The Beginning of Life

 Comments Off
May 292011
 
IMG014

by Darrel Smith, Publisher, ChristsInternet.com

Many people seem to be confused about when life begins. Some maintain that life begins at birth, others believe that life begins when the unborn baby is capable of living independent of its mother, others argue that it begins when the baby can be felt moving inside its mother, and still others at the moment of conception or at some other time.

These arguments miss some very simple scientific facts. No one has ever observed the beginning of life because life began many thousands of years ago. Since that beginning, life is always transferred, and it is always transferred in kind. Eagles always transfer life to baby eagles, horses transfer life to baby horses and humans transfer life to baby humans. In humans, life is transferred through a living contribution from a mother and a father.

Conception is the beginning of a genetically unique new human life that was formed from this union of the mother and father’s living contributions. From the moment of conception, all this new human life needs to fully develop are the same things a two-year-old child or you or I need – nutrition and protection.

In our society, the Supreme Court has ruled that unborn humans don’t have the protection provided to “persons” in the Constitution. This legal argument has been used twice before in modern western history. In the early history of this country black slaves suffered from this same legal classification. Later in Germany, the courts classified Jews as non-persons. The supporters of this classification for unborn human beings are following a truly shameful and dangerous history.

What choice will you make? Will you protect human life?

Check out these sites for ways to become involved:

Personhood USA

National Right to Life

Prolife.com

The Mount Vernon Statement

SIGN the Manhattan Declaration

National Pro-life Religious Council

Prolife Across America

 
Fetus in trees

When Prime Minister Harper announced that abortion funding would not be included in his health initiative for the upcoming G8 Summit in June, the enraged liberal opposition determined to squash him and all the other conservatives. Under normal circumstance, they WOULD have…

by Dean Smith
Special to ASSIST News Service

OTTAWA, ONTARIO (ANS) — Canada is run by a minority government. The ruling Conservative party holds 144 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons and must rely on support from at least one opposition party (Liberal, Bloc or NDP) to govern.

Since the combined opposition holds the balance of power they can, if agreed, pass motions forcing the government to take certain actions.

The G8 summit

This June (2010), Canada is hosting the G8 summit -– representing the eight wealthiest nations. As host, Prime Minister Stephen Harper plans to encourage G8 nations to provide financial support to women and children in impoverished nations.

When Harper -– an openly evangelical Christian — announced abortion funding was not included in this initiative, the Liberals took action. They initiated a motion requiring Harper to include a “full range of family planning, sexual and reproductive health options” in his proposal. Though, it purposefully avoided mentioning abortion, it was clearly the underlining message.

Strategically, the Liberals hoped to drive a wedge between Conservatives opposing abortion and those supporting it. On her blog, Liberal MP Dr. Carolyn Bennett penned the vote would be a “day of reckoning” for the Conservative party.

Call to pray and FAST

When the Liberals announced their plan to implement the vote on March 23, 2010, a number of national prayer groups sprung into action. In particular, 4myCanada initiated an urgent call to supporters. 4MyCanada is a Christian activist group that combines intensive prayer initiatives with political activism.

On March 20, they sent their first e-email which said: “We are calling an EMERGENCY 3 Day Fast Re-Global Abortion Motion.”

It went on to say,

“In Canada we have seen tangible and notable shifts in our nation through massive prayer and fasting. These are times to use the powerful tool of prayer and fasting – now is one of those times.

“We encourage you to consider a water only fast and to set aside times to pray fervently for this in the next 3 days. (Note: if you are not used to fasting we encourage you to perhaps do a liquids only fast and consult a doctor before you do a full fast (water only).”

Over the next three days, email alerts urged supporters to continue their prayer and fasting vigil.

A March 23, 2010, e-mail read,

“We want to let you know this: your prayers are working and our MPs are hearing the voice of Canadians as we are bringing it. There has already been a shift this morning … Pray that many Liberals and NDP feel the heat today and change their minds. Again, let’s pray that their eyes would be opened to understand what they are truly pushing when they push abortion (it looks like we need about 10 – 15 NDPers, Bloc or Liberals to vote against the motion for it to fail).”

Voting day – confusion reigns

With opposition parties firmly onside, the Liberals marched into the Canadian House of Commons on March 23 fully anticipating victory.

Despite Liberal party leader Michael Ignatieff stating earlier his MPs were free to vote according to their conscience, behind closed doors it was a whipped vote. This meant all Liberals were expected to be in the House to support the motion -– even those opposing abortion, which was why the word abortion was purposefully omitted.

But instead of solidarity, confusion reigned. While many Liberal MPs were told it was a whipped vote, a significant number hadn’t received the message. Thirteen Liberal MPs were missing, including some anti-abortion MPs who were told to stay away if they couldn’t support the motion. Others simply abstained.

Meanwhile, three Liberal MPs -– who opposed abortion and weren’t told it was a whipped vote -– took their Liberal leader at his word, and voted according to their conscience.

In a stunning upset, the motion was defeated 144 to 138.

A MP Blackberried 4myCanada from the floor of the House of Commons immediately after the vote stating, “You guys did it! This is an Act of God before our eyes!”

There was so much confusion on the Liberal bench, it carried over to the next motion presented by the Conservative party. Chronicle Herald reporter Stephen Maher described the chaos: “To make matters worse, in the confusion after the lost vote, Liberal MP Maurizio Bevilacqua misunderstood Cuzner’s [the Liberal whip] shouted instructions and stood to vote for a budget bill the Liberals opposed. Several other MPs followed.”

One Liberal MP portrayed the bedlam as “Clown city,” another said, “We look like fools.”

National Post columnist Don Martin depicted the debacle as

“A needlessly provocative Liberal move to sneak abortion back on the agenda, aimed at dividing the Conservatives, actually drove a wedge deep into the official opposition.” He described the unexpected Liberal defeat as “jaw-dropping.”

The power of fasting

The apostle Paul exhorts Christians to pray for government (1 Tim 2:1, 2). But there is an important element that needs to be included — fasting. As we pray God’s will in a situation, fasting works along side disrupting satanic strategies, attacks and loosening its grip on a situation.

Isaiah 58:6 outlines the power behind a true fast:

“Is this not the fast which I choose, To loosen the bonds of wickedness, To undo the bands of the yoke, And to let the oppressed go free And break every yoke?”

In the Book of Esther – which records the Jewish captivity in Persia — we witness first hand the power of fasting. The Jewish presence was not universally accepted and Haman, a senior Persian bureaucrat, hatched a plot to massacre the Jews on a single day and plunder their wealth (Esther 3:13-15).

Curiously, a few thousand years later, the Nazis orchestrated a similar one-day persecution of the Jews referred to as Reichskristallnacht, the night of the broken glass. On November 17, 1938, 7,000 Jewish businesses were plundered and 1,668 synagogues were vandalized with many destroyed. Ninety Jews were reportedly killed but the actual number was much higher and 30,000 Jews were sent to temporary concentration camps – an omen of what was to come.

In Persia, Haman even planned his own personal vendetta, constructing a gallows to kill Mordecai, a Jew who hung around the palace because a relative in his care – Esther – was chosen as the new Queen for King Ahasuerus.

Esther’s heritage was unknown to everyone, including Haman and her husband. As word trickled out on the planned massacre, Mordecai urged Esther to use her influence to change the King’s mind. But even her privileged position didn’t allow an unsummoned approach of her husband. If the King didn’t receive her, she would be executed.

Initially resistant, Esther finally agreed, but with one provision:

“Go, assemble all the Jews who are found in Susa, and fast for me,” Esther said. “Do not eat or drink for three days, night or day. I and my maidens also will fast in the same way. And thus I will go in to the King, which is not according to the law; and if I perish, I perish.” (Esther 4:16 NASV)

The wording implies the fast actually involved two full days, and on the third day Esther approached and was received by her husband (Esther 5:1, 2). Haman’s plot was exposed. The plan to kill the Jews was stopped and Haman hung on the very gallows he built for Mordecai (Esther 7:9, 10).

God sends confusion

But confusion surrounding the abortion initiative was also significant as confusion was a signature of God’s intervention on behalf of Israel. During their journey to the Promised Land, God promised,

“I will send My terror ahead of you, and then throw into confusion all the people among whom you come, and I will make all your enemies turn their back to you.” (Exodus 23:27 NASV)

And confusion proved an effective weapon. In one instance, the Philistines were so confused they ended up attacking each other (1 Samuel 14:20). In 1 Samuel 7, the Israelites again under Philistine attack, entered a one day fast and prayer (v 6). In response, “the Lord thundered with a great thunder on that day against the Philistines and confused them, so they were routed before Israel.” (v 10 NASV)

But the G8 battle continues

The defeat of the abortion motion was noticed around the world. On March 30, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used an Ottawa news conference to attack Canada’s Prime Minister for not including abortion in his motion. She was in Ottawa for preparatory meetings for the G8 summit.

Clinton said, “You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception, family planning and access to legal, safe abortions.”

Then the UN World Health Organization (WHO) stepped in to criticize, while at the same time back-slapping the US position. WHO Director General Margaret Chan made the comment at an April 14th news conference where she was introducing WHO’s latest initiative to improve maternal and child health. There was a bit of damage control involved as WHO was embarrassed when Lancet, a British Medical Journal, released a report stating women deaths during child birth had dropped sharply from 526,300 in 1980 to 342,900 in 2008. This contradicted WHO’s recent report there had been no improvement. This is not the first time, a UN report has been severely undermined by outside — and some suggest unbiased – research.
—————————————————————————

Dean Smith works in the communications field. Visit his website at www.opentheword.org

www.assistnews.net/Stories/

Wow. What happened in Canada is Awesome. Our strength truly is in the Lord. We can fight the present US Administration – and Win….Yes We Can!!

“…if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.2 Chronicles 7:14

.

 

.
Groups claiming to speak for women are upset over a Pro-life Super Bowl ad.

The left goes bonkers over anyone outspokenly Christian or anti-abortion. Sarah Palin was trashed. Focus on the Family has been trashed. Now the Tebow’s.

These – well, truthfully, anti-women’s groups – are trying to make CBS drop an anti-abortion ad featuring 2007 Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his family.

They have never seen the ad. They have no real idea what it says. They just don’t want focus on the Family or the Tebow’s to be allowed to speak freely during the Super Bowl, in an ad fully paid for by Focus on the Family.

Let me make something perfectly clear to the anti-baby, anti-woman organizations currently attacking the Tebows:

You do not speak for me. Please don’t pretend to speak for all women.

I look forward to seeing the Tebow ad during the Super Bowl, and fully support freedom of Speech for all individuals and organizations.

“Freedom of speech” is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. It is not implied, assumed, or conveniently read into the wording. It’s really there.

I oppose any use of public funds for these alleged women’s organizations, especially in light of their efforts to deny other individuals and organizations the right to use private funds in communicating their message.
.

Jan 182010
 

.
Enough is enough. Christians from all Denominations and across all walks of life are coming together to oppose the progressive legislation that attacks human life, the week and vulnerable, and the family.

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

They call this the “Manhattan Project” because Christian leaders met in Manhattan to discuss and begin this. Essentially, it calls us to civil disobedience if that is need be. It says –

“We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:

1.the sanctity of human life
2.the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3.the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”

Join us – read & sign the Manhattan Declaration at www.manhattandeclaration.org/

More Christian News, Resources and Media at www.christsinternet.com/

.

 

.
Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo, a nurse from Brooklyn, was forced to assist in an abortion last May. Her supervisors told her that it was a medical emergency, and that if she didn’t participate, she could lose her job. Turns out that there was no medical emergency. For Cenzon-DeCarlo, this was tantamount to murdering a baby, and she’s struggled with it emotionally and spiritually ever since.

And can you believe this? Liberal commentators are saying she shouldn’t have taken the job if she didn’t want to do the work.

Let me get this straight. Obama is all over the place complaining about a so-called health crisis, while at the same time, lefties commenting on the above article are saying things like, “if preforming termination of pregnacy is not you line of work then leave the job,” and “Don’t we file this one under “It comes with the job, toots?

So…those of you that believe Cenzon-DeCarlo should have gotten another job: Do you honestly think that this nurse is the only one that doesn’t want to participate in abortions? Do you think there aren’t any doctors that feel the same way? Do you realize that a large number in the medical profession are Christians? If you are willing to mandate they participate, do you know how many people will walk off the job? Doesn’t matter if you don’t think it’s murder. The people that will walk away from the medical profession do.

I am a former RN. I left the field 16 years ago after I got tired of the way nurses were treated. For one example, I was told I couldn’t tell any of my staff if there was an AIDS patient on the floor due to “patient confidentiality.” My LPN’s and Nsg. Assts were allowed to know any other diagnosis. Patient confidentiality didn’t matter with any other disease. Aids was the only illness they weren’t allowed to know. This was on a unit where an AID’s patient was wiping his feces all over his bedroom walls. People that aren’t responsible for cleaning up that type of thing can say what they want. I stuck up for my staff.

That’s just one of many examples. I’m not the only nurse to walk away over such issues. Others have obviously stayed in the field. But mandating participation in abortions – that’s a major line to cross over.

If you want Canadian style Health Care, where the staff to patient ratio is a fraction of what it is in the states, keep up your rhetoric. Pay your medical professionals less, and tell them they don’t have any rights. Keep it up and see what happens. Then be happy with yourself when someone you love has to wait for days or weeks to get the medical care they need.

Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo is right to be upset and file suit. She wasn’t abandoning a patient. MT Sinai had plenty of time to find a replacement. Mt Sinai abandoned its staff. I hope she gets everything she is asking for. Hospitals should not be allowed to do that to people. We still have freedom of Religion in this country. At least for now…
,

Jun 022009
 


Dr. George Tiller as shot and killed Sunday; murdered, presumabley by a pro-life advocate.

As many have pointed out, it makes no sense for a pro-life advocate to take the life of another human being.

Some pro-life advocates disagree and claim that because Dr. Tiller was murdering children and continued to do so despite years of legal attempts to stop him, there were no other options.

However, Nancy Keenan, president of abortion-rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America, issued a statement praising Tiller’s commitment. “Dr. Tiller’s murder will send a chill down the spines of the brave and courageous providers and other professionals who are part of reproductive-health centers that serve women across this country. We want them to know that they have our support as they move forward in providing these essential services in the aftermath of the shocking news from Wichita,” Keenan said.

They have her support. Wonderful. The murder of Dr. Tiller is a crime and much more important than the rhetoric that Nancy Keenan spits out. Did you notice how she took his murder and turned it into an advertisement for her and her group? I imagine, having been aquainted with her work and rhetoric in Montana government years ago, that she is tickled this tragedy happened as it gave her a chance to get some attention in the papers and might help bring favor on Obama’s Supreme Court pick. The Supreme Court fight probably had her worried this last week. I hate it when people use a tragedy to bolster their sick agendas.

Dr. Tiller was murdered and the killer needs to be punished. But that doesn’t suddenly make the killing of innocent children okay.
.
.

May 152009
 

.
Many Notre Dame Students are supporting Obama and are glad to see him speaking at their commencement. They are outraged that “outsiders” are raising a stink about Obama.

It is unfornate and sad that these students were able to spend four years at a supposedly Catholic Christian University, but learned nothing about God and about being a disciple of Jesus Christ. Obviously, Notre Dame didn’t do its job and educate these students. The students that were interviewed were clueless as to why the protestors were there. (How much did their parents pay for the education they received??)

Notre Dame was originally founded with the intention of furthering the cause of Christ and raising up new generations of Christians. When and why did Notre Dame leave their original purpose?

Maybe it’s appropriate that Obama receives an honorary degree from this university – a piece of paper earned for just showing up and having paid his dues. Many of these graduates are receiving one as well.
.

Apr 062009
 

.
I recieved this letter from a friend today:

“I am sending this out to some people on my list who profess to adhere to Christian principles or those principles that are similar. As you know, America is in trouble. We now have an administration that is taking advantage of this economic crisis to fund social re-engineering projects under the pretense of “economic stimulus” with no financial basis from which to draw the money being handed out. We are seeing a huge percentage of funds in these early hand-outs going to efforts that will continue to erode the freedoms we now enjoy.

“I normally do not send out a petition like this. In fact, I am often skeptical of them or their effectiveness, but my mind is changing. We are called to peacefully petition our government for righteousness and justice. This is an opportunity. A simple signature on this petition is one more effort to accomplish that. And, passing it on to others you know with similar adherence to the principles of a limited republic established by our founders will allow them to express their position.

“Though we would like to separate abortion, the subject of this petition, from “the economy”, we cannot. And the administration is showing it will not. As Francis Schafer taught us more than 30 years ago, “Abortion leads to infanticide and infanticide leads to genocide.” It happened in Germany and is happening in America.

“With the unfolding of current events as rapidly as they are, this is our first step in resistance to evil. The next step is currently brewing around the United States. I am reading of “tea parties” (open resistance to this massive government spending and taxing) that are already scheduled in over 2,000 cities across the US for tax day, April 15. If we ignore our government‘s actions via methods like this simple petition, we will then be given the opportunity to also ignore the increasingly open rebellion that is brewing. It is best to peacefully resist in favor of freedom, always first and whenever possible. I fear that if we do not, we will be facing the same thing German citizens did prior to Hitler’s rise to power. That rise became unstoppable because the church not only stood aside but often endorsed Mr. Hitler’s philosophies and ultimately his actions of genocide. Few resisted and though there were others, Dietrich Bonhoeffer is the only name that comes to mind. Do I say genocide is coming to America? All I can say is that we are following the same trail and I believe we need to resist every attempt to take our freedoms away unless, like the German people and the illustrated frog in slowly heating water, we wake up one day seeing a cauldron around us and wonder whatever might have caused this?

“If you do not live in the States, I suggest you forward this on to those who you know do.

“President Elect Obama said during the campaign that one of the first things he wanted to do was sign Foca (Freedom of Choice Act) into law.

“Foca would lift all restrictions on abortions.It would force all faith based hospitals to perform abortions. Christian Doctors would be forced to do abortions even if they felt it was wrong, because it would now be law. The Parents of younger girls would not need to be notified. And lots more. We need to sign the petition against F.O.C.A.

Please go to http://www.fightfoca.com/ and sign the petition.
Thank you.

Sincerely, Russ Wahl”
.

Jan 072009
 

.
A while ago I was thinking through the whole dynamics on how partial birth abortions are performed.

Okay, so you have this mother that is supposedly in distress from this child and needs to have the child removed ASAP – to save her life.

So the doctor begins the abortion by inducing birth. Then he stops the birth “mid-stream” in order to take the time to turn the baby around, so it is coming out breach – feet first.

How long does that process take, and what effect does it have on the mother in distress?

Then he allows the birth to continue – but stops it short before the head emerges.

At this point, he kills the baby with a sharp object to the base of the skull. How much time does that take?

Alright, so we’ve done this partial birth and abortion ASAP to save the mother’s life, but delayed it a couple of times in order to perform the murder? is that right?

And…this is my confusion – wouldn’t the birth have happened a lot sooner if it has simply been allowed to run it’s course with a live birth – and relieve the mother’s distress more quickly?

And then – here is the real, real big confusion. Why was the murder necessary? If they had already begun an early birth, and the child was already on his way out…and within a few minutes the mother was going to be free of the child anyway…I don’t get it. Why was the murder medically necessary?

Just asking.

I guess I have my own assumptions as to why partial birth abortion occurs despite its obvious nonsensical purpose. I base this assumption on those questions, as well as reports that near term babies are frequently placed in a freezer at the abortion clinic.

If the babies head is born, the child is considered a live birth. So if the child’s head is jabbed after it comes out, then courts would presumabley agree that the child was murdered.

Therefore, the child must first be turned in the womb so that the head is the last to come out and can be easily stuck in its base prior to a completed birth. In this way, it’s not considered murder. Right?

But why must the child be stuck in the head? Why not some other form of killing it while it is still in the mother’s body?

It seems this method of murder is an attempt to keep many of the baby’s tissues in good shape -undamaged by chemicals or tools. etc.

So what is the doctor’s purpose in recommending and performing a partial birth abortion, when – if the mother is truly in distress – she would be relieved quicker without it, and there is no medical reason for the child to actually be killed?

I have to wonder about the freezers these children are placed in and the purpose of perserving their tissues. If my assumptions are correct, I come to the personal conclusion that this isn’t about what’s good for mother’s or babies – it’s about what’s good for the Doctor and clinic financially. This is an industry, period.
.

Jan 062009
 

Does the Hebrew Bible deal explicitly with the subject of Abortion in Exodus 21:22?

Rabbi Balfour Brickner of New York once claimed that it does. He relates the verse and comments, “If men strive, and wound a pregnant woman so that her fruit be expelled, but no harm befalls her, then shall he be fined as her husband shall assess, and the matter placed before the judges….” The meaning of this text is straightforward. Only monetary compensation is exacted from whoever causes a woman to miscarry. Since the unborn fetus is not considered a person, the one responsible cannot be held liable for the taking of human life and certainly not for murder.”

But no where does it refer expressly to the woman and not the child. In fact, what the verse actually says is “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, [or are born prematurely] but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine.” Verse 23 goes on – “But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Rabbi Brickner believes that Jewish Scholars have proved it was only the woman being refered to, and he goes on to say that “Jewish Biblical commentators examined the ramifications of this text and in every instance based their rulings on their conviction that the fetus is not a child. In rabbinic terms, “it is not a living soul.” One example of this thinking will suffice. It is drawn from the Mishnah, Judaism’s earliest post-biblical authoritative interpretation of scripture. “A woman who is having difficulty giving birth is permitted to cut up the fetus inside her womb and take it out limb by limb because her life takes precedence. …” (Mishnah Ohalot: 7.6)”

He says that political actions to make “the fetus equivalent to a living, breathing human being [are] clearly unbiblical, un-Jewish, and if Christianity claims to be based on Biblical tradition, un-Christian. Political actions against abortion are even “harder to understand as they emanate from an administration whose leaders make a fetish out of their devotion to ” Christian religious values.” Instead, they have demonstrated their ignorance or their willingness to ignore religious law.”

What Rabbi Brickner is ignorant of or willing to ignore is the fact that Christians do not base their theology on Jewish teachings and writings outside of the Old Testament – the Hebrew portion of the Bible. We don’t ignore, but very pointedly don’t give top credence to extra Biblical writings. Jesus himself made reference to the Pharissitical use of extra-Scriptural writings as being more about what man wants then what God requires. (Mark 7:10-12) The Pharisees and Sadducees weren’t always correct and we Christians recognize that. Their extra-Scriptural religious law is NOT our law.

Further, the twisting of actual words of Scripture to suit ones own agenda is further aggravated by the picking and choosing of which verses to quote. Isn’t it interesting that those that choose to use this verse as an argument against abortion choose to ignore the verses surrounding it, such as Ex. 21:20-21, “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.” and verse 17, “Whoever curses his father or his mother shall be put to death.” How does the Rabbi explain the present day use of those verses, which come immediately prior to the verse he chose, the one whose misinterpretation he would like all Christians to follow in respect to abortion? I’m guessing he chooses not to address them.

(Christian response – these were Old Testament laws set up for the Israelite community for the purpose of showing them the need for law, their inability to follow law & remain sinless, and their need for an atoning savior to bring forgiveness to them for these sins – which they are unable to escape on their own. The Passover lamb and scape goat, as well as other parts of the law and atonement festivals were a fore-shadowing of the ultimate Passover lamb who would truly be able to bring them forgiveness for their sins. The Messiah. The stories told at Passover are also fore-shadows – a testament to the coming Christ ie the three Matzas, hiding the middle one, etc.)

I don’t say that out of disrespect for the Jewish Community. My paternal family had historically been part of the Jewish community – up unitl Germany in the mid-30′s. My father and his parents fled Germany at that time. Some of my relatives that stayed were shipped to Auschwitz in Poland and Theresienstadt in the Czech Republic. The rest we have not been able to trace past 1943.

I say that the Pharisees and Sadducees weren’t always correct out of respect for the truth and my Lord Jesus Christ, son of God – God the Father, God of my ancestors, God of Abraham, God of Israel: Yahweh. Adonai Eloheinu.

Rabbi Balfour Brickner, addressed in this commentary, was senior rabbi emeritus at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, New York, NY, and a member of the PPFA Clergy Advisory Board.

© 2012 Christ's Internet.com - News & Resource Portal Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha