About Us
Search Library
Library Index
Whats New
Statement of Faith
About Us
Admin Login
Believersweb Header

The Biblical View on Abortion pt.1

Written by: MacArthur Jr., John    Posted on: 04/01/2003

Category: Sermons

Source: CCN

The following message was delivered at Grace Community Church in Panorama City, California, by John MacArthur Jr.  It was transcribed from the tape, GC 90-67, titled "The Biblical View on Abortion" (Part 1).  A copy of the tape can be obtained by writing, Word of Grace, P.O. Box 4000, Panorama City, CA 91412 or by dialing toll free 1-800-55-GRACE.

I have made every effort to ensure that an accurate transcription of the original tape was made.  Please note that at times sentence structure may appear to vary from accepted English conventions.  This is due primarily to the techniques involved in preaching and the obvious choices I had to make in placing the correct punctuation in the article.

It is my intent and prayer that the Holy Spirit will use this transcription to strengthen and encourage the true Church of Jesus Christ.

Tony Capoccia

                      The Biblical View on Abortion                                   Part 1                                     by                             John MacArthur Jr.

As we come this morning to the matter of abortion, before I take you into the scriptures and we look more closely at to what the Bible has to say, it is probably fitting for us to get some kind of a grasp on the issue itself.  So, I want to address that, if I may, for a moment.  What I am going to say to you may sound like an article in the newspaper because it is full of statistics and quotes and that kind of thing, but it does set the scene for understanding the issue at hand.

To sum up what we are experiencing with regard to abortion in America, we could simply say, "America, as a nation, is highly committed by law and by practice to a form of mass murder."  And that is really the bottom line. 

This nation, which certainly prides itself on its humanitarianism, is in a murderous cycle of violence that makes the Nazi Holocaust look mild by comparison.  Nearly 2,000,000 babies are aborted a year in America.  Every third baby conceived now is being murdered.  Among teenage women there are 736 abortions for every 1,000 births.  Among married women abortions now exceed births!  More babies are killed than are born.  Some would tell us that there is an abortion about every 15 seconds in America. 

In some metropolitan hospitals, in the major cities of our nation, abortions far outnumber live births.  Planned Parenthood has gone so far as to say, "This is nothing more than a means of preventing disease; pregnancy being noted as a disease."  If you think that sounds farfetched, I will remind you of a paper by Dr. Willard Kates, from the Planned Parenthood Physicians Association.  The title of the paper is, "Abortion as treatment for unwanted pregnancy: The second sexually transmitted disease." 

Pregnancy then is seen by Planned Parenthood as a sexually transmitted disease that needs to be cured by abortion.  Planned Parenthood has somewhere approaching 1,000 abortion clinics doing somewhere approaching 75,000 murders a year, and are receiving millions of dollars of support from the U. S. Government and the United Way, and other agencies like that.  Our nation, and other nations in the world are frankly wiping out an entire generation of human beings in mass infanticide.

It is estimated that perhaps as many as 75,000,000 babies will be murdered this year around the world--75,000,000!  That's probably conservative.  It's more than all the deaths in all the wars, in all the history of the world.  This kind of murder is shocking and I don't want to be too shocking, but I want to tell you how it is done and I hope that I don't offend anyone.  The processes of abortion are somewhat frightening and bizarre.

During the First Trimester, the methods are Dilation and Suction, called DNS, or Dilation and Curettage, called DNC; basically this means that a vacuum tears the child in pieces and sucks the pieces out through a tube.  Or, a sharp instrument dismembers the Fetus into sections, and then often forceps are used to crush the head and reduce its size.  This, of course, can result in a torn uterus, a perforated uterus, sterility, [and] things like that. 

During the Second Trimester the safe comfortable home of the child, known as the Amniotic Sack, is wounded by a needle which withdraws the Amniotic Fluid and replaces it with a heavy saline solution (which basically burns the child alive), and in 24 to 72 hours the body will expel the dead fetus. 

During the Third Trimester, a Hysterotomy is used--sometimes "prostaglandin," a drug producing delivery by stimulating the uterus falsely into labor.  These sometimes produce children born alive, who are then left to die or even be killed.  A new way being advocated by the National Abortion Federation in their recent meetings was advocated at a workshop: puncturing the "soft spot" on the baby's head and then vacuuming out what is in the head.  Another abortionist at that meeting suggested that the length of the baby's foot could be measured and used to determine the price of the abortion.

It almost sounds primitive, certainly not characteristic of a culture as sophisticated as our is.  Even Cesarean Sections are performed as abortions in the Third Trimester.  I remember reading about a case in New York City where twin babies were conceived in the womb.  Both of them had "Down Syndrome" and they were killed by puncturing their hearts directly.  Hundreds of these attempted abortions in the Third Trimester, are born alive and then used in some kind of experimentation.

The IRS, jumping into the fray, as they are always wanting to do in order to rule on how this all affects our taxes, has ruled, in "Revised Rule 73 dash something," "That parents are entitled to a tax exemption, if after an attempted abortion their child lives for any length of time."  Now, you tell me how a child, attempted to be aborted, can be considered a dependent child if it lives, but not a child if it dies.  What kind of dilemma is that?  I suppose it is the same dilemma that the Van Nuys Police had not long ago, when a woman in Van Nuys had a baby in a bathroom--and she killed it with a razor blade.  Had she killed the baby before it was born, she would have had no problems.  But because she killed it with a razor blade after it was born, she is serving an 11 year prison sentence.  This is the stupidity of Humanism.

Fifteen year olds can get abortions without parental knowledge or consent; in fact, generally the law wants to say that parents are the enemy of the freedom of the child; in fact, even the consent of the spouse is unconstitutional.  Dead fetuses are used in an industry of business and experimentation.  The "Journal of Clinical Pathology" indicates that fetal organs have been grafted into mice and rats to see how long they live, and other frightening experiments that I won't even speak about in a public meeting.  Squibb Company is involved in paying tens of thousands of dollars to doctors to experiment with fetuses for use in research on high blood pressure drugs, and this is all coming very rapidly.  I saw something about it the other night on television.

The U.S. Government funded experiments on live aborted babies.  "The New England Journal of Medicine" reports that tissue cultures are obtained by dropping still living babies in the meat grinder after abortions, and they determine something from the culture that is produced in that.  Some are thrown away.  Dr. Jay Domingues (sp.) of New York City wrote, "On any Monday you can see 70 garbage bags with fetal material in them along the sidewalks of abortion clinics in New York City."  Again, the "New England Journal" article by Raymond Duff and Professor A. G. M. Campbell (sp.) of Yale acknowledged that over a 21 year period, 14% of babies who died at Yale Hospital did so through the physician's choice.  So you are dealing with a very, very, widespread problem.

It is now possible to do to a retarded infant what would be impossible to do to a dog or a cat.  In fact, a recent case in California, "Cerlander (sp.) vs. BioScience Labs" makes it possible for children to sue their parents for wrongful life, for letting them live and refusing abortion (this reported in the newsletter, "The American College of OB-Gyn").  In other words, if your parents didn't abort you and you lived, and you've got severe problems [then] you can sue them for letting you live. 

Bags of babies are found by trash compactors (as we all know); yet on the other side of this, a wounded American eagle was found recently in Maryland and rushed to emergency treatment.  However, it died and a $5,000 reward was offered for the arrest of whoever injured it.  It is illegal to ship a pregnant lobster: it's a $1,000 fine.  In the State of Massachusetts there is an anti-cruelty law that makes it illegal to award a goldfish as a prize.  Why?  This is what it says, "To protect the tendency to dull humanitarian feelings and to corrupt morals of those who abuse them."  The same people that want to save the goldfish are leading the parade, usually, to kill the babies. 

This of course has developed into a multibillion dollar industry, in the terms of business.  Many people make their money on this.  I talked to an abortionist who was attending our church, some years back, and presented to him the gospel.  We had several meetings together and he understood fully the gospel.  I don't know his spiritual condition at this time, but I remember on the days that I talked with him that he told me that he himself alone did $9,000,000 worth of abortions in a year in his own clinic (that's one doctor). 

The industry goes beyond just the abortion itself to the products of abortion: the material (the fetus material) which is used for all kinds of things and sold.  It is a massive industry.  This even gets more bizarre and there is no need to get into it.  The whole abortion industry is frightening [and] mind boggling.  How a nation of civilized people (if we are civilized; advanced technologically yes, civilized--no), how we can tolerate this is unthinkable, except for the falleness and the wretched sinfulness of the human heart.

In other countries in the world people are still reeling from the impact of this.  I will give you one illustration: Japan has been very aggressive in the abortion field for a number of years, and in Japan there is severe trauma on the part of Japanese women because there have been millions and millions of abortions that have occurred there.  Over the last say 40 years, in Japan there has been an excess of 50,000,000 abortions that are known.  The women have been traumatized by these abortions, in terms of their own emotional life, and so the Buddhists have erected temples for the expressed purpose of dealing with the issue of abortion.  These are temples which memorialized what are called "water babies" (this is a term for an aborted child).  A "water baby," those who perish by abortion.

In order to secure peace for their departed souls, these women come to these places.  And they are now aware of the fact in their own conscience (at least they assume this to be true without biblical revelation) that these little aborted "water babies" have a soul, and they have got to do something for the departed soul; so the Buddhists, in their religion, have erected temples where the departed souls of "water babies" can be attended to by penitent mothers.  For somewhere between $340 and $640 a grieving mother can purchase a small stone Buddha.  And somehow purchasing this small stone Buddha not only feeds the business enterprise but relieves some of the anxiety and, apparently, does something for the departed soul of the baby. 

In one temple alone, tens of thousands of these have been sold; the grounds have become a commercial attraction where visitors pay to come and take pictures of women who are there agonizing over their departed "water babies."  Priests will offer prayers at that place for "water babies" at $120 per baby and $40 for each additional baby that you have aborted.  That is just one illustration from one country of the trauma that has occurred in the lives of these women. 

400% to 800% is the range of statistic figures that regard suicide; somewhere between 400% and 800% of suicide rates increase in women who have had abortions.  Hypochondria, depression, withdrawal, guilt, shame, drugs, alcohol dependency, serious emotional trauma--all of these come from abortions.  Six to seven times more women die each year from legal than illegal abortions.  So the whole thing is a very, very frightening, frightening scenario. 

Just a few more things, and I am not going to give you all the documentation, although I have it in hand--but let me just read you some of the things that are coming out of this abortion issue with regard to how it impacts women:

1.  The risk of pregnancy outside the womb which threatens the mother's life, is doubled for women who have had one abortion, and quadrupled where there has been two or more.

2.  Miscarriages are almost twice as common for women who have aborted. 

3.  A study of 26,000 births indicated a more than threefold increase in the number of stillborn babies and deaths of newborns among mothers who have had an abortion.

4.  Since about two or three women per hundred need a blood transfusion, there is an increased risk of exposure to hepatitis and AIDS. 

5.  Bleeding is more common in subsequent wanted pregnancies.

6.  Many researchers have observed subsequent premature births and low birth weights.

7.  Among women who have had abortions there is an increased risk of damage to the cervix. 

8.  A sevenfold increase in "placenta previa" (that's where the placenta covers the birth canal and often requires a Cesarean Section).

9.  About twice the risk of breast cancer when abortions were performed in the first trimester, before completing a full term pregnancy.  That's because God, in part, has designed the body to begin to prepare itself for the birth of that child; when that is aborted it creates certain risk factors in the body as the body retreats to try to compensate.

10.  There is up to 30% greater risk of pelvic infection.

The statistics, however, are probably even grimmer since a woman who is injured will rarely go back to the doctor or facility where it occurred.  Furthermore, complications often develop later and are not reported in connection with the abortion that caused them, nor is death always linked to abortion in reports and in death certificates. 

When you look at the emotional effect, as I noted about the women in Japan, you find all kinds of interesting things:

1.  Women having prior emotional or mental problems often become worse, and having an abortion produced such problems in women who previously had none. 

2.  Women who have had an abortion are more likely to experience guilt, depression, and be suicidal.  However, the claim that a woman will commit suicide if she is denied an abortion (and that's what the liberationists tell us) is highly unlikely, because suicide is almost nonexistent among pregnant women.  Over a 20 year period, 13,500 Swedish women were refused abortions--only three committed suicide.  Very, very rare.

3.  After an abortion a woman is far more likely to break up with her partner, whether she is married or not.  Abortion just destroys everybody in the process.

The question then comes, "How did this ever get started?  Whoever started this?"  Well, sad to say it goes way back.  I mean if we want to know where it all started we have to see that it started certainly in the mind of Satan according to John 8:44, "He is a murderer."  Certainly it started from the same kind of fallen attitude that made Cain kill Able.  Cain was a murderer; that's the expression of fallenness.  You can go way back and you will find that there have been efforts on the part of Satan to murder babies in the time of Moses and in the time of Jesus.  And he was successful, as you know, in the time of Jesus, in massacring babies under the age of two, in order to try an eliminate the Messiah. 

Looking around, for example, say the ancient time of Judaism, you can find abortions practiced among pagans, but never among Jews, for obvious reasons.  They knew that life was sacred; life was granted by God, and they used to "camp" on the second great commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself;" and since a baby conceived was a person that became their neighbor and therefore to harm their neighbor would be to violate the second commandment.

Coming into the New Testament time there were also pagans who engaged in abortions, but again Jews did not do it in the New Testament time, nor did the Church.  Plato and Aristotle both recommended family growth limitation through abortion.  Abortion was used even in New Testament times among pagans to conceal illicit sex.  If you could remove the evidence, you could remove the stigma of illicit sex.  Rich women also didn't want to leave their wealth to lower class children fathered illegitimately, so while they might have wanted to have an affair with some low classed man, they didn't want to support his child, and so abortion was a way to deal with that.  And then, abortion was a way (they said) to preserve their "sex appeal," not to "trouble the womb with bouncing babies." 

Abortion was also a form of contraception.  In times of ancient cultures, even around the New Testament era, the methods used varied from substances introduced into the womb through the birth canal; sometimes oral drugs or "poisons" as they used to be called; sometimes mixtures that were mixed for the purpose of proving fatal to the unborn infant; sometimes they would bind the body in these very, very, tight ropes or cloths to literally squeeze the womb and crush the life of the child; sometimes they would locate the baby in the womb and take a hard object and smash against that infant in the womb and kill it that way; sometimes using blades and sometimes hooks going up through the birth canal. 

Pagans would do this; the Jews always rejected it because life was created by God, and anyone created by God became your neighbor, and to take a life was to violate the second commandment.  The early church then took a strong stand against it.  In the Didache, which is a codification of early church teaching, it says, "Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion."  Abortion was rejected in another early document, called the Epistle of Barnabus, as contrary to "neighbor centered love;" so you can see the early church picked up on some of the Jewish ideas.  The Didache, again that same codification of teaching, saw the way of death is full of cursing, murders, adulteries, and murders of children.  They saw the way of death as belonging to those who killed children.  They called them "Corrupters of God's creatures," and in the third century a Latin word even emerged, the word, "abortuwantes" (sp.)--abortionists.  "Abortion," they said, "brought the judgment of God."

The Reformation didn't change this; the church has always seen abortion as murder, an act of violence, and a lack of love towards one God has created.  So it isn't new: the people of God; Israel, stood against it; the church has stood against it; and we must stand against it.

Here we are living in a time when this abortion movement has become a massive industry, has become a reflection of our culture, and if you look back a little bit you can see what the pieces were that sort of came together to build the platform on which this whole thing stands.  Let me just see if I can't share some of them with you.  This whole commitment to abortion started;

Step one, the Sexual Revolution--the Sexual Revolution which basically said, "We want to be free to express ourselves sexually."  You go back to the early sixties; everybody has got to be engaged in free love.  Remember the expression "free love;"  you remember all the hippies and that whole thing.  The Sexual Revolution spawned abortion as an industry, because it basically said, "We have to be free to express ourselves sexually, and we don't really need to be dealing with the consequences."  In fact, they would go so far as to say,

If we are going to be free, we women certainly can't be victimized by men.  Men can jump in and out of bed with anybody they want all day long, and walk away and there aren't any consequences to them.  But what happens to us is--we get pregnant, and so their freedom has no impingement; their freedom has no consequence; their freedom has no detrimental results, but our freedom does.  So in order for us to be really free, you have got to eliminate the consequence, the major consequence of free sex, free love, and that is you have got to be able to eliminate pregnancy.  Otherwise, we become victimized by men, and we don't want to be victimized by men.

So the Sexual Revolution with its free love really set the stage for the massacring of millions of babies, who were nothing but an intrusion in the fornications and the adulteries of a wretched, degenerate society. 

Then there was a second thing that jumped onto the "bandwagon," apart from this whole free love thing, and that was the deformities issue.  You all remember back in the sixties, the big issue about Thalidomide.  Many women took Thalidomide because it was a birth enhancing drug and it would allow them to get pregnant, whereas they otherwise may not be able to.  And you may also remember that Thalidomide had some severe side effects, in terms of limbless children that were born.  There were some medical doctors in England who believed that these deformities and other deformities were serious enough to lead them to argue for eugenic abortions; and that, of course, came out of England, as I said, eliminating birth defect children because of the cost on society, because of the trouble they give to parents (they are difficult to deal with); they have all kinds of problems with these children so we ought to come along and say, "Look there is no sense in bringing deformed children into the world, it's a tough enough place anyway."  So, they jumped on the bandwagon for their agenda's sake and mounted, as it were, more arguments for abortion.

Then came along the whole Feminist Movement.  The Feminist Movement took the expression of sexual freedom one step beyond.  They basically said, "We not only want to be sexually free without consequence, but we want to be able to put on our blue suit and take our briefcase and go to work every day too.  We want to compete in a man's world as equals and if we have to have babies [then] we can't do that."  "Women are not equal," they said, and I am quoting, "to men unless they are rid of childbearing responsibilities."  Betty Friedan (sp.), who is a leader of the Feminist Movement said, "Women must have abortion as a backup to contraceptive failure."  Contraception first, and if it doesn't work then abortion because we can't be bothering with children.  We have got to go to work and make our way in a man's world. 

So you had the Sexual Revolution compounded by this sort of genetic game playing from those people who wanted to eliminate the deformed from society, and adding to that compound problem is the third feature which is the feminist argument: "If we are going to work in a man's world and to be equal to men in every way, we can't be fussing around at home with kids, so we have got to eliminate them from our lives." 

Then you had another component, another piece came into the platform from the population control advocates who were telling us that we all were going to be standing on each others heads if we kept having babies.  We were all going to be crushing each other out of existence because the world was going to be overpopulated; and I read all of that.  Don't you remember reading that in the 60's?  Everyone was screaming about overpopulation.  I remember finding an old book that was written in 1918, in which a man said, "If something doesn't change--we have too many horses in the streets of Chicago, and at the projected rate it's going right now, in another 25 years the city of Chicago will be 18 feet deep in manure."  It is the same kind of reasoning: we are all going to drown in a sea of babies.

All of this fed the building of this platform; it was all material fed into this building project to build the platform upon which the Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion verdict came down on January 26, 1973.  At that point the Supreme Court of the United States excluded unborn children from the protection of the 14th amendment, which says, "No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."  They said, "Unborn children aren't persons."  Yes, they are.  Yes, they are, and we will see that in a minute.

One of the professors at the Master's College, Dr. John Pilky (sp.), very astute (teaches in our English Lit. Dept), wrote me a little memo.  Listen to what it says,

The phrase "Pro Choice" (which is what the Pro abortionists use) strikes me as one of the most depraved, apocalyptically wicked, rhetorical facts in the history of western civilization in the Christian era.  The phrase means "Pro Sin" or "Free to Chose Sin."  The phrase would actually be less dreadful if it were "Pro Abortion" because that would confine it to the sphere of a particular moral problem, but by turning it to what seems a euphemism, the "Pro Choice" people have rung the final rhetorical "death knell" to the entire Democratic experiment. 

The phrase "Pro Choice" means "without conscience, or without inhibition, or without restraint," and it parades itself under the Jeffersonian banner of liberty of conscience and separation of Church and State.  As a rhetorical gesture, perfectly designed to function as a political banner, this phrase constitutes the last word: the official formulation of official apostate defiance against the God of Christianity.

I am confident that God will answer it apocalyptically.

Yes, I believe that he is right.  I believe abortion is the last official stand of the defiant apostate against God.  It says, "God, you will not determine who lives or dies--I will!"  The ultimate apostasy.

That's where we are in our culture, and we are there by law--the law of our own government.  The court ignored the issue of when life begins, which is a medical/scientific issue, even though criminals have been successfully prosecuted for killing unborn children in an attack on a pregnant mother.  That child is considered a non-person if its own mother decides to kill it; if a criminal kills it they are prosecuted; if the mother kills it is a non-person. 

As far a I can tell, and my research may not be exhaustive, but as far as I can tell, there is no nation on the face of the earth with a more permissive abortion policy than the United States, with the single exception of China.  It is reflective of our prurient, lascivious, immoral, perverted Sexual Revolution; of the deviation from God ordained role for men and women.  It is reflective of our selfish, materialistic value system.  It is reflective, most of all, of our atheistic ethic hostile to God, and we now have a holocaust; and we have a holocaust which God will judge, and I will talk about that tonight, and I will talk about what it means that the blood of the murdered victim cries out from the ground against the one who did the murder.

Medical science has clearly established that conception brings about an unique individual life.  Life begins at conception; that is absolutely a medical fact.  [Here is] an illustration from a secular source, Dr. Jerome LaJunge (sp.), professor of Fundamental Genetics at the University of Rene' De Cart (sp.) in Paris; this is a quote,

Life has a very long history but each individual has a very neat beginning--the moment of its conception.  The material link is the molecular thread of DNA.  In each reproductive cell this ribbon is cut into 23 pieces or chromosomes.  As soon as the 23 paternally derived chromosomes are united through fertilization to the 23 maternal ones the full genetic meeting necessary to express all the inborn qualities of the new individual is gathered, i.e., personal constitution.

And if I may digress from the quote a moment to say: everything is there that is reflected in full adulthood; all the component building material is there.  LaJunge goes on to write,

At two months of age, the human being is less than one thumb length from the head to the rump.  He would fit at ease in a nutshell, but everything is there: hands, feet, head, organs, [and] brains; in the fourth week, his consciousness.  All are in place.  His heart has been beating for a month already and fingerprints can be detected.  His heart is beating at two months at 150 to 170 beats a minute.  To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion.

Well, there at least is an introduction to the issue.  The Supreme Court of the United States of America has voted under pressure, pressure and influence from those who are engaged in a sexual revolution; from those who want to eugenically control who gets to be born or who dies; from those feminists who want to be sure there are no responsibilities that women have that men don't have; from those who would pour unto our agenda, as it were, a fear factor in terms of over-population.  All these people have orchestrated, I think, under the co

Doc viewed 4632 times.

Related Content

This articles keywords/phrases are:

The articles in the list below have 1 or more of the same keywords or phrases as the article you are viewing. If you wish to hone in on a single keyword, click on that keyword and you will see a list of articles that match just that keyword.

Site and Hosting Sponsored by:
Invite Them Home SEO Solutions