge you to think about fundamental issues. Are you really "pro-
life?" Do you take this position all the way? Is it possible for you as a Christian to take a
consistent stand, with both feet on the ground, in the interests of life regardless of the
circumstances? Do you believe that God has called you to promote, protect and preserve
human life? As a Christian you believe in the person, the work, and the teaching of Jesus
Christ. The new covenant in his blood has given you this new identity. Many Christians are
willing to accept this identity under certain circumstances. The challenge is to be pro-life
regardless of the circumstances and without regard to the consequences.

It is over this question of circumstances that many of us stumble and sometimes fall.
Circumstances keep us from holding our ground. We try to stand on one foot. Or we tray to
stand with one foot in the Bible and the other foot in the world. Even many of us who say we
take a pro-life position on abortion are quick to surrender that position if circumstances seem
to compel us to do so. You have heard people state that they are "categorically against
abortion except in certain circumstances.” What this means is that their position includes
exceptions. They will allow an abortion to take place under certain circumstances, notably in
a case of rape, incest, severe deformity or when the mother's life is endangered by the
pregnancy. We recognize that such action may at times be deemed necessary and
unavoidable. But if we state such a position ahead of time, we have already surrendered
much of our ground. You cannot take a "categorical" position on something and build into it
a few exceptions at the same time. If experience or circumstances are the basis for our
position, then we have no position. Experience and circumstances are always changing and
can provide no solid basis for any position. And this is precisely why Christians who may
take a strong stand against abortion feel compelled to allow for hypothetical exceptions in
certain cases, even before those cases become reality. Furthermore, it is why it becomes easy
for pro-life people to rationalize their decisions against life in altogether different
circumstances. They have allowed experience, not the Bible, to be their guide and authority.
They have forgotten that in Christ there is a new creation that is founded on a new
commandment. If it is easy for you to claim to be a "pro-life" person, and yet you find that
you can absolve, remove, excuse or justify yourself of any responsibility for your brother in
certain situations, then you need to hear this message. It may not change your mind, and it
definitely will not furnish you with answers to all the difficult questions. But, God willing, it
will force you to think through your convictions, or lack of them, about the sanctity of all
human life, all the time, in all circumstances.

The Way of Cain (Genesis 4:1-26)

The whole story of Cain, insofar as the Bible records it, is summarized in the words of Jude
11 as "the way of Cain." Jude used this expression to describe “godless men, who change the
grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and
Lord” (Jude 4). These are the ones “for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever”
(verse 13). It is said that Enoch prophesied about them that the Lord will come to judge and
“convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way” (verse
15). Hebrews 11:4 indicates that Cain was not a man of faith, that he did not bring his
offering as an act of faith, and that this explains why God did not look with favor upon Cain
or his offering. He came before God on his own terms and according to his own merits.
Cain evidently was bent on manufacturing his own version of religion. In I John 3:11-15 the
apostle makes the observation that Cain's actions were evil and that he belonged to the evil
one. Seeing that his brother's actions were righteous, his hatred grew until he murdered him.
The Lord came to him and said, “Where is your brother Abel?” His explanation of the
situation was an arrogant reply to the Lord's searching question: "Am I my brother's keeper?"
(Genesis 4:9). Cain tried to absolve himself of all responsibility for his brother. He wanted to
put distance between himself and his brother. He excused himself, justified himself, and in a
word washed his hands of anything having to do with his brother's life and well being. This is
“the way of Cain.” It is our purpose to examine that way with a view to discovering whether
we have any remains of his contemptible attitude in our own hearts. As we think about the
sanctity of human life, and ourselves as being on the side of life, do we at the same time
harbor any of this attitude that asks, "Am I my brother's keeper?"

The way of Cain is devilish in its origin.

"Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did
he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother's were righteous" (I John
3:12). Cain murdered his brother because he belonged to the evil one. The destruction of life
originated with the devil. He was a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44). He is the
destroyer (Revelation 9:11). Life was never threatened, insecure, or vulnerable until Satan
began his work in the world. Subsequent revelation makes it undeniably clear that the events
which began to unfold in Genesis 3 were the work of Satan. He was an angelic being who
had already determined to lead an uprising against God. His objective was to solicit and gain
the cooperation of the race of mankind in so doing. And as far as our first parents were
concerned, their going along with him constituted a rejection of God's authority over them in
favor of Satan's authority. They listened to Satan's insidious challenge when he said, "Did
God really say...?" and thus declared themselves willing to have Satan rule over them. They
supposed that Satan was on their side, that he was telling the truth when he insinuated that
God was somehow keeping them from realizing their full potential as human beings. “For
God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God,
knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:5).

Throughout the Bible Satan is seen as the embodiment of evil, the chief administrator of all
that is evil in the world. And to him are given such titles as “the ruler of the kingdom of the
air” and “the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient” (Ephesians 2:2). He is
“the prince of this world” (John 12:31) and “the god of this age” (II Corinthians 4:4). He
stands as the recognized leader of all that is opposed to God and Christ (Revelation 12). He
is the evil spirit whose activities are designed to sabotage the work of the Holy Spirit. The
world has been the devil's workshop for a long time, but it is his work that Jesus came to
destroy (I John 3:8). Under Christ the serpent's head has been crushed and Satan already
stands defeated and condemned. But it was Satan's work that paved the road for the way of
Cain. It is a way of life that is devilish in its origin, and it takes its lead from the father of
lies. In Cain we find that sin is already identified as a power ruling over man from within. It
is established as a way of life, or more appropriately, a way of death. It is even personified as
an active, aggressive force that is bent on man's destruction. “Sin is crouching at your door; it
desires to have you, but you must master it” (Genesis 4:7). Satan has accomplished his
objective to the extent that sin has come to dominate the inclinations of the thoughts of man's
heart so that all his ways become corrupt. In Cain it appears that all of human life has come
under the influence of sin. Sin is now conditioning every level of the human experience, and
it can all be traced to that old serpent, the devil.

The way of Cain is devious in its operation.

It is devious with men and with God. It says to the brother, "Let us go out into the field."
When God inquires about the brother, it says to God, "I don't know. Am I my brother's
keeper?" As far as the brother is concerned, the way of Cain is to deceive him. Cain set up his
brother for an ambush. He arranged the circumstances to make it easy to do the unthinkable.
This is not something Cain would do thoughtlessly. The situation had to be "right." Cain
knew well enough that this kind of behavior was morally reprehensible and socially
unacceptable. He was a man, after all, and his brother was a man. Both were created to bear
the image of their Maker. Cain would not try this in the presence of God. But the way of
Cain is to forget that God is present everywhere. Nevertheless, since God refused his
offering, Cain decided that God must not be interested in his field of labor. Cain became a
"secularist," thinking that God does not pay attention to what goes on in the field from which
his offering came, only to the place where the offering is made. He began to think of his life
in terms of “departments.” In some of them he was accountable to God, and in others he was
not, depending on the circumstances. He reasoned that he could behave according to one
standard in one situation, and according to a different standard in another. Did Cain think he
could get away with it, or that he would be exonerated, because he did it in the “field?” Did
he forget that God is everywhere and that no humanly contrived circumstances can shut God
out or hide from his all-seeing eye what is really going on? The way of Cain is devious,
because it typically operates on the assumption that God does not require us to “keep the
brother” in all circumstances. Several years ago one of the movies made about the Viet Nam
war included a scene in which a young girl was raped and murdered by American soldiers.
One of them protested the actions of his fellow soldiers and threatened to report the matter to
the authorities. He was told by his superior, “What happens in the field stays in the field.”
Cain acted as if he did not believe that God was both at the altar and in the field.

We must also make note of Cain’s devious response to the Lord. The way of Cain is always
evasive about God's question, "Where is your brother?" Following the way of Cain, people
seldom know where their brother is. Often they do not even know who their brother is. In the
way of Cain, the identity of the brother is constantly changing. In the way of Cain you can
never be quite sure about the brother. Under certain circumstances, you are willing to
acknowledge the whereabouts of the brother. But then in other situations you deny any
knowledge of the brother at all. When it comes to the easy questions, you know where your
brother is. But when the questions become more difficult, and you know that it is going to
cost you something to come up with the right answer, you absolve yourself of all
responsibility for him. More than that, like Cain, you throw the responsibility back upon
God. It is God's business to "keep" the brother, not yours! Whatever happens to the brother is
God's responsibility. Cain would even callously say, “Kill them all and let God sort them
out.” So devious is the way of Cain that he thinks he can have it both ways. Cain arranges
the conditions so as to loosen up his reservations as much as possible about doing what he
pleases with his brother, and then leaves the responsibility with God.

The way of Cain is destructive in its outcome.

In Cain, we see the entrance of violence into the family of Adam and Eve. A man destroys
the life of another man, his own flesh and blood. At the same time, it is the entrance of
violence and destruction into the world of humanity. In a world that had been so recently
pronounced "good" by its Creator, where once nothing but peace and harmony, love and
security prevailed, we now witness a man plotting and carrying out with his own hand the
execution of his fellow man. It is murder in cold blood! Sin, crouching at the door, has
gained the mastery over Cain. The way of Cain is the way of violence. It is the way of
violence against the brother. It is the way of violence against the sanctity of human life. But
we may also see it as the way of self-preservation. What did Cain's killing of his brother
have to do with the fact that his own offering had been rejected by God? What is the motive?
Was Cain simply angry about this? Was he venting his rage against God by taking it out on
Abel?
We need to remember that God had not only rejected Cain's offering; He had also accepted
Abel's. Cain must have felt threatened by this turn of events, and perhaps thought of his
brother as somehow gaining the advantage over him. Perhaps he imagined that Abel,
thinking that God was with him, would become more powerful and influential in the world
than Cain. Abel, he reasoned, might begin to attach some sort of "divine right" to his life and
behavior. Maybe he would start acting like God had given him certain "inalienable rights"
that would threaten to infringe upon Cain's turf! If he reasoned in this manner, Cain was only
projecting his own self-centered values upon Abel. Cain saw it all taking shape as a "kill-or-
be-killed" situation. He had to "get" his brother before his brother "got" him, so he launched
a preemptive strike against his perceived enemy. If God had been playing favorites, with
Abel out of the way he would be forced to accept Cain, even if he was God's second choice,
and even if he did have blood on his hands! In any case, the drama was played out as an act
of self-preservation. The way of Cain is to protect self at the expense of others. It means that
personal safety, security, comfort and convenience always take precedence over the brother.
Whenever these are threatened, the response is to get the brother out of the way. The way of
Cain makes it possible to over estimate the importance of personal, community or even
national interests, to the extent that we are willing to destroy the lives of others in order to
preserve what we think belongs to us. The tragic history of the human race has demonstrated
the fundamental selfishness of the way of Cain in every culture and generation.

The fourth chapter of Genesis further describes the movement of violence and destruction out
into the world. In the family of Cain it became pervasive. No one knew better than Cain
what kind of a world it would be, and he feared for his own life as he "went out from the
Lord's presence." And yet, astonishingly, God declared himself against retaliation and
revenge, placing some sort of mark on Cain, "so that no one who found him would kill him"
(Genesis 4:15,16). Even the murderer is God's property! Nevertheless, Cain was placed
under a curse, driven from the ground and made a restless wanderer on the earth. His
estrangement from God was intensified over that of his father. It continued to manifest itself
in his family. The Bible presents a picture of people doing with God's good creation what
people continue to do today. They use what is God's to make a name for themselves, to build
cities for themselves, and they defy anyone to take anything away from them. But the
destructive manner of the way of Cain became especially notorious again in his descendant
Lamech, who prided himself in his contempt for human life. Here was a man who boasted to
his wives who, in his view, seem to have been nothing more than property, that revenge was
his way of life (Genesis 4:23,24).

The way of Christ.

Only the way of Christ can turn people out of the way of Cain. The more people become
Christ-like in their thinking, speaking, and behavior, the more they find themselves
compelled to forsake the way of Cain. When they get to know Jesus as the way, the truth, and
the life, the way of Cain will have less appeal to them. This can be a difficult and painful
transition, one which we may never fully accomplish in a lifetime. But if we have problems
confronting some of the implications of the sanctity of human life, it could be due in part to
our tendency to work from an old covenant model. It is to be feared that the old covenant,
rather than the new, is the basis for many Christians’ thinking about these issues. But the old
covenant was not designed to be pro-life and it cannot provide an adequate basis for a
consistently pro-life commitment. We might say that it was selective when it came to life. For
example, the law of Moses specified many capital crimes. It not only permitted but required
the death penalty in such cases. In other words, sin would be committed by not putting the
offender to death. Furthermore, the old covenant was territorial. The constituting of Israel as
a nation under God involved their establishment in the land promised to Abraham. A
particular geographical land mass was at issue. This involved the people of God in waging
holy war against the inhabitants of the land. And again, they sinned whenever they failed to
destroy those peoples. The old covenant was also temporary. It was put in charge of God’s
people until Christ came (Galatians 3:24). Now that Christ has come we do not appeal to
Moses as our lawgiver and judge. To do so is to reverse the flow of redemptive history.

“Moses was faithful as a servant in all God’s house, testifying to what would be said in the
future. But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on
to our courage and the hope of which we boast” (Hebrews 3:5,6).

Jesus has brought in a new and better covenant. It is not like the old one. It is superior to the
old one (Hebrews 8:7-13). The old required righteousness, but provided none. Indeed, it is
called a ministry that brought condemnation and death. But the new is a ministry of
righteousness and life, and it puts God’s laws in our minds and writes them on our hearts (II
Corinthians 3:6-9). The new covenant is a ministry of new things: a new heart (Ezekiel
36:26), a new birth (John 3:3; I Peter 3:3), a new man (Ephesians 4:24), a new life (Romans
6:4), a new commandment (John 13:34), a new creation (II Corinthians 5:17), a new heavens
and a new earth (II Peter 3:13). It is established by the blood of Jesus and opens up a new and
living way into the most holy place (Hebrews 10:19,20).

If the way of Cain is devilish in its origin, the way of Christ comes from the heavenly
Father.

Consider some contrasts. Cain was fallen mankind's firstborn son. Jesus is God's only
begotten Son. Whose “way” should Christians follow? Cain belonged to the evil one, but the
evil one found that he had no claim upon Jesus, whose supreme delight was to do his Father's
will. Cain refused to be his brother's keeper, but Jesus came to be his brother's keeper. The
way of Cain is to steal and destroy. Jesus came that we might have life, and have it to the
full. The way of Cain is the way of death. The way of Jesus is the way of life. In fact, he is
the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through the Son, and only
those who receive the Son may call God their Father (John 1:12,13; 14:6). But receiving the
Son includes believing his words and obeying his commandments. Jesus proclaimed and
demonstrated the comprehensive commandment governing life in His kingdom, the law of
love (John 13:34). He spoke about loving God with our whole heart, soul, strength and mind,
and the neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 22:37-40). He spoke of treating others as we would
have them treat us (Luke 6:31). He spoke of loving the enemy, blessing those who curse us,
doing good to those who persecute us, and all of this in order that we may demonstrate by our
lives that God is our heavenly Father (Matthew 5:43-48). Such is the quality of life under the
new covenant.

Why is it so difficult for many of us to believe that Jesus says what He means and means
what He says? Why do we presume to know more than He does about the realities of life,
about all the possible "what if?" situations, and then suppose that what Jesus says is not really
what he means? On what basis do we think that we have the right to decide when the royal
law of His kingdom applies, and when it may be suspended? Is it possible that we try to
evade the obvious clarity of his teaching by saying that his language is not clear? If that is the
case, we may find ourselves counted among the crowd of religious persons to whom Jesus
spoke the piercing words of John 8:42-47:

“If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have
not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are
unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your
father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no
truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If
I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? He who belongs to God hears what God
says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."

The will of the Father is communicated to us through His Son. Do we hear what He says?

If the way of Cain is devious in its operation, the way of Christ is gracious in its
operation.

Instead of saying, "I don't know," when asked about the brother, those who follow Christ go
looking for the brother. Instead of asking, "Am I my brother's keeper?", they aggressively
seek ways to fulfill their responsibility to the brother. Instead of inquiring, "Who is my
neighbor?", they recognize that all their fellow men are their neighbors. What the brother has
done to them, what he may do for them, or what he has failed to do, are not the primary
considerations that govern the actions of those who follow the way of the Christ of Calvary.
They understand that life in the new covenant is supposed to be a foretaste of heaven. Their
responses are not conditioned by the actions of the brother, but by the grace of God that has
made all things new. They remember that Jesus came not to be served, but to serve, and to
give His life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). Christians know that a gospel church is a
colony of heaven in which the rule of Christ is law. It was in view of this that Paul wrote to
the church in Rome:
“Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If
it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge,
my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will
repay,’ says the Lord. On the contrary: ‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty,
give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not
be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:17-21).

God’s people know that they can only be overcome by evil when they resort to evil
themselves. We understand that life in God's kingdom is upside down in relation to life in the
kingdoms of this world. Serving takes priority over being served. Non-resistance takes the
place of retaliation. Willingness to lose our lives for the sake of Christ and the gospel
displaces motives of self-preservation. To go the way Jesus went means that whoever wants
to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for the sake of Jesus will find it
(Matthew 10:39).

We are devious whenever we attempt to deflect the application of these principles away from
certain areas of our conduct. We are devious whenever we reason that the authority of Jesus
does not have any right to intrude in certain situations. We are devious whenever we think
that the teaching of Jesus is crystal clear if we are talking about abortion, but its meaning is
unintelligible when the subject is self-defense or national security. In other words, do we
really believe in and practice the sanctity of human life? Does the Lord Jesus forbid the
taking of the life of an unborn child? Does he forbid it as an absolute principle, or only in
certain cases? Does Jesus forbid the taking of the life of a newborn baby, a toddler, an
adolescent, an adult? In some circumstances, or in all circumstances? Can we appeal to the
authority of Jesus Christ both to approve and prohibit the same thing? Is it possible for a
Christian to deliberately take a life under any circumstances as an expression of his belief in
the sanctity of human life? Do you as a pro-life person really believe that there are certain
situations in which the way of Cain takes precedence over the way of Christ? Is there ever a
situation that you could anticipate in your life in which you are committed in advance to lay
aside the law of Christ and follow the way of Cain?

If the way of Cain is destructive in its outcome, the way of Christ seeks to be
consistently pro-life.

It is not easy to be consistently pro-life, and I do not presume to have the answers to all the
difficult questions. Very few accomplish this goal in an entire lifetime. When you think
about it, the most difficult question is this: Are you committed to preserving, protecting and
promoting life all the time, under all circumstances, and in every place? Is this the way you
want to go, whether you have all the answers or not? Or are you willing to settle for the way
of Cain as a second-best option? Are you at least willing to recognize that the kingdoms of
this world may at times make demands upon you that are in conflict with the demands of
Christ's kingdom? Will you seriously consider what "the powers that be" call upon you to be
and do, in the light of what Jesus calls you to be and do? When you are called upon the
follow the way of Cain, will you remember that you have a higher loyalty to the way of
Christ?

Does the new covenant community, which is a preview of the age to come, function
according to the same standards as the institutions of the world, which is passing away? Is it
your goal to be considered great in God's kingdom, or great in the eyes of this present evil
age? For instance, how do you arrive at a "pro-life" position in relation to, say, capital
punishment? or AIDS? or war? or euthanasia? or suicide? or self-defense? or private
property? or protecting your family? or poverty? or homelessness? or hunger? These are
difficult questions, the answers to which may require serious thought and radical
commitment. None of us will be able to work everything out so that there are no more
problems to resolve. But where are you in relation to the sanctity of human life? Do you
come down on the side of destroying life, or protecting it as a gift from God? Do you keep
the brother? Do you strive for an ongoing transformation of life by the renewing of your
mind, so that you are always becoming less conformed to this world's scheme of things as
you test and show your approval of the good, pleasing and perfect will of God (Romans
12:1,2)? This is what is required, and nothing less than this, if we are going to follow Jesus
through the complexities of life in a world that is passing away.

People are out there in the battle to end the abortion industry in our nation. But we must
recognize that they are by no means unified at the level of motivation. Some are motivated by
a political agenda, and their understanding of what it means to be pro-life is limited to that
which promotes a political cause. Believing that the sanctity of human life can best be
promoted, preserved, and protected by government institutions, they vote only for pro-life
candidates. Thinking they have done all that they can do, they often give little or no attention
to other considerations. Others are on a moral crusade, and would resent the suggestion that
their motives are anything less than purely Christian. But the reality is that they are possessed
with a sense of moral outrage about a single issue that becomes everything to them. Their
commitment to it becomes their hope, their righteousness, and their salvation. But morality is
not Christianity, as Bunyan so vividly illustrated in The Pilgrim’s Progress. Still others are
concerned about the social fabric of our American society and fear that the practice of
abortion is one of many influences that tend to weaken the social fabric. There are also those
who are driven by mere emotionalism, consumed with thoughts about the helplessness and
defenselessness of the unborn. Their emotional reactions do not extend much beyond the
abortion issue, but somehow killing the unborn does not “feel right.” Many people are
dominated by a sentimentality that grows out of the assumption that children, especially the
unborn, are essentially innocent or unblemished and thus deserving of special consideration.
Abortion to them is especially outrageous because it is the taking of “innocent” human life.
There are even those who take as their starting point the inherent goodness of all life, but
who are wide of the mark because they lack a thoroughly integrated, biblical perspective and
fail to take into account the problem of sin.
If we are Christians, we are the new covenant people of God. As such we take our starting
point from the person and work of Jesus Christ, the mediator of the new covenant. We
acknowledge his person. We trust in his finished work. We believe his every word. We obey
his every command. His commandments to us are not burdensome. He is Lord of all. He is
Lord all the time, in every place, and in all circumstances. He is not a single-issue Lord. The
challenge of biblical Christianity is to consistently champion the cause of life and to be our
brother’s keeper.