Lincoln Larsen

Christ died to save sinners! Happy husband, father, and PCA Pastor

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@JojoRRuba @bnuckols 2/2
Abolitionists refuse to do God's will in Satan's way. Good intentions (saving as many babies) don't justify sinful methods (advocating unjust partiality). The ends and the means must match and not undermine/contradict each other.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@JojoRRuba @bnuckols 1/2
It's actually directly relevant. Even theoretically, would you grant that some types of efforts to save babies COULD cross a line into sinful compromise and capitulation? And if so, where would you draw that line?

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@JojoRRuba @bnuckols Deflection - could you please answer the question about the ends justifying the means?

As for moral responsibility, we are all obligated to obey God's word, which clearly says governments must rule impartially, establish justice, and render to everyone their due. Do you agree?

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@JojoRRuba @bnuckols Straw man, sir.

Of course abolitionists want to save as many babies as possible (we all agree it's a godly desire, right?) but we believe it must be done in a godly way. We refuse to support laws that sacrifice some to save others.

Do you believe the ends justify the means?

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf If what you say is true, then perhaps we shouldn't take our cues from society! Why don't you join the fight to promote and defend a truly just, fair, righteous abolition bill?

Or is that too much to ask?

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous.

Heartbeat laws don't teach that all babies are equal, but that they are different. They communicate that there must be some difference between smaller babies and more developed ones - namely, that smaller babies can reasonably be killed.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Kinda hard to save babies with laws that grant the mother special murder rights, don't you think?

How about laws that 1) honor God, 2) establish equal justice, and 3) don't force us to speak out of both sides of our mouth (saying babies are fully human but not fully protected)?

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Did you know that you can be right and be prudent at the same time?

Abolitionists just believe that it is never prudent or wise to disobey God.

"You shall not pervert justice. You shall not show partiality... Justice, and only justice, you shall follow."
-Deuteronomy 16:19-20

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Your unspoken premise here is that political wins (and losses) are the real gauge of success. Thus, compromise becomes a necessary means to achieve that end.

Abolitionists have a different metric. We believe we win (and will be blessed) when we humbly obey God's revealed will.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Seriously???

How about before you act, you ask what GOD thinks?

The evening news will always frame you in the worst possible light, anyway.

Who gives a rip about the court of public opinion matter when you know you'll stand God's courtroom to give an account?

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf So because Wilberforce put forward abolition bills ~95% of the time, you're justified in supporting abolition bills a big fat 0% of the time?

Got it.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Scott, you should already know that abolitionists take their marching orders from Scripture, not from fallible historical figures.

But even so, Lincoln said, "The logic and moral power of Garrison and the anti-slavery people of the country and the army have done it all."

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Alliances with "moderates" that are built on faulty assumptions (older babies should be protected, but younger ones murdered) will not last, nor will they lead to political progress. Compromise only breeds more compromise and continued confusion.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf Scott, you work hard to show the consistent logic of your position (e.g. SLED), but then turn around and suggest legislative compromise. If you're right, act like it! Nothing is remotely "reasonable" about an arbitrary dividing line between some babies living and others dying.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@rolyasteroid @scottklusendorf I was being sarcastic. You could maybe make the case that there is an inadvertent connection between Trump and abolition, but he's certainly not "the only reason we can consider abolitionist bills…" In fact he has vowed NOT to ban abortion, and is essentially pro-choice.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@AbolitionistFAA Because God convicted me of my sinful, man-pleasing cowardice in the face of the greatest evil of our time.

[Lincoln Larsen @LincolnLarsen8]

@scottklusendorf (2) Call us idealistic, unrealistic, and angry, etc... but I hope you do realize that you are pouring water on the hottest fire in the anti-abortion cause. Do you not appreciate the zeal, urgency, and conviction - if you really want the same thing?