“Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden”—Neither Pro-Life Nor Evangelical

Pro-life evangelicals for Joe Biden, which is really neither pro-life nor evangelical. Cal Beisner joins us today right here on the Christian Worldview Radio Program where the mission is to sharpen the biblical worldview of Christians and to share the good news that all people can be reconciled to God through faith in Jesus Christ.

I'm David Wheaton, the host, and our website is thechristianworldview.org. Now a group that calls itself pro-life evangelicals for Biden has released a document calling for evangelical Christians to vote for Democrat Joe Biden for president. Now why would professed pro-life Christians urge other Christians to vote for a candidate and party which holds the killing of pre-born babies as sacrosanct, even compelling unwilling taxpayers to fund it, especially when the other candidate and party, President Trump and Republicans, advocate for ending or at least reducing abortion? It is abundantly clear, except to the most deceived, that abortion is the intentional killing of a human being, a child that God created.

Psalm 139 says, for you God formed my inward parts, you wove me in my mother's womb. So how can one be a quote pro-life evangelical and vote for pro-abortion candidate Joe Biden? Cal Beisner, the founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, joins us today after penning an article about pro-life evangelicals for Biden committing two major mistakes in ethics. Let's get to the first segment of the interview. Cal, thank you for coming back on the program.

It's always a pleasure to have you on the program. I want to start out by reading a recent statement put out by pro-life evangelicals for Joe Biden. And the statement reads, join the movement, join Richard Mao, President Emeritus of Fuller Seminary, John Huffman, Board Chair Emeritus, Christianity Today, Jerusha Duford, Billy Graham's granddaughter, Ron Sider, President Emeritus of Evangelicals for Social Action, Brenda Salter McNeil, reconciler, professor, pastor, and Richard Foster, author of Celebration of Discipline, and others in signing the following statement. As pro-life evangelicals, we disagree with Vice President Biden and the democratic platform on the issue of abortion, but we believe a biblically shaped commitment to the sanctity of human life compels us to a consistent ethic of life that affirms the sanctity of human life from beginning to end.

Next paragraph. Many things that good political decisions could change destroy persons created in the image of God and violate the sanctity of human life. Poverty kills millions every year. So does lack of health care and smoking. Racism kills.

Unless we quickly make major changes, devastating climate change will kill tens of millions. Poverty, lack of accessible health care services, smoking, racism, and climate change are all pro-life issues. As the National Association of Evangelicals official public policy document insists, quote, faithful evangelical civic engagement and witness must champion a biblically balanced agenda. Therefore, we oppose, quote, one issue political thinking because it lacks biblical balance. Knowing that the most common reason women give for abortion is the financial difficulty of another child, we appreciate a number of democratic proposals that would significantly alleviate that financial burden.

Accessible health services for all citizens, affordable child care, a minimum wage that lifts workers out of poverty. For these reasons, last paragraph, we believe that on balance, Joe Biden's policies are more consistent with the biblically shaped ethic of life than those of Donald Trump. Therefore, even as we continue to urge different policies on abortion, we urge evangelicals to elect Joe Biden as president. That is from the statement from pro-life evangelicals for Biden. Now, Cal, the first question for you today is, what is biblically wrong and even deceptive about that statement? In my years as a seminary professor of ethics, I saw very few things that were more sinister and devious than the seemingly innocuous statement that is really the bedrock, the basis of this whole new public declaration that these folks have put out. They say, quote, biblically shaped commitment to the sanctity of human life compels us to a consistent ethic of life that affirms the sanctity of human life from beginning to end. Now, David, that's sinister and devious, not because life isn't sacred from beginning to end, but because those who use this statement are doing it to consistently hide a serious ethical confusion. What many people don't recognize is that this statement twists the meaning of the term pro-life and it makes two really fundamental errors in basic ethics. I mean, this is the kind of thing that, you know, you would learn in Ethics 101 first day in a seminary course.

The two basic ethical errors first. One has to do with what we would call intentionality. If you intentionally do something wrong, that is a more serious problem than if you do it accidentally or ignorantly. As Deuteronomy describes, two men might be out in the woods chopping trees down and the axe head flies off of one of the axes and it hits another man and it kills him. That's a completely accidental harm and there is to be no execution of the person whose axe head flew off.

So, intentionality is really important. In abortion, every successful procedure intentionally kills a human being, right? That's abortion.

Now, these folks want to tell us that pollution reduction, reducing smoking, reducing people's lack of access to adequate healthcare, all of these are pro-life issues. The trouble is that with pollution, with smoking, with lack of adequate healthcare, nobody sets out to murder somebody. Nobody sets out intentionally to kill somebody. When there is harm from those things, and sometimes there is, usually it's not death and it's never intentional. And of course, the second big difference is not just intentionality but what's the actual harm? In abortion, it's death. In air pollution, water pollution, poverty, lack of healthcare, it's usually not death. It's usually harm of a much lesser degree. And yet, scripture itself makes it very, very clear that killing is a much more serious sin and a much more serious crime than stealing or even assault and battery.

We can tell that from the different penalties prescribed for those different actions in biblical law. So now, the one third point that I would make is that words mean something. The dictionary editors figure out how to define a term by looking through vast amounts of human interaction, conversation and literature and so on, to see how a term is used. The term pro-life was coined in the 1970s or possibly the late 1960s, specifically to identify opposition to abortion. It wasn't designed to denote opposition to warfare or to capital punishment for certain crimes or to air pollution or water pollution or anything else. It was coined to denote opposition to abortion. And so, you can go to any standard dictionary or even for that matter to Wikipedia and look up pro-life and they all define it in terms of opposition to abortion. So now, when these folks say we are pro-life evangelicals for Biden because we like his views on environmental pollution or hunger or poverty or smoking or racism better than Trump's views on those things, what they're doing is they're stealing the term pro-life. They are obscuring its true meaning. Consequently, they're going to be dividing the pro-life movement and making it more difficult to elect to office people who truly are pro-life, who truly do want to set legal limits restricting abortion in this country and ultimately to prohibit it entirely. For them to claim to be pro-life is hypocritical in the extreme. Isn't this what liberals always do though?

They try to capture and twist language just like Satan did in the garden, by the way, twisting the words of God to try to achieve their desired ends. Cal Beisner with us today on the Christian Real of Your Radio program, the founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. They have an excellent booklet out titled How Does the Creation Care Movement Threaten the Pro-Life Movement? We are making that available to listeners today. We'll tell you how you can get that.

I want to go back, Cal, and read just pull one paragraph out that I read a little earlier. The statement on quote pro-life evangelicals for Biden says, poverty kills millions every year. So does lack of health care and smoking.

Racism kills. Unless we quickly make major changes, devastating climate change will kill tens of millions. Poverty, lack of accessible health care services, smoking, racism, and climate change are all pro-life issues. Now you talked about that second sentence there in that paragraph saying that's not what being pro-life is.

But let's get back to the verification of truth on these things. Is it true that millions are killed every year by poverty, lack of health care, and smoking, and climate change? Tens of millions, I said for that. As a matter of fact, around the world, millions of people do die because of lack of adequate food, clothing, shelter, clean drinking water, sewage, sanitation, or because of very, very profound air pollution or water pollution. Millions of people do die from those things. But you notice the term I'm using there, die. Die and kill are not the same thing. Does poverty kill? Does air pollution kill? Does lack of health care kill? You have to have some notion of a subject that is intentionally acting on something else.

This just really is to confuse terms. People die of poverty, yes. Poverty doesn't kill them. People die of old age.

Old age doesn't kill them. And so again, you mentioned how so often people will just steal terms. They will confuse language.

And that, of course, you can go back to George Orwell's 1984 and Newspeak. The left is master at this. In fact, I sometimes say, look, it's not by accident that left and theft rhyme with each other.

The left is consistently stealing words as it stole the word justice to turn it into social justice, as it steals the word pro-life now to turn it into pro-environment or pro-economic development. I'm all for economic development. That's part of why I founded the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. We're dedicated to biblical earth stewardship and economic development for the poor. I don't have anything against that. But it isn't properly described as pro-life.

So intentionality, again, is a very important ethical term. Very thankful for people like Cal Beisner who clarify things so well. You can get that booklet that he's written, How Does the Creation Care Movement Threaten the Pro-Life Movement for a Donation of Any Amount to the Christian Real View.

Just get in touch to do that. More coming up next on the Christian Real View. Who is George Soros and what does he believe? Are you religious? No. Do you believe in God? No. Soros told the independent newspaper in Great Britain, it is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of God, the creator of everything.

But I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out. Soros spends his billions to transform America into godless socialism. Be informed about him and the organizations he funds by ordering this George Soros resource bundle which includes a 60 minute DVD, 60 page book, and 16 page follow the money chart and guide for a donation of $50 or more to the Christian Real View. To order, call 1-888-646-2233 or write to Box 401, Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 or visit thechristianworldview.org. That's thechristianworldview.org. The Bible says that children should be raised in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. There's nothing more important than sitting, walking, talking, and teaching your son or daughter to love and fear God. The church is swimming in children's resources, but it's ultra important to select ones that accurately represent God, his word, and the gospel. At our store on thechristianworldview.org, we are intentional about offering resources that will build a sound and strong faith in children. You will find several Bibles for children, the Adam Raccoon book series, and Good News for Little Hearts series.

We also have video and audio resources like Theo and Sugar Creek Gang. Browse them all at thechristianworldview.org and then use them daily with the child God has put in your life. That's thechristianworldview.org. Thanks for joining us today on the Christian Real View radio program.

I'm David Wheaton, the host. Our website, thechristianworldview.org, is where you can get this booklet by Cal Beisner, which we are offering today, How Does the Creation Care Movement Threaten the Pro-Life Movement? It's a softcover 31-page booklet for a donation of any amount to the Christian Real View.

You can also call us to get that 1-888-646-2233. Some of you, lots of you, have ordered his previous booklet, the Social Justice vs. Biblical Justice one, How Good Intentions Undermine Justice and Gospel. It's a 47-page booklet.

That's a great one. What we're doing today is if you want to order the Creation Care one, how that's going to threaten the pro-life movement. If you haven't gotten the Social Justice one, the previous one, you can get both. Or if you already have the previous one, just get the Creation Care Movement Threatening the Pro-Life Movement booklet. You can do that at thechristianworldview.org. Our topic is pro-life evangelicals for Biden, neither pro-life nor evangelical. Cal Beisner, the founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, is our guest.

Let's get back to the second segment with Cal. You write in this column, another serious ethical failure in this statement, the statement of the pro-life evangelicals for Biden is confusing negative rights, in other words, against harm, with positive rights to benefits. I'm going to have you explain that in a second. As I demonstrate in my booklet, Social Justice vs. Biblical Justice, How Good Intentions Undermine Justice and Gospel, which we carry, by the way, here at The Christian Real View, negative rights are consistent and enforceable, but positive rights are inherently self-contradictory and unenforceable. Negative rights are the implication of true biblical justice. Positive rights are the expression of Marxist socialist egalitarianism.

Now that's a mouthful, that paragraph. I want you to go through that and try to really clarify what you're saying there. Negative rights are rights against harm. They're not rights to particular things. They are rights against harm. Positive rights are rights to benefits.

So let me illustrate this. I have a negative right established by the biblical command, you shall not murder, that no one should take my life away from me unjustly. Similarly with property, similarly with my reputation, you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. That doesn't mean I have a right for everybody to go around telling everybody else what a wonderful guy I am. It does mean that I have a right not to have other people tell people that I'm a liar, that I'm a thief, that I'm a murderer, that I'm an adulterer, etc.

Unless those things are actually true. That's not a positive right. Positive right to a benefit that I can point to out there, it is a negative right against harm. But now let's go to positive rights, so-called, because I believe that there really are no such things as positive rights. But what goes by that name, positive rights, these are rights to benefits. And so then we can say, well, I have a right to adequate clothing to protect me from the weather, to adequate housing, to adequate health care, adequate education, to a certain basic level of income, and so on. To say, I have a right to this clothing, or to that education, or to this medical care, or to that food, if it doesn't mean I have a right to earn it myself without obstruction, then what it means is somebody else has a responsibility, a duty, to provide it for me.

The problem with that is that, David, if I have a right to some food that you have, and I don't have, then perhaps I can demand that you give me that food, and that the government force you to do it. What happens then is that my claim of this positive right ends up contradicting your real negative right to the property you have in that food. In order to enforce positive rights, you have to be willing to violate negative rights.

I don't think that God so designed justice, this transcendent universal ethical principle, as to be inherently self-contradictory. I think true rights are inherently consistent, and they can be enforced consistently without contradicting anybody else's rights. Positive rights are not that way.

How does that fit into what these so-called evangelicals are saying that they're pro-life for Biden? Essentially, what they're doing is they are confusing the right to life of the unborn, which is a negative right, a right against having their lives taken from them unjustly. When they try to speak of hunger or pollution and so on, now they're actually speaking of positive rights.

When they say that poverty is a pro-life issue and people have a right to adequate income or adequate food and so on, now they're talking about benefits. That means that in order to enforce those things, they have to be asking the state, which by nature is an instrument of force. If you doubt that, try refusing to pay your taxes. The state is inevitably a creature of force. When you try to enforce so-called positive rights to food or clothing or shelter or education or living wage, when you do that, then you are contradicting true rights.

You're contradicting true justice, and you're perverting the proper role of the state. Cal Beisner with us today on the Christian World. We'll be the founder and national spokesman for the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. We're talking about this statement, pro-life evangelicals for Biden, which is really neither pro-life. Now, the second part of the title today is, is it actually evangelical? Someone sent me a recent column that was written by John MacArthur on the evangelical movement today. And he writes, recent surveys, and I'll reference what those are later, reveal that a large percentage of people who self-identify as evangelical do not understand even the most basic principles of gospel truth. In a recent poll of self-styled or professed evangelicals, 52% said they reject the concept of absolute truth. 61% do not read the Bible daily. 75% believe, these are professed evangelicals, believe people are basically good. 48% believe salvation can be earned by good works. 44% believe the Bible does not condemn abortion. 43% believe Jesus may have sinned. 78% believe Jesus is not dead. 78% believe Jesus is the first being created by God. 46% believe the Holy Spirit is a force rather than a person.

34%, a third, accept same-sex marriage as consistent with biblical teaching. 26% reject scripture as God's word. And 50%, these are professed evangelicals, say church attendance is not necessary.

Most of those views are categorically incompatible, MacArthur writes, with saving faith. In other words, many who self-identify as evangelicals are not believers at all. No matter, the media consider them evangelicals.

Evangelical churches grant them membership. In some cases, evangelical presses publish and promote their writings, and evangelical conferences feature them as keynote speakers. Consequently, evangelical has come to mean anything and everything, and that's why, as it is used today, the word hardly means anything at all. So the question, Cal, is what really is an evangelical, and are these people, these leaders, so-called professed evangelicals, are they evangelical really in name only, just using the name to attract the interest of evangelicals and kind of opening the door to say, hey, you don't need to be pro-life in terms of a one-issue voter, and pro-life means much beyond just abortion? Through the history of the church, evangelical is a term that has had several different references. During the period of the Reformation, evangelical basically meant somebody who was a follower of Martin Luther with his teaching, bold teaching on justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, as opposed to the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification by grace plus merits through faith plus works, the faith being in Christ, plus your own good works and the works of the church around you and the sacraments and the excess good works of the saints and so on. So evangelical meant that during the period of the Reformation. In the couple of centuries after the Reformation, evangelical tended to refer to the Lutheran movement of Protestants as distinct from the Reformed movement of Protestants. In the 19th century, evangelical tended to refer to those members of the Church of England, particularly the clergy in it, that were committed to this gospel of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, as distinct from those who were more latitudinarian, who might deny the deity of Christ or who might deny the gospel of justification by grace alone and so on. In the early 1900s, a movement began called the fundamentalists, who were giving intellectual defense to what they called fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. By the 1930s, this movement had become culturally quite isolated, quite rejecting interaction with the surrounding culture. Separatistic. And so – separatists, right. And so Billy Graham and a variety of other leaders, Carl F.H.

Henry, led a movement to say, you know, let's be culturally engaged. We'll call ourselves evangelicals rather than fundamentalists. In the mid-1950s, this group founded what was the evangelical theological society. And the doctrinal statement of it – there was only one statement that it was, its doctrinal basis was – the Bible alone and the Bible in its entirety is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs. That is, in the original writings, in the original languages by the original human authors, right? Inerrancy of Scripture was the defining mark of American evangelicalism from the 1950s on. And these folks who are pro-life evangelicals for Biden, I would say they certainly do not believe in the inerrancy of Scripture or certainly a sound interpretation of it.

More coming up after this. David Wheaton here, host of The Christian Worldview. For over 15 years, our mission has been to sharpen the biblical worldview of Christians and to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ. We pursue that mission on air through radio programs, in person hosting events, and online through audio, video, and print resources. We are an all-volunteer ministry, but have monthly operating expenses, the most significant being the cost of airtime on the station, website, or app on which you hear the radio program. We are looking for monthly partners so that each station or website is supported by its own listeners.

The level of financial support for a given outlet is a key decision point whether we continue paying to broadcast there. To become a monthly partner of any amount, call us toll-free 1-888-646-2233 or visit thechristianworldview.org. Thank you for listening to and supporting The Christian Worldview. There's an abundance of Christian resources available, but the reality is that many of them, even some of the most popular, do not lead to a sound and strong faith. While there's only one perfect book, a key aim of The Christian Worldview is to identify and offer resources that are biblically faithful and deepen your walk with God. In our online store, we have a wide range of resources for all ages, adult and children's books and DVDs, Bibles and devotionals, unique gifts, and more. So browse our store at thechristianworldview.org and find enriching resources for yourself, family, friends, small group, or church.

You can also order by calling toll-free 1-888-646-2233. That's 1-888-646-2233 or visit thechristianworldview.org. Our topic today on The Christian Worldview is pro-life evangelicals for Biden.

That's the name of a group who's urging other evangelicals to vote for Joe Biden. We're calling it neither pro-life, as Cal's been talking about, nor he's talking about now, neither evangelical as well. And just a reminder that we're offering Cal's most recent booklet today here on the program, How Does the Creation Care Movement? There's another euphemism, the Creation Care Movement. People, Christians here, oh, creation care, that's a care for creation.

That's got to be a good thing. Well, again, they've co-opted that word, and that's really just a leftist environmental policy movement, but calling it creation care to make evangelicals and Christians kind of feel good about it. But he's written a booklet entitled, How Does the Creation Care Movement Threaten the Pro-Life Movement? 31-page booklet available for a donation of any amount to The Christian Worldview. He's a very, very clear thinker, as you can hear him today. He wrote the previous booklet on social justice, which we also have available for donation of any amount.

We're actually offering them both together. Just get in contact with us the usual way through our website, thechristianworldview.org, or just call our office, 1-888-646-2233. Now, we have one segment left with him, and he was in the middle of an answer on talking about how the term evangelical has been historically defined as those Christians who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. There's no errors in Scripture. It's inspired by God. It's infallible.

It's immutable. It's completely true. It's the Word of God, not the words of men. And other key doctrines like justification by faith alone, through God's grace alone, the exclusivity of Jesus Christ for salvation, there's no other name under heaven by which men must be saved, things like this, you know, things that if you get wrong, well, you can call yourself an evangelical or Christian, but you're really you're believing things that are grossly near that really don't make you a true believer.

So let's get back to the rest of the interview with Cal Beister. Inerrancy of Scripture was the defining mark of American evangelicalism from the 1950s on. But by the 70s and 80s, you had even some members of the Evangelical Theological Society, like Clark Pinnock, for instance, who were saying, oh, you can be evangelical and yet think that the Bible has some errors in it. Around, I think it was 2002 or 2003, I attended one of the meetings of the Evangelical Theological Society.

I was a member at the time. And a group of thinkers calling themselves open theists were saying that, well, because God, in fact, really doesn't know the future perfectly. And they were saying this in order to protect human freedom. Therefore, God can have said things through prophecy that, in fact, never came to pass and never will. And so those prophecies were false. But we won't call them errors because they are unintentional. So they were redefining error as intentional error, as distinct from just anything that's false, right? There was a motion to dismiss these people from membership in the ETS, because if God's not knowing the future entails that he could give false prophecies, then the doctrinal basis of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Bible alone and the Bible in its entirety is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs, means nothing because therefore no longer follows. At that meeting, at that meeting of the ETS, the motion to remove those members, including Clark Pinnock, John Sanders, and a couple of others failed on a narrow vote. That was when I let my membership in the Evangelical Theological Society lapse.

It's done. There is no definition there anymore. Similarly, all of the different stats that you just quoted off about all of the doctrinal ignorance and error on the part of so many people who self-identify as Evangelicals, now Evangelical has lost all meaning among self-professed Evangelicals. Where it has not lost meaning is among the non-Christian society at large and the liberal Christian society at large, where, by the way, for the most part, Evangelical is thought to be a very negative term. And what's so amazing about the various different beliefs that you rattled off there from that survey, and I think that was from Ligonier Ministries, which does that every few years, so many of those beliefs are not only not consistent with modern American Evangelicalism or past American Evangelicalism or Evangelicalism of any time, they're not consistent with the most broad definitions of Orthodox Christianity you can get. When you say that Jesus is the first thing God created right away, that's not even Christian, let alone Evangelical.

No, it's not. And I think it's of note, we're going to talk about this later in the program, that Christianity today has always presented themselves as an Evangelical publication. That ceased by the mid-80s.

Yeah, exactly. It really did. In fact, I happen to know from firsthand testimony that in the mid-80s, a meeting of the board of Christianity Today, including its founding members, Carl Henry and Billy Graham, had done a review of the contents of the magazine over the past 50 years, 25 years, pardon me, and had determined that the magazine had completely lost its moorings, and that if they wanted to try to regain the moorings, they would lose so much circulation that they'd go bankrupt. Billy Graham, Carl Henry left that meeting in tears, realizing we've lost our magazine. Then it's no shock why the previous editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, Mark Galley, who wrote the column saying Trump should be removed from office in charge of this Evangelical magazine, we just find out recently has converted to Roman Catholicism. That speaks very loudly for what that magazine has become. Cal, we appreciate your excellent column.

Pro-life Evangelicals for Biden is a monumental ethical failure. It was an excellent column. We have it linked as well on our website. Cal, we always appreciate your coming on our program and for the incredible work you're doing at Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, how you handle that issue and so many others from a very grounded biblical perspective, never neglecting the gospel of Christ as you do so. So keep standing strong in him and thank you for coming on the program today. Thank you very much, David. God bless you.

Okay, that was Cal Beisner, everyone. If you missed any of the interview, we usually have it posted on our website, thechristianrealview.org. Later on Saturdays, the program is Saturday Morning Live and usually by later in the day on Saturday, we have it up on the website. It's available for podcasts.

Wherever you get your podcasts on your smartphone or your computer, you can go there to get the replay of the program. Also, want to make sure you know about their website, too, because I really believe Cal and that organization is the best biblical and sound website when it comes to this kind of issue we're talking about today, when it comes to especially the environmental movement, when it comes to understanding socialism, helping the poor, the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. Their website is cornwallalliance.org. It's linked at our website.

If you don't want to write it down, a link can link right over from our website to theirs. Don't forget, you can get the booklet. Cal is very good at writing these little booklets, 31-page softcover booklet, How Does the Creation Care Movement Threaten the Pro-Life Movement. We just ordered a lot of them, and you can get one or if you want an extra, you can certainly do that, too, for a donation of any amount to The Christian Real View. If you don't have his previous one, Social Justice versus Biblical Justice, the subtitle says it all, How Good Intentions Undermined Justice and Gospel, that's a 47-page one, you can get that as well. When you contact us, just go to our website to order, thechristianrealview.org, or call us in our office, 1-888-646-2233. Or you can also write to us at our P.O. Box as well, and that P.O.

Box address is 401 Excelsior, Minnesota 55331. Okay, so just a little follow-up on what Cal discussed today on this issue of, quote, pro-life evangelicals for Biden. So really, it's kind of a double oxymoron. They're neither pro-life in the true sense of the word pro-life, which means that you are against the intentional murder, killing of preborn children.

That's what it means to be pro-life. They've co-opted the term to have it mean many more things than that about, he said, positive rights. Now that can be a little confusing, negative rights, positive rights. Negative rights basically means not to be harmed, negative not to be harmed. Positive rights means benefits that you don't necessarily earn or deserve.

You have a, you know, I have a right to, you know, $15 an hour, I have a right to close, you need to house me, government needs to do all this, so forth and so on. So it's neither pro-life, and as you discussed in the last answer, it's really neither. These are not evangelicals in actually the historic definition of the word, who believe in the inerrancy of scripture, who believe in the fundamental tenets of the Great Commission, that Christ is the only way, and there's a command that no other ways are right.

We need to preach that to the world. I think if you drill down in any of these people who, part of this group, pro-life evangelicals for Biden, you would find out that they're very unorthodox in their theological views. I mean, you really can't be pro-life and urge people to vote for the most pro-abortion choice. I mean, it'd be one thing if they were saying just pro-life evangelicals, you know, for some third party candidate or something else, but to take the most pro-abortion candidate and party and say that Christians should vote for that?

That's a bridge way too far. The term evangelical is being used to push other Christians. This is how insidious it is. They're trying to push evangelicals, those who are truly evangelicals, to vote for Democrats, saying, well, there's a justifiable alternative to voting for Democrats rather than Trump and the Republicans.

Biden is very good because he's more, quote, pro-life on these other issues. What this is, is really the left posing as evangelicals. They don't believe in inerrancy. They don't believe in inspiration, infallibility, the immutability of scripture.

Christ is the only way. Maybe a little tenets of a few of them. But if you drill down, you'd find their viewpoints, theologically, are very liberal. More coming up after this final break of the day on the Christian Real View. Who is George Soros and what does he believe? Are you religious? No. Do you believe in God? No. Soros told the independent newspaper in Great Britain, it is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of God, the creator of everything.

But I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out. Soros spends his billions to transform America into godless socialism. Be informed about him and the organizations he funds by ordering this George Soros resource bundle, which includes a 60-minute DVD, 60-page book and 16-page follow the money chart and guide for a donation of $50 or more to the Christian Real View. To order, call 1-888-646-2233 or write to Box 401 Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 or visit thechristianworldview.org. That's thechristianworldview.org.

Be sure to take advantage of two free resources that will keep you informed and sharpen your world view. The first is the Christian World View weekly email, which comes to your inbox each Friday. It contains a preview of the upcoming radio program along with need to read articles, featured resources, special events and audio of the previous program. The second is the Christian World View annual print letter, which is delivered to your mailbox in November. It contains a year-end letter from host David Wheaton and a listing of our store items, including DVDs, books, children's materials and more. You can sign up for the weekly email and annual print letter by visiting thechristianworldview.org or calling 1-888-646-2233.

Your email and mailing address will never be shared and you can unsubscribe at any time. Call 1-888-646-2233 or visit thechristianworldview.org. All right, to think biblically and live accordingly, that's what we strive to do each weekend and each topic we cover here on the Christian World View radio program. We're so thankful for your listening and also for your supporting this listener supported nonprofit ministry. Our website is thechristianworldview.org.

Now, just in this final segment, I want a lot more material to get to. I wish I had a little more time today, but we'll try to get to as much as we can, talking about these pro-life evangelicals for Biden. But really, we really shouldn't be surprised from who the leaders, the main signers of this document are, urging others to do the same. You know, the list from Fuller Seminary, it's a very liberal seminary. Christianity today, as Cal was talking about, is no longer evangelical. I mean, you'll get some evangelical bent articles there, but it's a wide, wide spectrum of Christianity. Female Pastors sign is one of the main signatories of this. The National Association of Evangelicals is referenced there, very more theologically liberal. And then actually the humorous one is Billy Graham's granddaughter.

I mean, that's just ridiculous. I mean, you're using the good name of Billy Graham from a standpoint of the great preaching and evangelism he did, as if everyone who comes after Billy Graham holds the same viewpoints he did. And of course, Billy Graham, in some ways, there's some culpability. We do a show on this someday in the future for his ecumenical outreach that maybe led to some of this confusion with what it means to be an evangelical, but that's for a different day.

Now, I think far worse, though, than these kind of folks from just clearly theologically liberal organizations is those who are evangelicals who are much more trusted by really true biblical Christians, people like I've mentioned in the past, people like Tim Keller, a very popular author. We've gone into some of his writings about Christians can kind of vote either way. He gives us in his columns and writings.

I don't have time to get into that today. I want to give another example today. It's from John Piper, who's a very well-known evangelical, influential pastor and author and so forth. He has written just something very recently and it's been posted in many different places. I've seen a lot of people share this and it says, the policies, persons and paths to ruin pondering the implications of the 2020 election. He starts off by saying, nothing I say here is intended to dictate how anyone else should vote, but rather to point to a perspective that seems to be neglected. Yes, this perspective sways my vote, but you need not be sinning if you weigh matters differently. Now, he has a sort of a disclaimer at the beginning, but the rest of his column is all about you cannot take anything else away from the column, take any of their conclusion away, but to say that he would never think a Christian should vote for Donald Trump.

It's another paragraph. Actually, this is a long overdue article attempting to explain why I remain baffled that so many Christians consider the sins of unrepentant sexual immorality, unrepentant boastfulness, unrepentant vulgarity, unrepentant factiousness and the like to be only toxic for our nation, while policies that endorse baby killing, sex switching, freedom limiting and socialistic overreach are viewed as deadly. In other words, who is he referring to there? He's referring to Donald Trump, saying he's unrepentantly sexually immoral and boastful and vulgar and factious. Now, I don't know if he's unrepentantly sexually immoral.

I have no idea. He is boastful. He is vulgar at times. He is factious at times.

But you know what? So is Joe Biden. So are the Democrats.

I mean, to kind of pin it all on Donald Trump, I don't think is seeing the situation clearly. I have to skip down for lack of time. Maybe we'll try to get this article linked on our website.

I don't think it's there right now. He goes down to the issue we're discussing today, the issue of abortion, because this is the issue that evangelicals, true biblical evangelicals, point to to say this is why I'm voting for Donald Trump and Republicans, because they're clearly more pro-life than Democrats who are so sacrosanct. It is the highest tenet of being a Democrat today, as you must be for the killing of the unborn. Piper writes, I think Roe, Roe versus Wade is an evil decision. I think Planned Parenthood is a code name for baby killing and historically at least ethnic cleansing. And I think it is baffling, listen to this sentence, I think it is baffling and presumptuous to assume that pro-abortion policies kill more people than a culture saturating pro-self pride. That is really astounding that he'd write that. That basically is almost saying the same thing as the pro-life evangelicals for Biden statement. In other words, that pro-abortion policies, it's baffling to him and presumptuous to assume that pro-abortion policies kill more people than a culture saturating pro-self pride.

Really? I mean, millions of babies being killed. People are responsible for what they see in leaders, whether they're going to appropriate those into their own lives.

That doesn't kill them. They have a choice whether to become like the leaders they watch, whether the leaders divisive or vulgar or sexually immoral. They have a choice. You don't have to follow that. But babies don't have a choice. That is to me, you know, I'm not trying to slander John Piper.

I think he's influenced people and gets a lot of things right. But this one is a bridge too far for me. I mean, really? Democrat leaders and their policies don't lead to moral corruption?

I don't know. Anyway, just to conclude on this, I saw a little tweet this week by someone and I think the response of this kind of article by John Piper is, you know, basically Trump's bad. He morally corrupts the country. And as a Christian, you should not be comfortable with that because that's just as bad as abortion.

I disagree on this end. But the tweet I saw this week was an interesting one. It said this, to think that God could use a filthy minded, adulterous and wealthy man with evil in his heart to preside over a country is beyond me. Okay, so you're thinking, well, this little tweet is referring to Donald Trump, right? Because of course, Joe Biden is so holy, right?

Of course now. We don't have time. Maybe we'll get into it next week, how I believe he's even more of a unrepentant, boastful, factious, lying, immoral person than Donald Trump. But maybe we'll get into that next week. We don't have time today. But the setup here is to think that God could use a filthy minded, adulterous and wealthy man with evil in his heart to preside over a country is beyond me, right? Donald Trump? Okay, maybe.

Was that what they're referring to? But God did that. And that man gave us the Psalms, King David.

Very, very well made point. Here we have King David, a man after God's own heart falls gravely into sin, adultery with Bathsheba, murders, has her husband murdered in wartime, and goes into all terrible time of unrepentance and so forth. And yet God used him to lead the country of Israel, bring us the Psalms, an example of faith through the line of Christ and so forth and so on.

And the point is, let's project ourselves back into that day. Well, who would John Piper then vote for? If King David was on the ballot, would you vote for him, someone who's at least pro Israel and pro God? Or would you vote for a Philistine who is anti God and has all these anti God policies and say they're both bad and not voting for either one or open the door for people to vote for the Philistine? I can't make a conclusion to that. I can't I can't agree with that. Seems very clear that there's one party that Christians should not vote for.

There's one party that they can vote for and other other ways to vote as well. We'll get into that next week. Thank you for joining us here on the Christian Rule of View radio program. You know, we do live in a changing and challenging world. But there is one thing we can always trust in and count on. Jesus Christ and His word, they're the same yesterday, today and forever. Until next time, think biblically and live accordingly. We hope today's broadcast turned your heart toward God, His word and His Son. To order a CD copy of today's program or sign up for our free weekly email, or to find out how you can be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ, go to our website, the Christian worldview.org or call us toll free at 1-888-646-2233. The Christian worldview is a weekly one hour radio program that is furnished by the Overcomer Foundation and is supported by listeners and sponsors. Request one of our current resources with your donation of any amount. Go to the Christian worldview.org or call us toll free at 1-888-646-2233 or write to us at Box 401 Excelsior, Minnesota 55331. That's Box 401 Excelsior, Minnesota 55331. Thanks for listening to the Christian worldview. Until next time, think biblically and live accordingly.