Using the Bible to Defend Life

John Barros (left) and Scott Klusendorf (right)

My stomach churned. It always does in situations like that. The donuts I'd had for breakfast weren't helping. Even though it was early December, the light of the sun was warm on my shoulders. But such is Florida.

I was with a group of other homeschooled Christian teens -- all close friends of mine -- helping pastor John Barros to convince people not to kill their babies at an abortion clinic in Downtown Orlando. John Barros had been doing this about six days a week for years now. He had experience. Me? This was my first time.

John Barros uses an interesting method. He reads and quotes scripture, a lot. It's very normal for Pastor Barros to take a megaphone, turn to the book of Revelation, and preach judgement upon those inside the clinic (he let my friend Jacob do the reading on that day). And it gets results: people walk out of there, convicted of their sin, too scared of hell to follow through with killing their baby.

To be honest, I felt uneasy about this method. However, I bowed to Pastor Barros' authority and experience, and went along with it. I mean, come on: He'd been doing this six days a week for years, and this was my first time. He knows what he's doing, I don't.

But one thing Pastor Barros said really stood out to me. My friend Jacob and I had just failed to convince a Haitian man to let his baby live. What had we done wrong? John Barros old us this:

"You can't reason with them. You just need to keep giving them scriptures."

Several months later, I was at a homsechool convention in Cincinatti, Ohio. Scott Klusendorf, pro-life advocate and president of Life Training Institute, gave several talks on how to engage people on the topic of abortion and present a water-tight case for life.

His approach was totally different from Pastor Barros'.

Mr. Klusendorf's argument for life does not involve ANY scripture verses. Instead, he relies almost exclusively on science and logic to make his case. You can see for yourself on his website.

Mr. Klusendorf's method, like John Barros' method, also gets results. He speaks at schools, churches, and conventions, and also debates leading "pro-choice" advocates. Many people are convinced by his flawless logic.

These two prominent pro-life heroes use completely different methods to combat the same evil. Who uses the correct method?

This blog hasn't seen any lively discussion in a while (the forums have been silent for almost a year), and so I'd like for people to post their opinions in the comments and let me know what they think.

Which man has the better method? Are they both right? Are they both wrong? Should we use scripture only and not try to reason with people, or should we reason with them using science and logic and leave the Bible out of things? What do you think?

In my opinion, I think both men are right, but I think Scott's method is more sound. Why? Well, the Bible has little to no weight with the unbeliever. They couldn't care less what a 2,000 year old book says about how they should live their lives. Trying to use the Bible to convince them abortion is wrong would be a waste of time.

Should we still use the Bible? Yes. And Scott does use it to present the gospel --as we always should when engaging unbelievers-- he simply doesn't use it when making his case for life.

I'm still forming my own opinion on the matter, but I would like to hear yours. What part does the Bible play in making the case for life?