I disagree. There are few greater heroes than the one who realizes their great error and then spends their lifetime fighting the very evil the propagated. If such people are not heroic, than the many great repentant saints such as St. Paul could not be called heroic.
Your St. Paul analogy is a good one. However, he was a convert, in the really true sense of the word. Paul was educated as one of Tarsus’s upper echelon Pharisees, a true proponent of the Jewish faith, even a Roman citizen, with a great future ahead of him. His conversion was not simply to Christianity, but to a realization that Christianity was for all people, not just gentiles. A realization that the belief in God is now radically changed and that the idea of Judaism denying that Christ was a saviour is certainly a great turnaround.
However, to my mind, Dr. Nathanson was treacherous to his own society, his profession and then his “conversion” was to come back into the fold, so to speak. I Consider St. Paul to be a hero not because he turned his back on his own religious doctrines, but because he saw a new and better faith and had the courage to stick with his new found convictions until he was slain for them. Nathanson, on the other hand, betrayed his entire society, its Christian foundations and then later, attempted a reconciliation. In other words, he returned to that which he had abandoned. If St. Paul had returned to his Jewish beliefs, would he be a hero? Or would he be little more than a prevaricating opportunist?
If you go to
this web site, and read Nathanson’s
tConfessions Of An Ex-Abortionist, you will see a list of what Nathanson actually did.
- THE FIRST KEY TACTIC WAS TO CAPTURE THE MEDIA
- THE SECOND KEY TACTIC WAS TO PLAY THE CATHOLIC CARD
- THE THIRD KEY TACTIC WAS THE DENIGRATION AND SUPPRESSION OF ALL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION
Finally he states - AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION
He deliberately whiteanted the very society he was born and raised into. He deliberately denied his own medical and scientific teaching to white ant his own society. He admits to directly killing 70, 000 unborn babies and because of his gross deceit he is also indirectly responsible for the death of every other aborted baby since then. The consequences of his hypocracy are still are with us today, as more babies are killed before they are born.
Consequently, I hardly see his life story as any type of conversion. Yes, I am glad he turned himself around and attempted to undo what he had done. St. Paul, however, underwent a true conversion. Because of revelation he turned away from what he considered to be the the wrong path. St. Paul risked his own life because of his conversion. Nathanson, by comparison, simply turned his back on his own lies and deceit and on whatever ‘friends’ he may have attracted along the way, and once again trod the path he had been originally given with no risk to his own life. That does not give him ‘hero’ status in my opinion.
J
oan1969 made the point that he would be glad, right now, he did repent. Considering how the Son of God valued little children so much, I bet he is! Even now, God must still endure that which Nathanson played a part in unfolding.
Surely he’d be made to go sit in a corner somewhere?!
