Truth, Theology, and Total Abolition

I want you to picture yourself in British Parliament many years ago, sitting there listening to the debates on the abolition of the slave trade. After years of going back and forth, there is an expectation that common sense would prevail, yet a member rises to propose a Bill that would prohibit the sale of child slaves, but only on Sunday. To your amazement, the legislative assembly applauds the Bill as “a good start and move towards a better path.” As the room hushes, debate rises. Another Member of Parliament stands and proposes an amendment to the Bill: “Only those under five years of age should be applied. Such considerations would reduce the number of slave vessels sailing each year, while preserving the legality of the trade.

What has taken place? While certain measures have reduced the level of evil, they allow injustice to persist. If slavery was truly an evil because human beings bear the image of God, then no Christian could consistently argue that only some humans should be protected while others remained enslaved. As you sit there, your mind races, “The moral issue was never should fewer people be enslaved, but whether innocent image bearers could justly be treated as property, not people."

This, friends, is what's facing the church today. If the unborn child is truly a human being created in the Image of God, possessing inherent dignity before Yahweh and protected by the very moral law of Yahweh, then the issue is not whether fewer unborn children should die but whether any innocent child may be lawfully put to death.  The answer you give as a Christian to this question determines if one’s theology remains consistent or becomes a collection of disconnected doctrines forming an ethical implication.

Christians must settle once and for all in their profession whether they hold to the authority and inerrancy of Holy Scripture. To affirm the authority of Holy Scripture and Scripture is without error while embracing incrementalism in the face of abortion, I believe, introduces an inconsistency into the Christian theological and ethical framework. We do not want to use the word if here, as this provides a condition or uncertainty. The word we want is since, showing a definite starting point in the past, and in view of fact. Therefore, since Scripture teaches Yahweh is the Creator of all things (Gen 1-2), and that every human being is created in His Image (Imago Dei; Genesis 1:26-27), that person, starting in Adam, following through Eve, with the blessing of fruitful reproduction, each person possesses an immortal soul. Though we try to find workarounds, there is none. The Almighty God forbids the intentional shedding of innocent blood (Exodus 20:13); together, these doctrines complete a single ethical conclusion. Every unborn child possesses the same God-given dignity and legal protection owed to every other innocent human being. Naturally, a systematic theology survey would be required to expand this to a more academic paper, but suffice it for this post, the Imago Dei, and the moral law are not isolated doctrines that can be selectively applied. One could be firm here and say, “These doctrines form an inseparable theological foundation.”

What is the logical conclusion then? To acknowledge the full humanity of the unborn while accepting legislation that protects only some unborn children or simply reduces the number of children who may lawfully be killed is to render partial obedience to Yahweh’s clear authoritative Word where He requires complete obedience.

It is for this reason, pastorally, and why I charge others, that Christian opposition to abortion must extend beyond seeking to regulate the practice toward its complete abolition. Incrementalism, though well-intentioned, must come to grips with the position that implicitly concedes that the state may continue to authorize the intentional killing of a class of innocent image-bearers for a season. Nowhere in Scripture is it permitted the partial protection of the innocent life as a satisfactory expression of justice. Too often believers are drowning in modern academic flip-flopping to restate new definitions, so it is important to look at the long-standing, tested historic confession to reinforce this conviction. The 1689 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith affirms humanity was created by God, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, in the image of God (Gen 1:26-27, 2:7, Gen 3:6; Eccles 7:29; Rom 2:14-15)[1], which aligns with the Westminster Larger Catechism and expresses the believer's duty under the sixth Commandment. “The duties required in the sixth commandment are, all careful studies, and lawful endeavors, to preserve the life of ourselves and others by resisting all thoughts and purposes, subduing all passions, and avoiding all occasions, temptations, and practices, which tend to the unjust taking away the life of any.”[2] If these truths are sincerely confessed, then partial obedience cannot satisfy the demands of biblical justice. If we are honest, one can see believers are bound not to merely reduce the evil of abortion (through small steps), but to seek its complete abolition, because the very doctrines they profess leave no theological room for treating the lives of some innocent image bearers as negotiable.

Now here is the thing. Since Scripture and our confessions hold the convictions we profess, then such convictions must become our practice. Orthodoxy that never reaches obedience is incomplete. If we truly believe that every unborn child is an image-bearer created by Yahweh, then love for God must be expressed through love for our unborn neighbors. Prov 24:11-12

Proverbs 24:11–12 LSB

Deliver those who are being taken away to death, And those who are stumbling to the slaughter, Oh hold them back. If you say, “Behold, we did not know this,” Does not He who weighs the hearts understand? And does not He who guards your soul know? And will not He render to man according to his work?

This passage leaves no room for the believer to choose to be apathetic or passive. Though these verses are part of Wisdom literature, not a command, they reveal the heart of godly wisdom and expose the folly of indifference. Therefore, let every believer prayerfully examine whether their public witness reflects the doctrine they confess. May we join our voices with others who speak for those who cannot speak for themselves.

This is a Gospel issue. We are called to proclaim Christ with conviction and compassion, and this includes the call for the abolition of abortion. We are called to support ministries that offer help and support, including adoption and care. The unborn have no earthly advocates of their own. If the church truly believes what it confesses about the Creator, the image of God, and the sanctity of innocent life, then now is the time to speak with courage, act with charity, and pursue justice until every image-bearer is equally protected.

Author Note: Thank you for taking time to read. This post was not written as an exhaustive academic paper, nor as an invitation to online debates. Rather, it is a pastoral appeal for Christians who profess the authority of Holy Scripture to prayerfully consider whether our ethical convictions consistently reflect the doctrines we confess. I will not be engaging in social media debates or responding to online criticism, as such exchanges too often serve personalities and algorithms more than truth. If you disagree, I urge you to open the Scriptures, consult the historic confessions, and seek the Lord with humility. My prayer is not that an article would win a fight, but to encourage believers to think, speak, and live with greater consistency.

__________________________________________

1]. The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, chap. 4, para. 2, “Of Creation,” accessed August 3, 2026, https://www.the1689confession.com/1689/chapter-4.

2]. The Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. 135, “What Are the Duties Required in the Sixth Commandment?,” The Westminster Standard, accessed August 3, 2026, https://thewestminsterstandard.org/westminster-larger-catechism/