Why do Christians procreate?

jason_delisle said:

Oh no my friend. That is not the answers an atheist wants to hear. Stand by for dissatisfied comments. [emoji13]

Click to expand...

Oh no, my friend. That is exactly the kind of answer that is appropriate to the question.

I even gave it a like (even though I would not agree with it) because it very much gave an answer to the question.

MentalHolocaust said:

I won't engage anything you said until you revise that outrageous 75% figure. I was Russian Orthodox for ten years before I abandoned Christianity, and I was a Roman Catholic for twenty years before that. I am not a fool. I also know what Roman Catholicism preaches, and I find much of what you said suspect. But again, no discussion until you are more honest about demographics...

Click to expand...

Oh, but what I said about demographics IS honest.

Latin America, much of sub-Saharan Africa, the plurality of Canada, a quarter of the United States, tens of millions of Indians and 100 million Filipinos, and 2/3rds of Europe (France, Iberia, half of Germany, Belgium, Italy, Austria, Croatia, Poland, the Czechs, "Volhynia" are all Catholic. So are the Lebanese Christians. That's about 1.4 billion people, more than China. Catholicism is the largest religion in the United States and Australia as well.

Over against that you have what? The Orthodox are the next biggest group, but what is that, really? Less than 10% of any of the Middle Eastern country, dwindling down to 5%, 4%, 2%. There's Ethiopia, with a few tens of millions. Mainly there's Russia, with 170 million people (not all of them Orthodox) and much of the Balkans. The Orthodox make up perhaps 10% of Christianity.

And then finally there are the Protestants, which can be divided into two groups: the Anglicans, a sort of Catholic-lite version, that is more than half of them, and the rest.

If you go look at the figures, it works out to a Christian world of about 1.9 billion, 1.4 billion (over 75%) of whom are Catholic, another 10-15% of whom are Orthodox, 5-6% are Anglican, and the remaining 5% or so, the welter of Protestants, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.

My figures were right the first time, and I will not revise them. The overwhelming supermajority of Christians in the world are Catholic, and the most important minority of Christians is Orthodox, which are almost Catholic is most ways.

If you're going to speak to "Protestant Christianity, the 10% fringe, by all means do so, but don't elide that into "Christianity". Christianity, by and large, is Catholicism.

As far as your "suspicions" about Catholic beliefs, have you ever read the Cathechism, the Canon Law, the Bible and a good volume of the Lives of the Saints cover to cover? No? I have. Of course what I say, or anybody else for that matter, emphasizes the aspects of the religion that I think are important for the discussion, but I don't simply make things up.

When it comes to the Bible, there are only a few portions where Catholics are bound by the Church to a certain belief. Beyond that, Catholics are quite free to read and interpret, just as long as their interpretation doesn't break any of the infallible doctrines - which are mostly contained in the Nicene Creed.

So, if you don't want to have a conversation, we won't. Certainly if the "condition" of having a conversation with you is that I revise basic demographic figures or cease to state that Catholicism is the supermajority Christian religion, I'm not going to lie in order to have a discussion with you. That game ain't worth the candle.

Instead, I will just let the Catholic supermajority fact worry you. If you want to go research it to "prove" me wrong, go ahead. If you come back triumphantly and declare "Ha! Catholics are only 73%, not 75%!" I will still be right. 73% is still a supermajority.

If the numbers madden you, go research them and struggle with them. Once you look and realize that, yes, Catholicism IS supermajority Christianity, then you can come back and start quibbling about doctrines. You'll discover that what I've said is the truth there too.

Then you can be miffed that you can't play the same game with Christianity writ supermajority large that you can with little splintered and squabbling sects in the 5% fringe.

And then perhaps you will come to a more mature and reasoned viewpoint of Christianity. Catholics don't play Sola Scriptura, because it's not true.

MentalHolocaust said:

I won't engage anything you said until you revise that outrageous 75% figure. I was Russian Orthodox for ten years before I abandoned Christianity, and I was a Roman Catholic for twenty years before that. I am not a fool. I also know what Roman Catholicism preaches, and I find much of what you said suspect. But again, no discussion until you are more honest about demographics...

Click to expand...

Thus proving my point. No answer is good enough.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

jason_delisle said:

Thus proving my point. No answer is good enough.

Click to expand...

Don't worry about it too much. Facts are stubborn things. They get into the mind like grains of sand in the shoe.
What I said, that elicited that response, was that Catholicism is 75% of Christianity. As a general statement, it's true. Apparently it's offensive to our interlocutor. Since I won't go and revisit it (other than to double down on it), he will be sufficiently bugged by the assertion to go and look it up, so that he can pull a "gotcha".

But given that I didn't make up the numbers - I just stated them broadly from memory - he will find out that, grosso modo, what I said is true. He may come back with slightly different percentages, but crowing "73% not 75%!" is not really a victory at all. My point about the supermajoritarian status of Catholicism will remain. Which means that in the context of a broadside against "Christianity", if the Catholic beliefs are not front and center, the discussion is not about "Christianity", it's about some narrow minority of Christianity.

Atheists like to rile religious people up. They like to speak from a position of assumed authority. They really believe that the facts run all with them. When confronted with a major set of facts they did not know, they are inclined - as our friend did - to draw themselves up into self-important authority and thunder, as if from on high, that they will not address such things for whatever reason.

Which of course merely gives some stubborn wildling like me the opportunity to REPEAT the facts AGAIN, tossing a few more grains of sand.

He'll be COMPELLED to go to the Internet to "prove" me wrong, and in the process he'll learn something. And even if pride and self-importance drives him to rage at me, that fact of the supermajoritarianism of Catholicism will sink in, and irritate him, because it will mean for him to really attack CHRISTIANITY, as opposed to narrow sects of Christianity, he must deal with Catholicism. And Catholicism is a much more difficult target theologically, precisely because it is NOT confined to a book that somebody can sea lawyer.

When atheists write, they write provocatively, to get under the skin of the believer. But atheists are not the only people who know how to bait a hook.

Vicomte13 said:

Don't worry about it too much. Facts are stubborn things. They get into the mind like grains of sand in the shoe.
What I said, that elicited that response, was that Catholicism is 75% of Christianity. As a general statement, it's true. Apparently it's offensive to our interlocutor. Since I won't go and revisit it (other than to double down on it), he will be sufficiently bugged by the assertion to go and look it up, so that he can pull a "gotcha".

But given that I didn't make up the numbers - I just stated them broadly from memory - he will find out that, grosso modo, what I said is true. He may come back with slightly different percentages, but crowing "73% not 75%!" is not really a victory at all. My point about the supermajoritarian status of Catholicism will remain. Which means that in the context of a broadside against "Christianity", if the Catholic beliefs are not front and center, the discussion is not about "Christianity", it's about some narrow minority of Christianity.

Atheists like to rile religious people up. They like to speak from a position of assumed authority. They really believe that the facts run all with them. When confronted with a major set of facts they did not know, they are inclined - as our friend did - to draw themselves up into self-important authority and thunder, as if from on high, that they will not address such things for whatever reason.

Which of course merely gives some stubborn wildling like me the opportunity to REPEAT the facts AGAIN, tossing a few more grains of sand.

He'll be COMPELLED to go to the Internet to "prove" me wrong, and in the process he'll learn something. And even if pride and self-importance drives him to rage at me, that fact of the supermajoritarianism of Catholicism will sink in, and irritate him, because it will mean for him to really attack CHRISTIANITY, as opposed to narrow sects of Christianity, he must deal with Catholicism. And Catholicism is a much more difficult target theologically, precisely because it is NOT confined to a book that somebody can sea lawyer.

When atheists write, they write provocatively, to get under the skin of the believer. But atheists are not the only people who can bait a hook.

Click to expand...

Agreed, when an atheist is backed into the corner, they tend to throw insults and straw men in order to distract you away from the main point.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

jason_delisle said:

Agreed, when an atheist is backed into the corner, they tend to throw insults and straw men in order to distract you away from the main point.

Click to expand...

So do lawyers. It usually works. Except against good lawyers. The good lawyer will respond to that by reiterating all of the facts he pronounced before.

Enjoying yourselves?

No, seriously. I have no idea where this 75% figure comes from. I'd like a citation. And I am quite well-versed in Roman Catholicism. You needn't talk down to me, unless you like "straw men and insults."

nightflight said:

Isn't it risky bringing a child into the world, knowing there is a possibility that he/she may end up in eternal torment? Why risk it?

Click to expand...

MentalHolocaust said:

why conceive a child at all if the risk exists for it to be eternally damned?

Click to expand...

Eudaimonist said:

People may choose not to have intercourse and thereby avoid having any children. Why not choose that?

Click to expand...

Eudaimonist said:

Why do Christians (at least those who believe in eternal torment) have children when they know that children of theirs might end up in eternal torment?

I don't see how shifting the responsibility to God does anything to relieve the ethical issue of having children knowing that some of them might end up in eternal torment.

Click to expand...

My personal answer is I should not let the possibility of evil be what decides what I do. And there is the possibility of my children having love and intimacy with God and learning how to love any and all people. This is too much to miss out on.

And I know how evil is designed to make this look bad; evil is like the politician who is doing all he can to get the attention so we do not see who would be the really right candidate. Like this, evil is doing all it does to decoy our attention away from all that is really good and possible.

So, I wouldn't let evil control your attention and decide what you do and what you think about God.

com7fy8 said:

My personal answer is I should not let the possibility of evil be what decides what I do.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I'd count that as an actual answer to the question.


eudaimonia,

Mark

com7fy8 said:

My personal answer is I should not let the possibility of evil be what decides what I do. And there is the possibility of my children having love and intimacy with God and learning how to love any and all people. This is too much to miss out on.

Click to expand...

I like this.

Eudaimonist said:

Thanks, I'd count that as an actual answer to the question.

Click to expand...

Well, of course, no one has to agree

MentalHolocaust said:

I like this.

Click to expand...

Well . . . . . . one thing which atheists have helped me to learn is to answer a question directly.

Now I would add that if I have children, this means I need to be a good example for them. So, there is this responsibility with having children; they are not here only for what I want. Plus, by the way, I don't control where they spend eternity, but my example can have a lot to do with it.

Also, I think of this > it seems to me how a number of parents use toys and candy and TV and video games and money-seeking babysitters and caregivers and other little children to babysit their kids. These parents might want to get things done around the house, or have time for what they like to do. So, they might even shut away their children when these children come and want to help with chores or join in what is interesting for their parents.

But this can be keeping the children away, for just one thing, from sharing with a mature adult so they can learn how to relate in love.

Another thing > if you say no when your little ones come and show an interest in helping with chores, they could be getting taught to say no to chores!!!! But, instead, they could do things with you so they discover how chores can be a love and sharing and caring activity, instead of virtually a "time out" to be isolated from you plus from whoever has been giving them attention.

And if we do not include them in what we enjoy - - later on, how will they be interested in what we might then wish to share with them . . . after we in their early years taught them not to be interested?

So, never mind how the evil of the world could send a child to hell. The evil could be me!!!!

MentalHolocaust said:

Enjoying yourselves?

No, seriously. I have no idea where this 75% figure comes from. I'd like a citation. And I am quite well-versed in Roman Catholicism. You needn't talk down to me, unless you like "straw men and insults."

Click to expand...

Well, I personally don't know where 75% comes from. However, according to pew research center, "Catholics comprised about half (48%) of all Christians and 17% of the world’s total population, according to historical estimates from the World Christian Database."

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/02/13/the-global-catholic-population/

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

nightflight said:

Isn't it risky bringing a child into the world, knowing there is a possibility that he/she may end up in eternal torment? Why risk it?

Click to expand...

But there is also a chance of eternal bliss.

Its hard to do a cost-benefit analysis when you're dealing with infinities. Infinite bliss divided by infinite torment...err.
Its also hard when you're dealing with unknown outcomes. How many people end up in eternal torment? 90%, 10%, 0.0001%? No one seems to know.


By not having a kid, you are robbing them of the chance to experience eternal bliss. How cruel.

First off I want to acknowledge a couple things. There are many versions of Christianity, including catholicism, that don't feel the force of the op simply by virtue of their theology. Fair enough I say.
Less fair is what I am about to do, quoting two different people in one post. They are making a similar point and hopefully they will forgive me.
So here we go...

Tree of Life said:

I don't think I'm dodging the question. I just think you're dissatisfied with my answer. Being born into the church does not guarantee salvation, but it does make salvation highly more likely.

Click to expand...

leftrightleftrightleft said:

Its also hard when you're dealing with unknown outcomes. How many people end up in eternal torment? 90%, 10%, 0.0001%? No one seems to know.

Click to expand...

If we accept the Bible as true then we actually do have a very rough guideline for how many people get into heaven versus how many go to hell. In Matthew 7 Jesus says: For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
Now we don't know if Jesus means a 95/5 split, 75/25, or what ecaxtly. But is seems clear that more people than not, and by a significant margin, go to hell. Now we need to adjust that calculation to represent the numbers of children born to Christian families, to include the numbers of saved from other backgrounds etc etc but in any case I should think that if you do belive in eternal torment, that this would be of concern.

nightflight said:

Isn't it risky bringing a child into the world, knowing there is a possibility that he/she may end up in eternal torment? Why risk it?

Click to expand...

Yes.

But love is worth the risk.

jason_delisle said:

However, according to pew research center, "Catholics comprised about half (48%) of all Christians and 17% of the world’s total population, according to historical estimates from the World Christian Database."

Click to expand...

Yes, I'm not disputing that. But 48% is a far cry from 75%.

nightflight said:

Isn't it risky bringing a child into the world, knowing there is a possibility that he/she may end up in eternal torment? Why risk it?

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that it's a bit of a pyramid scheme.

Vicomte13 said:

When atheists write, they write provocatively, to get under the skin of the believer. But atheists are not the only people who know how to bait a hook.

Click to expand...

Hey... what are you doing here? I got the impression from you that arguing with atheists is counterproductive. Oh wait... what am I doing here? I kind of retired from this website.

Lol.

jason_delisle said:

Agreed, when an atheist is backed into the corner, they tend to throw insults and straw men in order to distract you away from the main point.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Please could you stop hurling insults at atheists in general?

Nihilist Virus said:

Hey... what are you doing here? I got the impression from you that arguing with atheists is counterproductive. Oh wait... what am I doing here? I kind of retired from this website.
Lol.

Click to expand...

You have a point. What AM I doing here?