Conference yukon::christian_v7

    
    I will begin this note with excerpts from a Focus on the Family
    broadcast I heard about March 1 on this issue.  
    
    If anyone can get a copy of the broadcast, it is very enlightening
    on where the overall movement is.
    
    Some issues to get the discussion started:
    	
    	The Dutch recently passed a law legalizing the right to die,
    	which has actually been in practice for years.  What is not
    	publicized is the fact that 3 deaths per day are not patient
    	choice as much as family choice -- i.e., chronically ill/old/
    	terminal people whose families give the doctors the OK to
    	kill them.
    
    	A conference on this issue is coming up shortly in California,
    	and the agenda includes discussions on right to die issues for
    	children and old people.  The agenda labels them "Pre-persons"
    	and "Post-persons", from which one can infer that one who is not
    	aware, capable of taking care of themself, functional, useful to
    	society, etc., is not really a person..... shades of Nazi Germany.
    
    	Nazi Germany had a right to die movement going in the 30's/40's
    	where mentally handicapped people were the first to be euthanized,
    	based on a non-person status, I assume.
    
    	A group of legal researchers at the Univ. of Idaho drafted a 
    	proposed law (a sort of straw horse) that included the right
    	for a child over age 6 to have their own life terminated without
    	parental consent required.
    
    	Dr. Jack(el) Kevorkian has made the statement that anyone sentenced
    	to more than 3 years in prison should have the right to request
    	death, and have their organs donated to society.  (Can government
    	COMA be far behind?)
     	
    
    I personally believe that the right to die movement is an extension of
    the abortion movement, and is on the path to society and individuals
    determining who shall live and who shall die, based on the current
    definitions of "person", "value", and eventually "good".
    
    Bob
    
    
    	

    Everyone has a right to die.  This statement is as erroneous as
    "pro-choice" is, but it is used in the same way. The real statement 
    should be "right to cause death." This would give the true meaning of
    what is being sought after. 

    Jim

    Everyone has a right to sin.  God gave them that right.  We can't take
    it away from them without sinning ourselves.  God told them not to sin.
    God told us to tell them in case they didn't hear him.
    
    (These thoughts just rolled off the top of my fingers, but they may be
    useful for some discussion...)
    
    So,
    
    Everyone has a right to choose to die.  God gave them that right.  If
    we deny them that right then we are sinning.  God told them not to take
    their own life (?references?).  God told us to tell them that killing
    themselves is a Bad Thing.
    
    James

Well maybe useful for discusscion James, but I have to politely disagree.

No one has a "right" to sin, that is why sin leads to eternal damnation.
God allowed sin to enter the world, but did not give us the "right" to 
sin.  But we all do sin.  That is why Jesus bore the penalty for us.

Everyone will eventually taste death in this life, but God made us for life,
and set eternity in our hearts.  Death, though part of this world, is not
to be sought after or desired for ourselves or others.

Setting moral standards which deny total liscentiousness in all areas is 
necessary.  As long as those moral standards are keeping with God's character, 
it is not sinning to set them and require appropriate consequences for 
disobedience. ie - the consequences should not outweigh the crime.

Leslie

    Re: Note 50.4 by KAHALA::JOHNSON_L
    
>No one has a "right" to sin, that is why sin leads to eternal damnation.
>God allowed sin to enter the world, but did not give us the "right" to 
>sin.  But we all do sin.  That is why Jesus bore the penalty for us.
    
    Maybe we have different meanings of the word "right".   Let's get back
    to definitions.  A "right" to me is something that I _can_ do within
    the constraints laid down by a controlling authority.
    
    I'm saying that God grants humans a "right" to sin by having previously
    granted them a "right" to choose to obey him or not.  We have been
    granted free will.  We are not constrained from the start to avoid
    sinning - if we were thus constrained then it would be impossible to
    sin.  It would be a non-issue.
    
    We *are* told not to sin.  If we choose to obey him, then we have
    relinquished the "right" to sin in favour of the "right" to eternal
    life.
    
    James

    Reminds me of an ACLU argument against the death penalty.  From what I
    understand, they argue that there should be no death penalty since it 
    is inhumane punishment for those who do not want to die.  For those few 
    who do want to die, it is argued that no sane person would want to choose 
    death.  Therefore, they should not die for reasons of insanity.  
    
    I could see there being some amount of conflict between those who support 
    "right to die" and those who oppose the death penalty.  Some could even 
    regard death as an acceptable "cure" for insanity ...  
    
    Steve

    I think I would define rights such that we have no right as people -
    whether we know the Lord or not - to do what God forbids us to do.  So,
    we have no right to murder, including abortion or mercy killing or
    suicide.  When we take on a decision that God reserves for Himself, we
    are disobeying Him.  
    
    This is not to say that we can't do those things -
    we can choose to murder, but there are consequences.  One of the
    consequences is to face whatever sanctions people decide to put on
    those acts.  But the more serious consequence of disobeying God is the
    damage it does to our relationship to Him.  True, Jesus paid our
    penalty, but we have no right to disobey God, and He'll hold us
    accountable when we meet Him.  So, to me, rights flow from God's law,
    not from some person's idea of what is right.  This has to be true if
    God is accurately portrayed in the Bible.  If He is perfect, good,
    just, loving, and eternally that way, then His law is also perfect,
    etc.  See the Psalms, Romans 12:2, and many other references.
    
    The practical application is that many people are defining rights
    today.  The way to check to see whether these definitions of "rights"
    hold water is to see if God grants those rights in the Bible.  If He
    does, then we're echoing His law.  If not, then those rights aren't
    rights at all, but people's opinions on what is good to do.  And that's
    about what they're worth.  There is a right to live, because God
    creates life, and He decides when it begins and ends.  There is no
    "right" to a job, or a "right" to good medical care - at least I can't find
    one in the Bible.  Clearly, there is no right to take the life of
    someone because their life is unproductive or not worthwhile.  There
    also is a prohibition on suicide.
    
    Make sense?
    
    Don Randall

    I saw on the news last night that the suicide helper (so called doctor)
    is "doing his thing" again.  His lawyer claims he did not help, but was
    just present and that there is no law against being present in that
    state (what state? I don't remember).  However, they described the man
    as sitting in a chair with a mask on his face with tubes leading to a
    container (not verbatim) which contained the "gas."  So who did all the
    connecting, etc.?  
    
    
    

    
    I just read an article in Our Sunday Visitor, May 16,1993, titled,
    "Murderous Euphemisms."

    Here's a short summary of what it reported.

    The truth now officially acknowledged, is that involuntary Euthanasia is 
    a large part of Euthanasia in Holland. Killing without request has been
    carried out against newborns with birth defects, elderly and incompetent 
    patients who have made no request to die. The reports of death without 
    request are in articles written by Dr. Richard Fenigsen a retired 
    cardiologist. The Dutch government leaders are admitting to the practice 
    of death without request.  In 1990, according to official Dutch
    estimates, doctors in Holland killed about 5,400 patients with their
    consent. The same figures show that an even larger number, 5900 were
    killed without their consent. "Death Without Request" is part of the 
    pro-Euthanasia movement in Holland as well as in the U.S. We should be
    seeing it in the U.S. soon.


    Jim

    re: <<< Note 50.9 by PCCAD::RICHARDJ "My God Is OK, Sorry About Yours" >>>

     Jim,

     > "Death Without Request" is part of the pro-Euthanasia movement in
     > Holland as well as in the U.S. We should be seeing it in the U.S.
     > soon. 

     Ah yes. And soon behind that we will be hearing the call to no longer
     support a welfare system that is breaking the economic back of Amerika,
     be truly merciful and allow the "non-producing eaters" a merciful exit
     from their downtrodden, oppressive, hopeless existence. 

     Amerika started murdering those least able to resist or protest,
     received no significant or forceful objection from those who most
     should have known better, and is continuing down the path of death and
     destruction of the innocents. It would be most interesting to hear the
     frank and honest perspectiove of an older German historian on our
     current direction. Some say that history repeats itself in 75 year
     cycles. I wonder how long it will be until we start killing Jews? 

     Greatly Saddened,

     Brian 

> I wonder how long it will be until we start killing Jews? 
    
    Close, but this time I think it will be (true) Christians that are the
    target.
    
    Mark L.

                    re: <<< Note 50.11 by USDEV::LZTEST >>>

     Art,

     That was one of the most balanced and well reasons discussions on the
     subject I have ever read. Your concerns and accusations against
     professing Bible-Believing Christians are well founded and accurate,
     IMHO. Thank you for taking the time to post your note here.

     Regards,

     Brian 

Re: .11

Excellent note, Art.  Thank you.

Sandy

    re .11
    
    	The truth sometimes hurts, but you have described a significant
    portion of what is labeled 'Christianity'.  One correction...
    
    The Foundation for Human Understanding and it's founder Roy Masters
    are not Christian.  Some of the talk he talks sounds a bit
    Christian-eze, but that is where the resemblence ends.  If you want to
    use organizations as examples, be sure they are really what the try to
    sound like.  /that last sentence doesn't sound right, but.../
    
    Browse through II Timothy Chapter 3 when you get a chance.
    
    	In His Name,
    
    		Rich

 Art, welcome to Christian, its good to have you here.



 One thing I'd like to say as a word of caution is that there are no perfect 
 Christians.  We are all sinners, saved by the grace of God.  As a favorite
 preacher o f mine said once "being Christlike may not be the perfection in
 our lives, but its the direction in our lives".

 There are a lot of people out there who claim the name of Christ and who on
 first look sound and "look" like the genuine article.  The Bible tells us to
 test the spirits and see if they are from God, and I believe if we were to
 take those who claim the name of Christ, test them against the scriptures, many
 would quickly fall out as being false, Mr Masters included. And, I would hope
 that you would test those of us in here who claim the name of Christ against
 the Scriptures.

 I would suggest and hope that you not judge God by the actions of men.  That
 many sit idly by while atrocities take place awaiting their own salvation is
 certainly not Biblical. And, as the time of His return draws nearer we know
 that those who claim His name will indeed be tested.



 I hope you will continue to participate in CHRISTIAN and come to a better 
 knowledge and understanting of Him through this conference.




 Jim 

    
    Hi Art, and thank you for your insightful entries here.  If you read
    through this conference and its past versions you will see a consistent
    message supporting life under all conditions and condemning the ideas
    that support the killing of others.
    
    Since the term "Christian" is now almost meaningless in conversation it
    might be better to say that Bible-believing people are and will be the
    people who speak out against the killing and are/will be persecuted for
    doing so.
    
    jeff

================================================================================
Note 50.16 USDEV::LZTEST
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>And as societal structures break down more and more and evil gets slicker in
>it's marketing strategies, what was once considered 'heinous' a generation or
>two ago will become more and more the status quo.

Art,

Well said about the marketing strategies.  I have written much about
the best ways to "ruin an economy" is to flood it with counterfeit
bills.  And the closer the counterfeit mimics the real, the more
easily it is passed off.  And we are to the point that most people
CANNOT define what a Christian is.

True Christian (whoever "they" may be) compete with scores of other
definitions.  Marketing.  Packaging.  Labeling.  When a true Christian
defines his Christianity in the Person of Christ, he is met with
"okay, there's one opinion."

>(Note 50.17 CSLALL::HENDERSON) I would suggest and hope that you not judge God
>by the actions of men.

Jim speaks well, here, too.  If I may borrow some other wisdom:

                   God's ethics = true definition of terms

Think about this.  Take out all humankind before defining anything,
because if there is definition in anything, then there must be an
Origin.  Shakespear said a rose by any other name would smell as
sweet.  That's because the definition of a rose is NOT in its name,
but in its being. Too often we get caught up defining Christianity
outside of the context of the Origin and fall into defining it by what
we say or do.  So IF THERE IS A GOD, HE DEFINES the terms.

If we seek to know what Christianity is, we enter an intellectual
exercise that has a multitude of definitions.  But if we seek to know
Who God Is, then Christianity will become defined out of this process,
from the being of the Origin, and NOT the reverse.

[The definition of] Christianity MUST be centered in the Person of God, 
unified as One.  All other definitions [that we can give] emanate from 
less than God and are therefore imperfect at best and downright abominations 
at worst.

>... since mankind by nature is base, corrupt or for you Christians, 'sinful'
>if that makes you feels better.

Sinful is another term that is defined.  But base and corrupt are
valid synonyms.

Mark

    Hi Art!
    
    I was out of the office yesterday all day and just came across your
    notes and the subsequent responses.  I, too, would like to welcome you
    to this notesfile.
    
    Jim and Mark, excellent responses.  May I, too, keep my eyes on God and
    not men, for as a Christian I get discouraged in what is happening in
    the name of Christianity today.
    
    I'm so saddened by those who call themselves Brother and Sister, that
    have strayed from holiness and God-given Truths as defined in the
    Bible.  God's word declares that righteous will be made evil and evil
    righteous in the last days and I'm no prophet(ess), but it sure seems
    this describes today.
    
    In Him,
    Nancy

    Art,
    
    	I pray that you will be able to push aside the hucksters and
    hawkers we see in the media (Christian and secular) and take a fresh
    look at the person of Jesus Christ as portrayed in the Holy Word of
    God, the Bible.  Jesus Christ has set the example for us, His followers
    to emulate.  Don't define 'Christianity' by what some televangelist or
    other personality says.  Re-examine Jesus from a biblical perspective
    and reject ANYTHING which would be contrary to God's own Word.  Pray
    for those who seem to have gone astray, but be firm on keeping the
    faith first delivered to the saints.
    
    	In Jesus Name,
    
    		Rich

Forever and always, some (large) portion of the people whom God has called, and
who call themselves God's people, have entirely missed the point of what God
really wants from His people.  Consider this excerpt from the writings of 
someone speaking to God's people (the Jews) about 2000 years ago:

"But if you call yourself a Jew and rely upon the law and boast of your relation
to God and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are
instructed in the law, and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a
light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of
children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth - you then who
teach others, will you not teach yourself?  While you preach against stealing,
do you steal?  You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit
adultery?  You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?  You who boast in the law,
do you dishonor God by breaking the law?  For, as it is written 'The name of God
is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.'"  (Romans 2:17-24)

History does repeat itself, because human nature has not changed.  Even those
of us seeking to 'put on' the nature of Christ and be reborn as the people God
created us to be, still struggle with our human natures, and we still sometimes
lose those struggles.  Thousands of years before Paul wrote these words, the
nation of Israel was falling into the very sins they were claiming that people
should avoid.  Here we are thousands of years after Paul wrote that, and once
again "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of *US*."

We can point the finger at other folks who "call themselves Christians," and say
that the name of God is being blasphemed because of THEM.  But if I look at my
own life, I can only cringe at the times that the name of God has been 
blasphemed because of *ME*, and be very glad that we have a gracious and 
forgiving God.

Paul

    .-1
    
    Amen Paul.  I too am guilty and am thankful for God's mercy.
    
    jeff