Did I just read that "the mercy of the wicked are cruel"?
That is a hard truth to sit with.
People will say, "We are only trying to help the child so that he does not suffer in this world." It sounds compassionate on the surface, but what is presented as mercy is, in reality, a deeper cruelty.
Scripture teaches that a righteous person even cares for the life of his animals. If God expects such regard for beasts, how much more should we value and protect innocent human life?
What troubles me is how easily our culture redefines compassion. What is called kindness is often an attempt to avoid suffering by doing what God has forbidden. We call it mercy, but it is a grave injustice.
"The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel" because they seek relief at the expense of righteousness, calling evil good and cruelty compassion.
βWhoever is righteous has regard for the life of his beast, but the mercy of the wicked is cruel.β
Righteous people even regard the life of their beasts, how much more a helpless child in the womb?
If you have a lot of money, you also need a lot of wisdom.
When Scripture says that money is a defense, this is one of the contexts.
There are some kinds of wealth that require personal security details, heightened discretion, and a greater awareness of your environment. You can have so much money and still leave yourself dangerously exposed.
Wealth attracts attention both good and bad. If you lack the wisdom to protect yourself, you may end up losing your life unnecessarily, and everything you spent years building will pass into the hands of another.
This is why the Bible does not merely say money is a defense; it also says: "For wisdom is a defence, and money is a defence: but the excellency of knowledge is, that wisdom giveth life to them that have it" (Ecclesiastes 7:12).
Money can provide a measure of protection, but wisdom teaches you how to preserve both your life and your wealth. A wealthy man without wisdom can still die like a chicken, while a wise man understands that safeguarding what God has entrusted to him is part of good stewardship.
Once you hit a block of money as a young upcoming man in Nigeria, go to the closest divisional police headquarters, donate something, anything.
Collect a phone number from the DPO for "follow ups"
Save this just in case. Must I teach you everything?
I think identifying talent is often something learned through experience. After evaluating enough people, you develop an instinct for spotting potential. What appears to be intuition is usually the result of years of due diligence, observation, and pattern recognition becoming second nature.
You may be right 7 out of 10 times, and even in the 3 cases where you're wrong, you're often not completely off the mark. Experience doesn't guarantee perfection, but it significantly improves the odds of making the right judgment.
One thing we will eventually learn is that CT is not our modern-day church board that exists to accommodate every view, especially when those views stand in opposition to Scripture.
We gain nothing by standing with people, against God simply because their position is popular, emotionally appealing, or capable of earning us approval online. If a belief does not align with Scripture, our loyalty must remain with God rather than public opinion.
CT is not a room for popularity. Christianity does not exist to soothe us or affirm every desire we have. Rather, it calls us to repentance, obedience, and transformation.
As Christians, our goal is not to make the faith more comfortable for ourselves, but to live lives that are pleasing to God, offering ourselves as a living sacrifice to Him.
We have a church problem: many have been brought into the church, but few have been discipled into Kingdom culture. We remain too self-centered for a people who are called to be God-centered.
Part of the problem is our fixation on prosperity and the expectation that faith exists primarily to deliver the things we desire. The Kingdom, however, is not centered on getting God to serve our ambitions, but on surrendering ourselves to His will.
When we confess the Nicene creed, we take a stance on life. When we say:
βWe believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of lifeβ¦β
It means the God we serve is the author of life and he grants life as gift to all who participate in existence.
This is the faith we profess
I mean they keep asking how many person with DS have we adopted. If they kill everyone, would there even be a need to adopt anyone. There will always be more people born with DS, at what point would they realize that they cannot abort their way into a solution.
Science is progressing, and at a point even people with DS would leads an almost normal lives!
@Prezain_LJ It is not just insensitive but you just said you do kill the child.
The wickedness that abounds in the heart of many and it is not even funny.
Come and say you do kill your child!
If you like apply more logic to this!
Your heart is clear on the matter.
No, I do not think that is the issue.
More often than not, many Christians are simply not taught moral and ethical principles relating to reproduction, human dignity, and the sanctity of life. But even if your pastor has never addressed these issues, the responsibility to seek knowledge still rests with you.
Being a Christian does not automatically make every opinion Christian. A person can profess faith and still embrace positions that contradict the very principles they claim to uphold, especially when those positions are convenient or culturally acceptable.
Faith is not merely about attending church or repeating doctrines; it is also about pursuing truth and aligning one's convictions with it, even when doing so is unpopular or uncomfortable.
It is therefore possible for someone to identify as a Christian while supporting ideas that are fundamentally at odds with Christian moral teaching. The question is not what is convenient, but what is true and what is right.
@Etuk_Odiong@lamideee_a@DibiaErnesto Because they all have the church on their profile.
You have church on your profile then keep propagating anti-christian takes.
What do you have to say about people living with sickle cell disorder? Should they never have been born because their lives may involve pain and medical challenges?
Or is the concern really about public shame and social stigma?
If shame is sufficient reason to justify ending a life, then the principle does not stop with Down syndrome. Countless people face rejection, discrimination, hardship, and embarrassment throughout their lives. Yet we do not conclude that their lives are therefore not worth living.
It is one thing to argue that abortion is morally permissible. It is another thing entirely to argue that a human being is deserving of death because they have a disorder.
A person's worth is not diminished by a diagnosis. If anything, a compassionate society should focus on supporting those who face challenges, not deciding that their lives are less worthy of protection.
There is a certain irony in a person living with sickle cell disorder arguing that someone with Down syndrome should have been prevented from being born because they may experience suffering.
Both conditions can bring challenges, pain, and limitations. Yet the existence of those challenges does not diminish the value of a human life. If we accept the principle that potential suffering justifies ending a life before birth, we create a standard that could be turned against countless people who live meaningful and fulfilling lives despite adversity.
The question is not whether a person may suffer. Every human being will suffer in one way or another. The real question is whether suffering makes a life unworthy of being lived.
Is pain exclusive to those with Down syndrome?
If the reality of pain is universal, why should a life be taken because of suffering that may occur at one point or another during that person's lifetime? Pain, disappointment, hardship, and sorrow are experiences shared by all human beings to varying degrees. They are part of the human condition, not a characteristic unique to any particular group.
Or do you subscribe to the belief that life should be free from pain? If so, that is a standard no human being can meet. Every life, regardless of ability, health, wealth, or circumstance, will encounter challenges and suffering. Yet we do not measure the value of a life by the difficulties it may face. Rather, we recognize that human life possesses inherent worth despite its struggles.
If pain alone were sufficient justification for ending a life, then the principle would extend far beyond those with disabilities. The reality is that suffering is universal, but so too are resilience, joy, love, achievement, and the capacity to overcome adversity.