A Reply to Credenda Agenda's "Moving Beyond Prolife"
                                                                         (Vol. 8, No. 5).
  
 
Dear Editors,
Your Credenda Agenda article, "Moving Beyond 'Pro Life' " (Vol. 8, No. 5), broached issues
upon which the life and death of untold millions depend. I agree with much of the article and
appreciate your willingness to consider my efforts to clarify the issues in question.
Your position was summarized succinctly: Our duty in providing a faithful testimony has three parts.
First, we must continue to preach the gospel of forgiveness. We provide faithful testimony as we
preach the gospel to every creature (Mk. 16:15). Part of this testimony includes the insistence that
abortion is murder. In this respect, every Christian must be consistently pro-life.
Second, we must flee when we are persecuted, if flight is possible (Matt. 10:23).
Third, we must take up arms to defend God's covenant children (Neh. 4:14). But we may not use
violence until they come after our children. We ought not take up arms to overthrow the established
authorities or to defend the lives of Molech worshipers and their children.
Your first point is well received. Abortion must be exposed as murder from God's law.  And to be consistently believable we must also act as though abortion is murder by resisting  it as God's law requires. The sixth commandment not only forbids murder but also requires  using the means necessary to defend against murder--including lethal force.
Inconsistent Reasoning*
Surely, the whole point of the Good Samaritan is that the duties of the second great commandment
(not excluding the use of defensive force) apply to all our fellow men and not just those in covenant
with us. The position that unbelievers should be protected from the elements by clothing them but not
from assailants by defending them is inconsistent. If the commandment is to love your neighbor as
yourself, and if the Bible's definition of neighbor includes non-Christians, then you must love your
non-Christian neighbor as yourself.
But not only must believers and unbelievers be defended similarly, this duty is inalienable and must be
performed though men forbid it. The first commandment, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me"
requires that the obedience demanded by God, in this case the defense of children, be rendered in spite
of human prohibition. Otherwise, men would be obeyed rather than God (Acts 5:29). Thus, to neglect
the protection of your unborn neighbor in deference to men is to enthrone vile men above God by
prostrating yourself in the blood of the unborn.
The belief that God has endowed men with inalienable rights is also fundamental to all democratic
governments. Such governments are based on individuals joining together to have their rights recognized
(especially the right to defend life). Thus, if individuals deny they have a prior right to defend life they have
no basis for expecting the government to exercise this right on their behalf by making abortion illegal.
This leads to your third point, "We ought not take up arms to overthrow the established authorities
or to defend the lives of Molech worshipers and their children." You rightly distinguish between using
arms to defend individuals and using arms to overthrow a government. If someone defends his child
contrary to the law it doesn't necessarily mean he is trying to overthrow the government. Over-
throwing a government requires appointed leaders and an organized force, but defending your child
doesn't.
Many who oppose individual defense confuse it with corporate defense and claim it requires the
leadership needed in corporate defense; but official approval isn't needed for you to protect your child.
When oppressive  authorities require such a sinful omission, the individual may not shirk his duty to God
in the hopes that eventually  the government will change and he will be given permission to obey God.
Rather, the imposition of any degree of  any sin must be resisted utterly and at once.
  This brings to view your point about fleeing when flight is possible. You rightly support this tactic
from Matt. 10:23, "When they persecute you in this city, flee to another." In this instance, as well as after
Pentecost, several things should be noted about the apostolic response to a prohibition to obey God's
commands. First, they immediately asserted their rights and never stopped doing so. Some fled from city
to city, but they continually obeyed God by saving others as they went. It is equally instructive to notice
what they did not do. When forbidden to save people, they didn't comply and hope that educational and
legislative means would some day make it legal. Neither did they just save those in the covenant. Nor was
their intent to overthrow the government; they just obeyed God by standing for the truth and saved as many
people as possible. Their bold stand brought persecution; but this gave credence to their position and
ultimately persuaded the government to legalize their efforts.
              "They saved others as they would have wanted to be saved."
If they had responded to the prohibition to save souls as we have to the prohibition to save lives, they
would have been as successful as we have been; but they saved others as they would have wanted to be
saved and God blessed their efforts. And while many fled, many did not; nor did they flee from their duty
in fear.
Lev. 26:36 & 37 shows that the blindness of heart and fear that causes God's people to flee before their
enemies is a curse God places on them for neglecting His commands. Therefore, our response to the prohibition
to save lives should be similar to the fearless apostolic response to the prohibition to save souls.
The cutting edge of Satan's current attack is the abortionist's knife. To scorn the duty to repel this
lethal force with force is to evade both the first and the second great commandments by not defending
your neighbor as you would yourself in disobedience to God. Therefore, to disdain God's means for
preventing murder is to cut the heart from the gospel by failing to join faith with good works. To persist
in this neglect is to continually expose both Christ's name and those made in His image to defilement.
The solution is to show your faith in God's word by repenting of this neglect.
The abortion plague is many times more horrible than the AIDS plague; however, the marvelous news is
that God's cure is finally coming to light. The key to successfully making abortion illegal is for the people to
assert their right to defend life so the government will do so on their behalf. News of the cure must be
proclaimed throughout the world. Praise God for His deliverance and shout the good news!
Paul Hill
Starke, FL
The Authorized Paul Hill website.
Paul Hill  "I think more people should act the way I acted."
Pensacola News Journal Sept 3, 2003 AD
Paul Hill links page.
Paul Hill "I think those bullets should be pointed in the direction of abortionists."
Pensacola News Journal Sept 3, 2003 AD
To View Helpless babies murdered by babykilling abortionists click here.
Back to Army of God Home Page.
Genesis 9:6
Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed:
for in the image of God made he man
.
Numbers 35:33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are:
for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the
blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.
To contact e-mail: Glory2Jesus@ArmyofGod.com
  Telephone 1-757-685-1566
  Or write to: Rev. Donald Spitz
                     Glory to Jesus Ministries
                     P.O. Box 16611
                     Chesapeake VA 23328