Be fruitful & Multiply?

[Godcreatedsteve]

[FONT=&quot]“And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,”[/FONT][FONT=&quot] (Gen 1:28 )[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]One of the most over-cited and least-understood passages in the Bible is God’s blessing: ‘be fruitful and multiply.’ For many, the primary difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals is that the latter are not able to procreate through sexual intercourse. Does it mean their sexuality contradicts this ‘commandment’? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In answering the “be fruitful and multiply” argument, we need to point out that God’s blessing was never an order to procreate. Though it may involve procreation for some, it means much more than that. We can only understand it as the blessing that it was. The Lord never commanded humanity to procreate. Rather, He blessed and enabled humanity to do something that they could not have done without His blessing. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It says “God blessed them…” and not that He commanded them because God accomplishes it through His grace rather than through our sexuality. Though some have presumed to make it a commandment, without His blessing they would be barren and perish. “[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Yea, they shall not be planted; yea, they shall not be sown: yea, their stock shall not take root in the earth: and he shall also blow upon them, and they shall wither, and the whirlwind shall take them away as stubble.”[/FONT][FONT=&quot] (Isa 40:24) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]To equate heterosexual intercourse with being fruitful is to reduce the grace of God to a sexual act. In that sense, it’s another form of sexual idolatry.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]“Genesis 1:28 is not a commandment, but a blessing[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. It does not refer to what humans must do to please God, but to what God does for and through humankind…Fertility is not a command but a blessing that God gives to his creatures, to animals as well as humans.”

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]The scriptures make it abundantly clear that being fruitful can only come from God: Gen 41:52 - “For God hath caused me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction.” Gen 48:4 - “Behold, I will make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, and I will make of thee a multitude of people.” Lev 26:9 - “For I will have respect unto you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish my covenant with you.” Psalms 100:3 – “Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves.” [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Since being fruitful is a blessing - why would we treat it as a commandment that we need to obey, let alone condemn others for not obeying the commandment? If children are a blessing from God - and we can all agree that they are - the proper response is joy and thanksgiving. The proper attitude is not to become so proud as to condemn those who - for whatever reason – have not been similarly blessed with children. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Unjustly condemning those who could not conceive happened quite often in Israel, which is why the scriptures also say, “Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD.” (Isa 54:1) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The verse equates being fruitful with receiving God’s blessings, whatever they happen to be. Children are certainly a blessing, though God does not condemn those who haven’t children as if they’d disobeyed a command. Raising children to be good and loving adults is one way of leading a fruitful life, though it certainly isn’t the only way. As Isaiah pointed out - He can give us even greater blessings, so that ‘more are the children of the desolate.’ [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus distinguished between those who bear good fruit and those who do not (Matt 7:17-20) though he wasn’t talking about heterosexuals and homosexuals. He was speaking about the fruit of the Spirit, manifested in doing good works. “[/FONT][FONT=&quot]I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit.”[/FONT][FONT=&quot] (John 15:5)
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]St. Augustine wrote in ‘On Genesis’ concerning the blessing, “we can rightly understand it in a spiritual sense, and assume that only after the fall was it turned into fleshy fertility ... to bring forth spiritual fruits, namely good works and praise to God, in a spiritual relationship."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Living in Christ means being in a fruitful relationship with God.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Being a heterosexual parent doesn’t necessarily indicate that you are in that kind of relationship. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]There are abusive parents, parents who spoil their children, and parents who have become so obsessed with acquiring money and possessions that they take little responsibility, and reserve very little time, for their children. Consequently, many children are selfish and without compassion, most are materialistic, frequently addicted, and sometimes abusive towards themselves and others. In other words, there are heterosexual parents who know a lot about procreating even though they are producing bad fruit. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]There are also gay and lesbian couples who cannot sexually procreate, yet they are raising children to become loving and tolerant human beings. So it’s not our ability to procreate that matters; what matters is the fruit of our life. Moreover, it’s not measured by how many children we produce, but in whether our efforts have added to the love and peace in the world, or only reinforced all the old divisions and conflicts. [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT] Raymond C. Van Leeuwen, “Be Fruitful and Multiply” Is This a Command or Blessing? (Christianity Today, November 12, 2001).

 

[Harry3142]

The commandment to be fruitful and multiply was repeated in Genesis 9:1. And yes, it was a commandment which needed to be obeyed. The society to whom it was directed were an agrarian people who made their living through the raising of herds of cattle and flocks of sheep, as well as the planting of crops and their harvesting at the appointed times. In order for all these activities to be accomplished successfully, it took manpower, and that manpower was to come from within the family unit rather than from strangers.

Also the defense of the nation depended on an abundance of young men who could overcome the attacks of their enemies. When we read of the tribes' sending their men into battle against those who wanted to destroy them, it is these young men that Scripture is referring to. And it only makes sense that in order to have the young men that were capable of defending the people against their enemies, they had to give birth to them.

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

The commandment to be fruitful and multiply was repeated in Genesis 9:1.

Gen 9:1 "And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth."

Q: Why would God need to give this additional blessing if the original were still in effect?

A: Because it was a blessing and not a command.

The blessing was necessary because the sins of humanity had resulted in their destruction - in the same way that Adam & Eve’s disobedience had made them subject to death. The blessing was to demonstrate the grace of God, who is able to forgive, bless, and redeem humanity. It wasn’t because Noah and his sons were on the boat so long that they’d forgotten how to procreate.

 

[Godel]

Having children, yes, is a blessing. But "be fruitful and multiply" is still an instruction from God. *BUT* it was not a universal one - it wasn't meant as "every single one must reproduce," but rather as a general instruction - it applied to humanity in general, not every specific person. We know it was only a general instruction because both Jesus and Paul stated that some are simply called to be celibate. (Mt.19:10-12; 1Cor.7)

So, Godcreatedsteve, your point, as far as I can see, is that homosexuality doesn't contradict that instruction (which I agree, in and of itself doesn't speak against homosexuality), and that homosexuality is good because you can raise children well. Is there more to your point? Just trying to be clear on what you're saying.

 

[sorednax]

Homosexuality doesn't contradict the scripture be fruitful and multiply any more than it contradicts the scripture about rendering onto Caesar what is Caesars. Because it isn't relevant. But there is plenty in the bible that condemns it.

Maybe that passage from Paul about how some are chosen to be celibate could apply to homosexuals. To be a homosexual is not a sin, and one can do Godly works, but to act on those desires is sinful. Hence, better to be celibate and serve the Lord. In the end, what is more important? To come into the fullness of the Lord, or to serve your desires, and justify the act by cherry-picking scripture to fit an agenda?

I think it always comes down to an agenda. Ask yourself this question: Do you seek to find justification of homosexuality in scripture, or to find what scripture says regarding homosexuality, and accept its answer, no matter where it leads?

 

[daydreamergurl15]

Gen 9:1 "And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth."

Q: Why would God need to give this additional blessing if the original were still in effect?

A: Because it was a blessing and not a command.

The blessing was necessary because the sins of humanity had resulted in their destruction - in the same way that Adam & Eve’s disobedience had made them subject to death. The blessing was to demonstrate the grace of God, who is able to forgive, bless, and redeem humanity. It wasn’t because Noah and his sons were on the boat so long that they’d forgotten how to procreate.

I don't know exactly your point but I read both Genesis 1:28 and 9:1 in their context and it both seems to be speaking of procreation. He also gave the same commandments to the animals in Genesis 1:22.

 

[LantanaAnna]

It was and is a commandment. You see when that commandment was first given, Adam and Eve were immortals in the garden. After the earth fell, then that commandment could be obeyed.

Bless Israel

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

Having children, yes, is a blessing. But "be fruitful and multiply" is still an instruction from God.

No, the Bible says it's a blessing from God.

*BUT* it was not a universal one - it wasn't meant as "every single one must reproduce," but rather as a general instruction - it applied to humanity in general, not every specific person.

Sort of like "though shalt not kill" doesn't apply to everyone, just to humanity in general? Not to every specific person?

We know it was only a general instruction because both Jesus and Paul stated that some are simply called to be celibate. (Mt.19:10-12; 1Cor.7)

But obviously they disobeyed the 'general instruction', so they could not have been as righteous as those who obey God's instructions. It's the same with those who aren't able to procreate: They've fallen short of the mark and disobeyed God's instruction.

So, Godcreatedsteve, your point, as far as I can see, is that homosexuality doesn't contradict that instruction

No, my point it that it's not an instruction.

(which I agree, in and of itself doesn't speak against homosexuality), and that homosexuality is good because you can raise children well.

Homosexuality is a sexual preference, and it's neither good or bad in itself. The problem is that heterosexual Christians have made an idol of their own sexuality by presuming that God is commanding them to lust after the opposite sex. When your sexuality becomes your religion, then of course you will see any other sexual preference as evil.

Is there more to your point? Just trying to be clear on what you're saying.

If you could have been clearer, I'm sure you would have been.

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

It was and is a commandment. You see when that commandment was first given, Adam and Eve were immortals in the garden. After the earth fell, then that commandment could be obeyed.

Chrysostom points out in On Virginity, “For where there is death, there too is sexual coupling, and where there is no death, there is no sexual coupling either.” Sexual reproduction directly implies mortality: Human beings reproduce sexually because we age and die, and would otherwise become extinct. Although it would be more biologically correct to say that we age and die because we sexually reproduce. Sexual reproduction produces genetically distinct individuals who necessarily age, reproduce, and eventually must die.


Species that do not reproduce sexually – simple bacteria for instance – maintain a natural immortality and don’t necessarily die of old age. One bacterium is cloned from another as they continue to live and evolve as a single living organism, potentially forever.


A 250 million year-old bacterium, referred to as B. permians, was recently discovered encased in a hard-shell spore in salty deposits beneath Carlsbad, New Mexico. It was then resurrected in the laboratory.


Another example is ‘Pando,’ the clonal colony of a single male Quaking Aspen Tree (Populus tremuloides) carrying identical genetic markers. Located in the Fishlake National Forest in southern Utah, scientists estimate it’s at least 80,000 years old – the oldest and largest continuously living thing on earth.


God cloned Eve from Adam because He intended they live forever in a chaste marriage. But by choosing to reproduce sexually, Adam and Eve initiated the aging process that would eventually lead to their death, just as the Lord had warned them, “For in the day that you eat of it you shall die.” (Gen 2:17)

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

I read both Genesis 1:28 and 9:1 in their context and it both seems to be speaking of procreation. He also gave the same commandments to the animals in Genesis 1:22.

But humankind was created in the image of God, not in the image of the animals. Human beings were created as spiritual beings, Psa 8:5 "For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour."

Jesus tells us, “The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be ‘accounted worthy’ to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." (Luke 20:34-36)


Gregory of Nyssa (310 – 395 AD) explains in On the Making of Man (chap. XVII) that inasmuch as those ‘accounted worthy’ would experience “the restoration of the fallen to their ancient state” and become like the angels, humanity must have originally been able to multiply like the angels - without sexual intercourse. But since God “saw beforehand by His all-seeing power the failure of their will to keep a direct course to what is good” and “in order that the multitude of human souls might not be cut short by its fall from that mode by which the angels were increased and multiplied”, He’d also made provisions for “that animal and irrational mode by which they now succeed one another.”

 

[Godel]

No, the Bible says it's a blessing from God.

I'm not disputing it's a blessing. I directly said it was a blessing. However, being a blessing does not preclude it from being an imperative statement.

Sort of like "though shalt not kill" doesn't apply to everyone, just to humanity in general? Not to every specific person?

Uh, no. Why would the fact that one command is general then mean that another command must also be general? There's no basis for that conclusion. There's this thing called "context". Hebrew relies a lot on context in determining its meaning, at least, notably more so than English. The instruction of "be fruitful and multiply" must be general, not universal, because otherwise both Jesus and Paul directly contradicted it. There is no similar context indicating only certain people are not to murder, while others are allowed to (and, btw, "murder" is a better translation, as God also instructed for the death penalty, which is killing, but it is not "murder").

But obviously they disobeyed the 'general instruction', so they could not have been as righteous as those who obey God's instructions. It's the same with those who aren't able to procreate: They've fallen short of the mark and disobeyed God's instruction.

Uh, no. Jesus and Paul wouldn't say some Christians are called to be disobedient to God.. that doesn't make any sense.

No, my point it that it's not an instruction.

Yeah, i get that. You're misunderstanding. The "be fruitful and multiply" thing does not apply to homosexual practices. We agree on that, we just have different views on *why* it doesn't apply. So, your first point, that we can disregard that passage from an argument about homosexual behavior, is accepted by me.. that's really all I'm saying.

Homosexuality is a sexual preference, and it's neither good or bad in itself.

I never said feeling a temptation itself was "bad".

The problem is that heterosexual Christians have made an idol of their own sexuality by presuming that God is commanding them to lust after the opposite sex. When your sexuality becomes your religion, then of course you will see any other sexual preference as evil.

I don't believe God commands anyone to lust after anything. Scripture specifically tells us lust is a sin. And I'd prefer it if you respond to what I'm actually saying, rather than vague responses about what some Christians somewhere are doing which has nothing to do with anything I said.

So, we're left with the remainder of your original post, where you say that the important thing is that homosexuals are capable of raising children in a loving environment and being able to raise them well. And, it seems to me, (which is what I'm asking you about) that you are giving that as one justification of the homosexual lifestyle. That, the fact that they are homosexual is not important, but rather how they raise their children is what matters. Is that not your point?

God cloned Eve from Adam...

Um, no. If Eve were a "clone", she would have been male.

...

because He intended they live forever in a chaste marriage.

Nonsense. The instruction/blessing/whatever-you-want-to-call-it "be fruitful and multiply" was given *before* the fall. It would not make any sense at that time if they were intended to be chaste.

 

[Harry3142]

GodCreatedSteve-

All the commandments found in Torah are societal in nature. The purpose of the Torah itself was to act as a constitution, enabling a people (the Hebrews) to form a cohesive society, in which everyone from their leaders to the lowliest laborers working in the fields would live under the same set of laws and commandments.

the Jews considered the commandment to be fruitful and multiply as one of the 613 societal laws. Unless specifically directed otherwise, every Jew and Jewess saw it as their obligation to get married and produce children. This was why it was seen as almost a rebuke from God if a woman remained barren. At the time of Christ it was even seen as a prerequisite for being a rabbi. Before they could be recognized as a rabbi in the traditional sense, they had to marry and have a family themselves.

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

I'm not disputing it's a blessing. I directly said it was a blessing. However, being a blessing does not preclude it from being an imperative statement.

Yes it does. A blessing is what God has done for us. A command is what we must do for God.

Uh, no. Why would the fact that one command is general then mean that another command must also be general? There's no basis for that conclusion. There's this thing called "context". Hebrew relies a lot on context in determining its meaning, at least, notably more so than English. The instruction of "be fruitful and multiply" must be general, not universal, because otherwise both Jesus and Paul directly contradicted it. There is no similar context indicating only certain people are not to murder, while others are allowed to (and, btw, "murder" is a better translation, as God also instructed for the death penalty, which is killing, but it is not "murder").

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]The first rule of Biblical interpretation is called the 'Rule of Definition.' You can't define something as a commandment in one part of the Bible and then define it differently somewhere else just because it suits your purpose.

Uh, no. Jesus and Paul wouldn't say some Christians are called to be disobedient to God.. that doesn't make any sense.

Of course they didn't say that - YOU did. Try and keep up.

Yeah, i get that. You're misunderstanding. The "be fruitful and multiply" thing does not apply to homosexual practices. We agree on that, we just have different views on *why* it doesn't apply. So, your first point, that we can disregard that passage from an argument about homosexual behavior, is accepted by me.. that's really all I'm saying.

No, you're saying that some are excused from this 'commandment'. I'm saying that it's a blessing, and not a command for anyone.

 

[Godel]

Yes it does. A blessing is what God has done for us. A command is what we must do for God.

I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong. There is NOTHING in the definition of a blessing that precludes the necessity of some act on the part of who would receive that blessing. That does not mean that all blessings include such a necessity, only that there is nothing saying that such a necessity can not be a part of a blessing.

We have clear example of this in Scripture. "All these blessings will come upon you and overtake you if you obey the Lord your God," - Deut.28:2.

The first rule of Biblical interpretation is called the 'Rule of Definition.' You can't define something as a commandment in one part of the Bible and then define it differently somewhere else just because it suits your purpose.

I'm not changing any of my definitions. I've given my definition of the phrase, "be fruitful and multiply". I have not given a different definition of that phrase anywhere else. I've defined general and universal. I have not given different definitions of those anywhere else. The only things I've defined differently are things that are different. The instruction to be fruitful and multiply is different than the instruction to not murder.

The claim that there can not be different types of instructions is ludicrous. It's like claiming there can't be different types of cars. If one has two doors, and one has four doors, are they not still both cars? According to your argument here, both of them can not be cars.

Of course they didn't say that - YOU did. Try and keep up.

No, again you are not understanding what is being said. You tried to present what I said as Scripture contradicting itself. Read it over again if you need to. All instructions are not universal. If they are, Jesus and Paul are contradicting Scripture. Therefore, all instructions can not be universal. Let me know if you still don't understand it.

No, you're saying that some are excused from this 'commandment'. I'm saying that it's a blessing, and not a command for anyone.

Yes. That is correct. That is exactly what I'm saying. Your idea that I claim that I'm not saying it is absurd. I've said repeatedly that it is what I'm saying. We agree that passage is not an argument against homosexuality. We disagree on why.

 

[Harry3142]

Here is a list of the 613 commandments of Torah. Note commandment #63:

www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

 

[daydreamergurl15]

But humankind was created in the image of God, not in the image of the animals. Human beings were created as spiritual beings, Psa 8:5 "For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour."

Probably the reason why He gave us dominion over animals. But He still gave Animals and Humans the same command to "be fruitful and multiply.

Jesus tells us, “The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be ‘accounted worthy’ to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." (Luke 20:34-36)

Not sure how this connect to what you're trying to tell me, but when He created Eve for Adam He gave us the definition of marriage:
"Therefore a man shall leave his father, and mother and be joined to His wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."--Genesis 2:24-25

And it is in this manner that humans should be 'fruitful and multiply".

Gregory of Nyssa (310 – 395 AD) explains in On the Making of Man (chap. XVII) that inasmuch as those ‘accounted worthy’ would experience “the restoration of the fallen to their ancient state” and become like the angels, humanity must have originally been able to multiply like the angels - without sexual intercourse. But since God “saw beforehand by His all-seeing power the failure of their will to keep a direct course to what is good” and “in order that the multitude of human souls might not be cut short by its fall from that mode by which the angels were increased and multiplied”, He’d also made provisions for “that animal and irrational mode by which they now succeed one another.”

The bible tells us this about the angels:

27 Last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”

29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. 31 But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying,--Matthew 19:27-31​

In Genesis 1:28 it tells us that God created us, humans, male and female, in Scripture, it never speaks of a female angel. Every angel mentioned in Scripture are males. Now, we don't have any scriptures that tells us that Angels procreate without sexual intercourse don't know if there needed to be male and female angels (though Scripture doesn't speak of one) for procreation to be occure, so I don't know what Gregory of Nyssa got his information from.

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

In Genesis 1:28 it tells us that God created us, humans, male and female, in Scripture, it never speaks of a female angel. Every angel mentioned in Scripture are males.

[FONT=&quot]“behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork.” [/FONT][FONT=&quot](Zeck 5:9)[/FONT]

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

Here is a list of the 613 commandments of Torah. Note commandment #63:

www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

That's the sanitized version, not the original version written by Maimonides, which does not include 'be fruitful and multiply' but does include things like "The rapist must marry his victim if she is unwed — Deut. 22:29"

613 commandments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


613 Mitzvot - 613 Jewish Commandments - ReligionFacts

P.S.

Rom 8:1-8 "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God."

 

[IisJustMe]

[FONT=&quot]“behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork.” [/FONT][FONT=&quot](Zeck 5:9)[/FONT]

This is a vision, and therefore does not depict actual persons or heavenly beings.

In this vision the prophet sees an ephah, something in the shape of a corn measure. This represented the Jewish nation. They are filling the measure of their iniquity, and when it is full, they will be delivered into the hands of those to whom God sold them for their sins. The woman sitting in the midst of the ephah represents the sinful synagogue and nation of the Jews, in their latter and corrupt age. Guilt is upon the sinner as a weight of lead, to sink him to the lowest hell. This seems to mean the condemnation of the Jews, after they filled the measure of their iniquities by rejecting Christ and His gospel. Zechariah sees the ephah, with the woman thus pressed in it, carried away to some far country. This indicates that the Jews would be scattered their land, and forced to dwell in far countries, as they had been in Babylon. Indeed, the second diaspora occurred shortly after the destruction of the Temple, which was in 70 AD and fulfilled Jesus' prophecy that Jerusalem would be all but desolate and the Temple "not one stone remaining on another." The ephah will be firmly placed anywhere but in Israel, and the sufferings of the people continued far longer than in their late captivity. Blindness comes to Israel, and they are settled upon their own unbelief.

So there is still not indication of female angels, nor males for that matter, as there truly is no indication of their gender other than the masculine sounding names of the few who are identified.

 

[Godcreatedsteve]

This is a vision, and therefore does not depict actual persons or heavenly beings.

A vision by a prophet of God is always of actual things, or else it is a false prophet.

Also, this is the second time you've broken your word by answering my post. My understanding was that you report my posts to the muckety-mucks rather than answering them.