Big things are happening. Obama vs. McCain. Joe the plumber. Vicki's daughter Catherine preparing for Saturday wedding. I'm posting when I should be preparing for wedding also, oh well, there is never any anxiety at wedding time, all is calm, cool, and collected.

Linda, you asked that I provide a synopsis of last Sunday's sermon on THOU SHALT NOT MURDER. The following is a brief review of the themes.

The sermon sought to answer 3 questions:

1. what constitutes murder
2. what does Jesus and NT. add to Moses' words
3. how does the commandment speak to us today


I. What constitutes murder?

Numbers 35 distinguishes between accidental killing and intentional killing. The latter is not punishable by death, but the former is. Yet even the latter does not go without consequences the killer must be confined to a city of refuge, otherwise the avenger(normally a family member) has the right to enact vengeance on the perpetrator. Our laws make similiar distinctions. Also killing in military service or police action is not murder even if the intent is to kill. In those instances the individual is a servant of the state and acting as its representative and not as an individual citizen (Rom. 13:1-7).

2. What does Jesus and the NT add?

In the Sermon on the mount Jesus said even anger can be a murderous attitude. Thus Jesus warns us of the danger of anger and Paul adds that we must learn to be angry without sinning.
(Eph. 4:25ff.). Paul urges us to deal with anger on a daily basis rather than allowing it to develop like a cancer.

3. How does it apply today

Few of us and I assume none of us have knowingly killed a innocent person. Murder assumes that the victim did not deserve to die and that an injustice has taken place. Today the question of murder has to be attached to the question of life. In other words, we need a clear definition of both, because abortion for instance is justified by many because what is destroyed is not considered life by many. Thus the question of when life begins is the question of the day. Abortion is usually premeditated and thus intent is involved.

Barack Obama said the answer to when life begins is beyond his pay grade. A course in biology or genetics should be required for a presidential candidate. Plenty of scientists approve of abortion; however, none can deny that from the time the egg is fertilized by the sperm a new entity that is no part of the mother exists. We know this because the genetic code of this new entity is different from every cell of the mother's body. The new code is that of a new person. Just because it does not yet look like a fully developed adult human does not mean that it is not human life. An acorn doesn[t look like an Oak tree, but it will never be anything else. The life of the Oak tree is alive in the acorn. Those few cells that constitute the earliest stages of the embryo are not dead, they are multiplying and developing and represent the same beginning of human life that we all experience in our mother's womb. To intentionally destroy those cells is to murder human life just as to intentionally kill an adult human is murder.

Sunday, I was asked about those who once upon a time thought life began with the first movement of the baby in the womb and thus provided legal protection for life in the womb only after quickening. It is true that such was the assumption for hundreds of years and that it has only been in relatively recent history that we have become aware of when life begins from a scientific point of view. My answer is that we obey God's will to the best of our human understanding whether 1st century or 21st century. Today we know better than our ancestors knew and thus we should live accordingly.

To create human embryo for experimental purposes with the ultimate goal of destroying the embryo is again to create human life with the goal of murdering the life.

When life ends is a more difficult question because we now have a diffent definition than once prevailed. Its no longer a question of when the heart stops pumping blood through our body, but now its when brain wave activity ceases, in both the higher and lower parts of the brain. Some would opt for death when only a part of the brain activity has ceased. Because of modern technology we can keep organs functioning after brain wave activity has ceased. This issue carries us into the question of what it means to be "in the image of God". What does it mean to be a human etc.. If I were teaching a class on this subject I would want to explore those questions, but in a sermon time does not allow.

We must distinguish between prolonging life and prolonging the dying process. Sometimes that's a difficult call. However, one certainty can be determined and that is if a doctor or anyone injects anything into a patient that has no aim other than producing death, then one is killing with an intent to kill. Thus there is no biblical grounds for mercy killing or assisted suicide. If pain management ends in death as an unintentional consequence that is a gray area for which I have no easy answer, but my opinion is that such would not be murder. However, in such instances I think we would do well to talk to God before and after such treatment.

One thing further and that is that many of us (pro-lifers) seem to be interested only in life in the womb. Once a child is born, we don't seem to have nearly as much concern about whether he has food, clean water, and medicine. We offer money to many causes but often ignore the starving and abused children of the world. God will not smile upon us if we are pro life only as one enters the world and as one is about to depart the world.