Pro Life Super Bowl Commercial

[ChariotsofFire]

I'm happy Tim Tebow and Focus on the Family are standing up against abortion. Women's Groups Blast 'Divisive' Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad -- Without Even Seeing It - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

One thing I'm wondering is where Focus on the Family is getting the money for the commericial? Is it from their supporters? Do you feel it is a worthwhile investment?

 

[Andres]

That is admirable. Good for Focus on the Family and Tim Tebow.

 

[LawrenceU]

Good on them!

 

[ChariotsofFire]

One thing I find funny is how the anti-lifers jump on this ad for being offensive. I'm sure they're find with many other ads that Christians would find offensive. Yet, when a commercial comes out for in favor of saving children's lives, they cry bloody murder. Their consciences must be seared.

 

[Mushroom]

I believe I read somewhere that interest in Super Bowl adverts has dwindled, I know Pepsi dropped out, so maybe the rates are a tad more affordable.

Or maybe CBS offered a deep discount in support of the pro-life movement?

/Oops! Back to reality!/

 

[Andres]

Boo for it being on the Lord's Day.

Wait, I don't get this boo here. No one is encouraging Christians to watch the SuperBowl or the commercial. Isn't the commercial directed at non-Christians? Obviously real born-again believers are already pro-life. Is the argument that someone will have to work for the commercial to air? I'm not really sure how commercials/television work, but apparently the commerical is already made, so it will basically just air during that time slot. No one will be made to work who wasn' t already going to choose to do so. Right? What am I missing here?

 

[au5t1n]

One thing I'm wondering is where Focus on the Family is getting the money for the commericial? Is it from their supporters? Do you feel it is a worthwhile investment?

When I read about this a couple days ago, I read that it was paid for by a few private donors.

 

[awretchsavedbygrace]

Boo for it being on the Lord's Day.

Get a DVR and it doesnt have to be on the Lord's Day.

 

[N. Eshelman]

Boo for it being on the Lord's Day.

Wait, I don't get this boo here. No one is encouraging Christians to watch the SuperBowl or the commercial. Isn't the commercial directed at non-Christians? Obviously real born-again believers are already pro-life. Is the argument that someone will have to work for the commercial to air? I'm not really sure how commercials/television work, but apparently the commerical is already made, so it will basically just air during that time slot. No one will be made to work who wasn' t already going to choose to do so. Right? What am I missing here?

The people at the television studio work.
The players work.
The 1000s of fans in the audience are not keeping the Sabbath.
The viewers are not keeping the Sabbath.

There are literally thousands of people that are not honoring the Lord's Day because of the Super Bowl- Christian or not.

We are not to make our servants or are donkeys (asses for you KJV only guys) work. That implies that we need to do whatever we can to encourage them to keep it!

I know this is off subject- so back to the 2.5 million dollars spent on 30 seconds of air time.

 

[Scott1]

Yes, it's disappointing all this is set on the sabbath and causes and encourages people not to remember the sabbath day or keep it holy.

But for those focused on it during the sabbath, whether Christians sinning or unbelievers, the commercial is a wonderful, courageous witness and testimony with a wide audience.

 

[TexanRose]

Boo for it being on the Lord's Day.

I can't thank yet, so...thank you.

Buying an ad to be aired during a Sabbath-day sporting event implies endorsement of Sabbath-day sporting events, in my opinion. Seems a bit like "doing evil that good may come."

 

[ChariotsofFire]

Perhaps it will run again on one of the other 6 days of the week?

 

[Andres]

Is the argument that someone will have to work for the commercial to air?

No. That's not the argument. The argument is:

"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God. In it, thou shalt not do any work. Thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day. Wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it." - Exodus 20

I'm not really sure how commercials/television work, but apparently the commerical is already made, so it will basically just air during that time slot. No one will be made to work who wasn' t already going to choose to do so. Right?

This is the same argument that non-Sabbatarians use to go to the restaurant (i.e. that the waiter, waitress, cook, already chose to work) on the Lord's Day. Respectfully, Friend, does that make it any better? Ought we contribute to another's sin? Absolutely not.

I know it may seem that I'm just being an old curmudgeon, but I hope that better will be thought of me. Ultimately, however, I'm not so concerned with how I am seen as much as the Lord's Day be exalted to its rightful sanctification. Wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it.

You are most certainly not being a curmudgeon and I very much appreciate you and the others who have helped me to better understand why this commercial, while commendable in it's content, is inappropriate because of it's time slot (or day slot). I certainly agree with you (and did before this post) that we shouldn't eat at restaurants or go shopping on the Lord's Day. For some reason I was thinking the commercial was different because it was already made. Of course now I see the error of that thinking and you are exactly right that it is the equivalent of going out to eat on a Sunday.

 

[Mushroom]

I know it may seem that I'm just being an old curmudgeon, but I hope that better will be thought of me.

It doesn't seem like that at all, dear brother, it is a verifiable fact, but that has nothing to do with this issue. You just are. But then so am I, so maybe we oughta start a club.

In fact it was positions stated and defended here on PB that broke my NFL habit. Praise the Lord!

 

[Montanablue]

I would call saving children's lives an act of mercy.

 

[Notthemama1984]

I know it may seem that I'm just being an old curmudgeon, but I hope that better will be thought of me.

It doesn't seem like that at all, dear brother, it is a verifiable fact, but that has nothing to do with this issue. You just are. But then so am I, so maybe we oughta start a club.

In fact it was positions stated and defended here on PB that broke my NFL habit. Praise the Lord!

Same here! I still have an addiction to football though. I just moved to Saturday and watch the college version.

 

[Glenn Ferrell]

I would call saving children's lives an act of mercy.

So would I, but that has nothing to do with a commercial and forcing others to do non-essential work on the Lord's Day. That commercial will save no child's life.

Those who pay for the commercials are picking up the tab for the Super Bowl event and broadcast. Thus, they are the responsible parties for this Lord's Day violation. The sin is not in sharing truth on the Lord's Day, even though directed at Super Bowl watchers. I'd preach the gospel for 30 seconds at the Super Bowl, if invited to do so without charge, and if I didn't have to participate in their sinful activity by watching or seeming to condone it. Might remind them of the 4th commandment. The problem is sponsoring the profaning of the Sabbath. The end does not justify the means.

 

[LawrenceU]

I would call saving children's lives an act of mercy.

So would I, but that has nothing to do with a commercial and forcing others to do non-essential work on the Lord's Day. That commercial will save no child's life.

Joshua, I understand your position, and you know that I hold a high view of the Sabbath. But, to make the statement, 'That commercial will save no child's life.' is not a good argument. You don't know that. I know of a child who is now five years old who was spared from murder in the womb because her mother saw a pro-life advert on TV the very morning she was scheduled to be killed.

I pray that it will save untold numbers of unborn babies.

 

[Marrow Man]

Tim Tebow will probably be playing on the Lord's Day in a year, and millions of Christians will see nothing wrong with it and claim it is a good witness for Christ.

But he and his mom are still to be applauded for their strong pro-life stand. Every a Gator Hater like me like be thankful for that.

 

[Andres]

Tim Tebow will probably be playing on the Lord's Day in a year, and millions of Christians will see nothing wrong with it and claim it is a good witness for Christ.

Hmm...very interesting point.

 

[Montanablue]

Dear Pastor and Friend Lawrence,

As Christians, we are not pragmatists. We believe in using lawful means to accomplish God's Work. Promoting these things via causing folks to perform non-essential work on the Lord's Day is not a lawful means, as it violates the 4th Commandment. I do not doubt any of those who disagree with me's sincerity, nor the Tebows, nor even Focus on the Family's. But folks can be sincerely wrong, as I often am in thought, word, and deed according to the level of perfection required by God's Law. I have not risen to that level, and I also transgress the boundaries set therein. And I hate that, but apparently, I don't hate it enough because I keep being found lax therein.

With much love and charity toward you and others,

But works of mercy are allowed. I would volunteer at a crisis pregnancy on a Sunday, I would pray at an abortion clinic on a Sunday, I would make a meal for an unwed mother on a Sunday. I'm not sure I understand why you see this commercial differently.

 

[Montanablue]

Because it is an unlawful means in that it is contributing to someone else's non-essential work. There are six other days a week to air this commercial. This is not a spur of the moment work of necessity or mercy. It's not an ox-in-the-ditch scenario.

I see - but I have one last question. I'm not meaning to harp on you, I just want to be sure I understand what you're saying. You seem to be saying that planned "nonessential" mercy work on the Sabbath is unlawful. Is that right? For instance, would you say that it is unlawful to cook a meal for an elderly shut in on a Sunday if that meal could be cooked on a Saturday (with no real different in results - the people would still be fed on Sunday) instead. Do I understand your position?

 

[Philip]

Because it is an unlawful means in that it is contributing to someone else's non-essential work. There are six other days a week to air this commercial. This is not a spur of the moment work of necessity or mercy. It's not an ox-in-the-ditch scenario.

But somehow airing it on one of those other six days wouldn't have nearly as much of an impact. The Superbowl is probably the most watched sporting event of the year.

 

[N. Eshelman]

Because it is an unlawful means in that it is contributing to someone else's non-essential work. There are six other days a week to air this commercial. This is not a spur of the moment work of necessity or mercy. It's not an ox-in-the-ditch scenario.

But somehow airing it on one of those other six days wouldn't have nearly as much of an impact. The Superbowl is probably the most watched sporting event of the year.

Shall we sin so that grace may abound?

 

[Andres]

Because it is an unlawful means in that it is contributing to someone else's non-essential work. There are six other days a week to air this commercial. This is not a spur of the moment work of necessity or mercy. It's not an ox-in-the-ditch scenario.

But somehow airing it on one of those other six days wouldn't have nearly as much of an impact. The Superbowl is probably the most watched sporting event of the year.

Shall we sin so that grace may abound?

God forbid!

 

[ChariotsofFire]

It seems that we all approve of the ad itself, but are not all agreed on whether it is appropriate to play the ad on the Lord's Day. I am hoping it plays again on the other 6 days of the week.

Whether the ad playing on Sunday is ok, I haven't quite decided at the moment. It's important to honor the Lord's Day, and it is better not to try to honor God by disobeying his law. The ends do not justify the means, but I'm wondering if the means are within the exception of mercy. The ad could be played on the other 6 days of the week, and still reach a great number of people. But then again, the ad could be played on Sunday and pro-life message could be heard across the nation. This would be merciful. But I don't think it would be a necessity.

My question is whether an act of mercy on the Lord's Day has to be a necessity?

 

[ChariotsofFire]

I would call saving children's lives an act of mercy.

So would I, but that has nothing to do with a commercial and forcing others to do non-essential work on the Lord's Day. That commercial will save no child's life.

Josh,
Would you say then, that forcing others to be merciful is not very merciful? This would seem to make sense to me.

 

[Montanablue]

Yes, it's certainly preferable to do one's work within the six days so as to be better prepared for the Lord's Day. It's not necessarily always wrong for a person to prepare a meal on the Lord's Day, but why would one wait for the Lord's Day to do so, especially if it's going to be taxing and take from the other essential duties of the day? That's the point I'm trying to make.

Thank you for explaining your reasoning - I'll certainly be thinking about it. I think that perhaps our point of disagreement or misunderstanding is that I think its an essential part of this act of mercy that the ad be shown to the largest audience of the year. Although I do understand your perspective and I respect your conviction, I think that you are mistaken on this point and it really saddens me. I don't say that to be fractious. However, I believe that planned acts of mercy - even ones that are "nonessential" and could be done on other days of the week - are essential parts of the Lord's Day. And I can't imagine a greater act of mercy than protecting the lives of innocents.

 

[Joseph Scibbe]

I am glad for this ad coming on. It is a call to life that man millions of people will see and I think it most certainly can be a big factor in whether a mother decides to go through with her abortion. I think that is but 1 life is saved because of this then it does not violate the Sabbath (as I see it having been put out here. I am not here to discuss my view) as it functions to save a life. I am stunned by the stupidity of people on the far left that call this "controversial"...since when is carrying a baby to term controversy? What happened to freedom of speech?!