The recent killing of Dr. George Tiller is a dark blot on the pro-life movement. The killing should be and indeed is condemned by true Christians. 1 Peter 2:13-15 says: Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people.
Albert Mohler wrote an excellent commentary on this event. It can be read in its entirety by clicking here.
Here is an excerpt:
We have no right to take the law into our own hands in an act of criminal violence. We are not given the right to take this power into our own hands, for God has granted this power to governing authorities. The horror of abortion cannot be rightly confronted, much less corrected, by means of violence and acts outside the law and lawful means of remedy. This is not merely a legal technicality — it is a vital test of the morality of the pro-life movement.
In the case of Dr. George Tiller, the governing authorities failed again and again to fulfill their responsibility to protect all citizens, including those yet unborn. The law is dishonoring to God in its disrespect for human life. The law failed to bring George Tiller to account for what should have been seen as crimes against humanity. But this failure does not authorize others to act in the place of the government, much less in the place of God. The government must now act to prosecute and punish the murderer of Dr. George Tiller.
I wonder if Bill Hyer would discuss this horrible act in light of the doctrine of concurrence.
My response is simply to point once again to Genesis 50:20, the verse that I have quoted most in the discussion. As I stated in the discussion, the Scripture attributes in the one and the same act the choices and actions of humans and the choice and action of God. It says that in the same event the human choices were evil yet God was sovereignly working to bring about His good purpose. That is Concurrence.
When Joseph says, “God meant it for good” he is referring to “it” as his brothers selling him into slavery to the Egyptians, not the brothers’ evil jealousy festering in their hearts. Joseph is also giving his frightened brothers the strongest possible assurance that their lives were not at risk. To rest your response to the problem of evil (murdering Tiller or babies) on this verse is hazardous, not only for you but your readers.
It’s difficult to see how these evil acts can be condemned if “God was sovereignly working to bring about His good purpose” at the exact same time. If I understand the doctrine of concurrence, these events could never have been otherwise since God’s superseding will is working in concurrence with the will of the man who does the killing. If we follow that logic, God would be sovereignly working to bring about his good purpose as mothers decide to kill their offspring.
Why would Jesus be upset about the choices of people in Matthew 11:20-30 or in the instance of Tiller’s death if “God was sovereignly working to bring about His good purpose”?