Posted on 03/07/2016 7:37:06 AM PST by Morgana
LifesiteNews.com reports on a risible claim about Jesus made by Amy Hagstrom Miller. Miller runs a chain of abortion clinics in Texas and is a key antagonist in the challenge to a Texas law regulating abortion clinics now before the Supreme Court. In an interview at AlterNet Miller contends:
I was raised in a liberal Christian tradition, and I come to the work because of that background, not in spite of it. The Jesus that I was taught about would be holding the hands of women inside the clinic; he wouldn’t be screaming at them. Acting on Christian principles is holding the hands of people at difficult times in their lives, and being supportive and nonjudgmental and kind.
If this was what she was taught about Jesus by the “liberal Christian tradition,” then she was taught badly, very badly indeed, and “liberal” Christianity comes in for a scathing indictment. While I characterize her comments as risible, her views reflect accurately how “liberal Christianity” justifies its support for abortion.
Everything that we know about Jesus from extant sources (as opposed, say, to what we “know” about Jesus from treating him as our own personal ideological cipher) indicates that Jesus would have intervened to protect the helpless child. And then he would likely be gracious to the offenders seeking to take the child’s life by calling them to a higher ethic of doing for others what they wish to be done for themselves (which, incidentally, would not include depriving their own selves of life).
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Satan is strong in this one.
The Lord felt the need to tell His Disciples to suffer (permit) the children to come to Him.
He would probably tell this generation, among other things,to suffer the to be born in the first place.
Delusional at best.
I'd invite him to our parish pulpit. After, of course, he's ordained a deacon.
Here is a classic example of liberal non compos mentis.
Dead soul, not a Christian. She runs a chaion of murder inc chambers; follow the money.
It goes to. show how wrong the *liberal Christian tradition* is then.
Since they don’t believe in the Bible anyway, they certainly aren’t teaching about the Jesus of the Bible.
The only one holding the hand of someone butchering their offspring would be Satan.
New International Version
“’Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molek, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD.
Lev 18:21
Age of child, what else is different?
It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.So I don't think Jesus would hold a woman's hand and tell her she is doing the right thing, and as for the abortionist, remember that Jesus drove moneychangers out of the temple with a whip.
Jesus might be raising the babies from the dead.
That will happen, according to Revelation. It must for the Day of Judgment to go forward.
And no, these little innocent ones will not be thrown into hellfire. They will testify against those who tore them apart and those who allowed them to be treated thusly.
I just love these liberation theology morons and their Hippy Jesus.
This one may be right. Jesus wouldn’t be screaming at the pregnant women. Considering what He did at the temple against the moneychangers, it’s not beyond belief that He would go into these clinics and kick some operating tables over.
Jesus chased the money changers from the temple with a knotted rope.
I think he has even less sympathy for this liberal “Christian”.
My sins are too many for me, I would hate to be one of these Mmurderers of the Innocent on the Judgement Day.
“Liberal” Christianity is like “moderate” Islam. There is no such thing possible according to the scriptures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.