Married without children

[Tom Sawyer]

So in your view that is a secular view and so because someone has A view that you consider a secular view, that makes them a secular Christian.
You're entitled to your view.

A secular view is one that regards marriage and children as optional, and does not recognize children as the blessing that they are. it is moreover one that disregards natural law. The Bible uplifts marriage and children, and through the ages Christendom has too, just as it has respected natural law until very recently in history. The contracepted Christian with few or no children is an incredibly modern thing, which has not come from the Bible or from historical Christian theology. So naturally I view it as secular, and I view Christians with those attitudes as secularized, even if they are sincere in their faith.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Of course the Bible spoke of married couples with no kids several times, both by choice and by limitation, but keep going. You haven’t gotten a lot of this right yet, I see no reason to start now.

 

[Hank77]

I view Christians with those attitudes as secularized, even if they are sincere in their faith.

You are talking to someone who has four children and six grandchildren that recognizes children as a blessing from God. Because of that I don't wish to see children raised by people who don't like or want children.
You are saying that God does want people who don't like or want to children to have them anyway.
Being raised in a Christian home doesn't automatically make someone a good parent to their own children.

I know someone that knew from the time she was a teenager that she didn't want children of her own. She knew she would not make a good full time caregiver for children. She loves her nieces and nephews and they love her, as do the neighbor's children who she taught to garden and care for their pets. Her favorite charity is St Jude's Children's Hospital. Is she more of a blessing to children living the way she does or would she be more of a blessing to children of her own that she never wanted?

Living as a Christian isn't all about the individual receiving God's blessing on them but it's also about being a blessing to others, especially children, and finding how we can best serve God. Some people can't best serve God and be a blessing as a parent. But they can be a blessing to their spouse and others.

 

[snoochface]

Amen, Hank.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

It is awkward at times not having kids and it is indeed frustrating when people don't mind their own business about the subject or assume you're wife is pregnant if her stomach shows a bit. But when the time is right you will have them, and if you don't thats ok too. Despite what a few teach, the purpose of marriage is not kids. Kids are a by-product of marriage if the couple chooses. Marriage is about two believers marrying and leaning on each other for support (well and God of course) who want to live a christian life together.

Side note, I believe its unbiblical to teach "Go forth and multiply" is what our goal is. Its taken out of context. If you read the whole chapter its about populating a earth at the time which was practically void of people.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

You are talking to someone who has four children and six grandchildren that recognizes children as a blessing from God. Because of that I don't wish to see children raised by people who don't like or want children.
You are saying that God does want people who don't like or want to children to have them anyway.
Being raised in a Christian home doesn't automatically make someone a good parent to their own children.

I know someone that knew from the time she was a teenager that she didn't want children of her own. She knew she would not make a good full time caregiver for children. She loves her nieces and nephews and they love her, as do the neighbor's children who she taught to garden and care for their pets. Her favorite charity is St Jude's Children's Hospital. Is she more of a blessing to children living the way she does or would she be more of a blessing to children of her own that she never wanted?

Living as a Christian isn't all about the individual receiving God's blessing on them but it's also about being a blessing to others, especially children, and finding how we can best serve God. Some people can't best serve God and be a blessing as a parent. But they can be a blessing to their spouse and others.

I believe I have answered some of those points. Number one, God indeed gives us the recognition of the value of children, and if we are respecting God, and not specifically celibate for ministry, we will want to have them. If we feel we don't maybe we need to learn. God does that too. He teaches people. I began to have children because I learned it is the right thing to do, and I learned to appreciate them much more, and how to love them well, with experience.

God does not want humanity wiping out its fertility, and He does not want His people the Church rejecting their future and being replaced by Islam. To reject children, except for very specific justified purposes, is against the will of God and is against nature.

Having children of your own and also being a caregiver for the children of others is not mutually exclusive. Countless parents do BOTH. There are those who are celibate for ministry or who are infertile who may have extra time to do that, and that's fine, but those who are able should have children.

But I repeat: Why should anyone take marriage and family advice from a people group that has no future and is being replaced by those who have children?

I think we need to go somewhere else for advice.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It is awkward at times not having kids and it is indeed frustrating when people don't mind their own business about the subject or assume you're wife is pregnant if her stomach shows a bit. But when the time is right you will have them, and if you don't thats ok too. Despite what a few teach, the purpose of marriage is not kids. Kids are a by-product of marriage if the couple chooses. Marriage is about two believers marrying and leaning on each other for support (well and God of course) who want to live a christian life together.

Side note, I believe its unbiblical to teach "Go forth and multiply" is what our goal is. Its taken out of context. If you read the whole chapter its about populating a earth at the time which was practically void of people.

I'm sorry but you are wrong here; it is RIGHT to teach we are to "be fruitful and multiply." Nowhere does the text say this is only because there were few people. That is your assertion.

The commandment "do not murder" was given when FAR few people were on the earth as well? We can safely say far UNDER a billion. Perhaps we can ignore that commandment too, as we have more people today.

God's command to man is to have children. It is an eternal command and is in harmony with nature, which unites man and woman in an act which produces them.

 

[snoochface]

Jesus reiterates do not murder. "You have heard not to murder, but I say that to have hate in your heart toward another is murder." He never reiterates a command to have children. He changes that commission to "Go forth and make disciples of all nations."

You seem to have a single-mindedness about this. If you do not want children of your own you:

1) Do not respect God.
2) Do not obey God.
3) Want to wipe out Christianity.
4) Want to replace Christianity with Islam.
5) Go against nature. (I assume you have continued having children until you were no longer able to conceive them, correct?)
6) Are a sinful Christian.
7) Are, in fact, more secular than Christian.

No one's childbearing is of any business of yours. Your world, both personally and globally, does not change by someone's decision not to have children. There are plenty of people having children, and plenty of Christians having children. The vast majority of the population wants and has children. Just as some are given spiritual gifts and others are given different gifts, not everyone is given the desire to have children. Not everyone is given the desire to marry. Christianity isn't going to be wiped out by this.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I'm sorry but you are wrong here; it is RIGHT to teach we are to "be fruitful and multiply." Nowhere does the text say this is only because there were few people. That is your assertion.

The commandment "do not murder" was given when FAR few people were on the earth as well? We can safely say far UNDER a billion. Perhaps we can ignore that commandment too, as we have more people today.

God's command to man is to have children. It is an eternal command and is in harmony with nature, which unites man and woman in an act which produces them.

In that case we should also stone sinners.

We can agree to disagree.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Op, you don’t owe anybody an explanation for why you don’t want kids. There is nothing wrong with not wanting kids, thinking you did and realizing you don’t, thinking you wanted more than you have but then changing your mind, or any variable in between. Up until about 5 years ago, I wanted between four and six kids, but with one biological son and two more blessings from my husband’s first marriage that we see every day but Saturday, I changed my mind and said I was good with what we had. If I got pregnant tomorrow, it would be a disaster of Biblical proportions.

When I changed my mind, I didn’t have to answer, explain, or justify my choice, or have to hear “but you’ll change your mind” or “but you will regret it,” and if your choice is to stop at zero, you shouldn’t have to either.

You and your husband have a calling for zero kids? Well then bless you and your husband for answering that calling especially when people who have no part in if you have 0 or 100 kids and won’t help you at all in being a parents feel like they can tell you what to do. I have come to learn the lesson in that is that no matter what you do, there will be people who feel unjustly confident in telling you you’re wrong, and in that is a surprise hidden gift in being able to hear it, acknowledge it, and allow it to not disturb your peace or path. You’ve done admirably in both so rock on.

 

[mama2one]

agree with Tropical Wilds ^

we discussed adopting again but just couldn't get it together to start again
and then wondered if it was a mistake to raise an only, as SO many people say it is

however, a couple times I did say "you need a brother" and our child was "no way" as she's heard too many stories from her friends about brothers so it all worked out

not everyone is meant to raise children
and I know one is enough for us just as no kids is right for others

 

[Tropical Wilds]

With three boys, we occasionally get “you won’t try for a girl?” Honestly, I only wanted girls until I had boys... Now I would only want boys and no girls. Any regret I was worried I’d feel when I realized my first and only to-term pregnancy would be a boy was completely removed when he was born. Never, ever once since have I ever thought “I wish I had a girl.” Especially now as in my gut I feel like this is always how it was meant to be.

 

[JRichard68]

God does not want humanity wiping out its fertility, and He does not want His people the Church rejecting their future and being replaced by Islam.

News flash! Christians not having children increases Islam!

 

[Guy Incognito]

A secular view is one that regards marriage and children as optional, and does not recognize children as the blessing that they are. it is moreover one that disregards natural law. The Bible uplifts marriage and children, and through the ages Christendom has too, just as it has respected natural law until very recently in history. The contracepted Christian with few or no children is an incredibly modern thing, which has not come from the Bible or from historical Christian theology. So naturally I view it as secular, and I view Christians with those attitudes as secularized, even if they are sincere in their faith.

While the bible uplifts both of those things - it mandates nor categorizes either as sinful. Jesus nor Paul were married. Heck, Paul even says “I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am.” (1 Cor 7:7-8).

Marriage, and in my estimation children, are for those who are called to it. That's not everyone, and the Lord can (and does) use those who are married without children and single to advance the kingdom and His glory - in ways and areas that those who are married with kids might not be able to commit to.

 

[Martyr's Crown]

My husband and I are also a married couple without any children, we are both 35 now, and we don't want to have any children either.

In my case it is that I wish to have more focus and time spent on God, I want to do as much as can be done for God's Kingdom, and be more available for other people that God leads into my path.

Though like with you getting along with most people our age can be difficult, more for them, I think. Lately I seem to have more talks with women who are older than me, which seems to enjoy having a conversation with me.

I am just happy with anyone I meet outside and who are open for a chat, I consider it a blessing from God which I hope can be a blessing for both of us. And I am also open for any possibilities where I can be a witness for Christ too.

Some of these women are also open for meeting more, either for a visit or going to a Cafè together. I think it is nice.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

In that case we should also stone sinners.

We can agree to disagree.

No, that is not true. It's like saying well, if you believe -- you shall not murder -- is true for today you are also saying it's right to stone sinners. It is part of the moral law, and there is nothing in the NT to suggest we should ignore it. In fact the NT Scriptures are in good harmony with it, and also uphold natural law, which teaches the same thing. The moral law is eternal.

 

[JRichard68]

It seems that a desire to return to the "law" is a mistake the Hebrews were making that the writer wanted to address. The encouragement was to continue in the Grace of Christ which they had received, and not return to the Law. There were also warnings about turning from grace and back to the Law. Yes, the world is governed by moral and natural laws, and God is the ultimate moral law Giver, but the desire to follow law nullifies the Grace given to us.
Also, the Apostles themselves were straightforward as to what should apply to Gentile believers when brought the very question about following the law:

For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well (Acts 15: 28-30).​

The idea of married couples being under some obligation to bear children - as if it were some moral law - just isn't found.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It seems that a desire to return to the "law" is a mistake the Hebrews were making that the writer wanted to address. The encouragement was to continue in the Grace of Christ which they had received, and not return to the Law. There were also warnings about turning from grace and back to the Law. Yes, the world is governed by moral and natural laws, and God is the ultimate moral law Giver, but the desire to follow law nullifies the Grace given to us.
Also, the Apostles themselves were straightforward as to what should apply to Gentile believers when brought the very question about following the law:

For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well (Acts 15: 28-30).​

The idea of married couples being under some obligation to bear children - as if it were some moral law - just isn't found.

I agree in a certain sense with what you are saying -- we do not have the law in terms of needing it to be justified, as we are justified by Christ. However, we DO follow the moral law, and that is a necessary part of life in Christ in the New Covenant. There are countless teachings in the NT about the need to obey God as well as warnings for those who do evil. In fact read Revelation 2 and 3 as far as strong warnings against Christians who choose to sin.

So we may not follow the law as in the Mosaic order or in terms of justification, but we MUST follow the law which is written on our hearts, and is a part of us as a new creation.

There ARE legitimate reasons for not having children -- such as celibacy for the sake of ministry -- so it is not always sinful to refrain. However, considering the motivations in the hearts of Christians, I consider most of the small families in the modern Church to be rooted in sinfulness, yes. It is plainly wrong.

 

[JRichard68]

I agree in a certain sense with what you are saying -- we do not have the law in terms of needing it to be justified, as we are justified by Christ. However, we DO follow the moral law, and that is a necessary part of life in Christ in the New Covenant. There are countless teachings in the NT about the need to obey God as well as warnings for those who do evil. In fact read Revelation 2 and 3 as far as strong warnings against Christians who choose to sin.

So we may not follow the law as in the Mosaic order or in terms of justification, but we MUST follow the law which is written on our hearts, and is a part of us as a new creation.

There ARE legitimate reasons for not having children -- such as celibacy for the sake of ministry -- so it is not always sinful to refrain. However, considering the motivations in the hearts of Christians, I consider most of the small families in the modern Church to be rooted in sinfulness, yes. It is plainly wrong.

I appreciate your perspective here (I don't always disagree with folks ). I'm one of the unfortunate ones who doesn't have any children, and I got married later in life with my wife not able to have kids. To a degree I can understand some of the perspective about motivations of the heart. I'd wanted children, but life circumstances have prevented it. But I don't begrudge those who make a conscious choice not to.

 

[Kurt Warner]

There are people who shouldn't own pets not to mention having children. We too often live in a "check the box" kind of world as we run after a sense of satisfaction and fulfillment. College? Check. Married? Check. Kids? Check... Many don't put much critical thought, analysis or prayer into these decisions, they just check the boxes because they have been programmed to do so. Christians are not immune to this especially young and/or immature Christians. The OP and her husband made a decision not to have children. Good for them. It is a lifetime commitment and if they don't believe they are able or willing to make that commitment that is fine. At the same time the OP needs to understand that at some point she may feel regret for not having children. She may even push her husband to have children as she approaches the end of her child bearing years fearful that she has missed out. Every decision we make has consequences; some good and some bad. You will have to focus on the benefits and opportunities not having children affords you when you are tweaked with feelings of regret or wonderment.

As to fitting in in a church setting... you are in the minority so you will have to navigate that reality without resentment toward the majority. They are not bad people for talking about those issues which are priorities to them. Even though you have chosen not to have children, I'm sure you are pro-family and children so you can celebrate with them. It is important for each person to be content with the choices they have made. The childless couple should not envy or resent the couple with children and the couple with children should not envy or resent the couple without children. Each has made their choices and they need to take ownership of those choices.