Why do Christians procreate?

Vicomte13 said:

The latter.

Click to expand...

I guess the notion of love as a pillar of the faith is a Protestant invention.

Nihilist Virus said:

I guess the notion of love as a pillar of the faith is a Protestant invention.

Click to expand...

Perhaps.

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 definitely get what you mean--in the practical sense of things, since any soul once it is born may end up in eternal torment, it would be better to just clean stay out of the whole thing. That way, you don't have to worry about bringing any souls into the world that may end up in eternal torment. The reason why a Christian (or some Christians, or me at least) don't consider it a risk (or take the risk, however it is you look at it) is that because we believe in a Sovereign God; that God has ordained what will happen in our lives and it will work out ultimately to our good no matter if we don't understand how that is possible. We consign everything over to the Lord and his eternal counsel. It involves places God's word above our flawed logic. We trust that if God blesses us with children and we raise him or her in the best way we can, that what happens to that soul occurs according to the eternal counsel of God. After all, God requires that we love him first and that means above our families and children. Now, being earthly beings most of us can't do that; yet once we are freed from these fleshly prisons and have eternal fellowship with God, there will be no more sin. That is what a Christian looks forward to the most.

Eudaimonist said:

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...

Sure, that may be considered unethical according to society's standards (if in fact this society agrees there is an eternal torment, but does not submit to the authority of God's word; which seems a little odd set-up to me. But what have you). But it is not according to God's word (since it is not unlawful to have children; in fact, God encourages it). You can consider me unethical if you want to; my main concern is what God thinks of me, not what people think of me.

Archaeopteryx said:

Dude, it wouldn't matter to you if there was good evidence that his body was stolen and re-buried elsewhere. You've made that abundantly clear. You don't care.

Click to expand...

It's not that I don't care, it's that I do care. I care about truth.

As a side note, my properly basic belief in the self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit will act as an intrinsic defeater of any would be defeater you might actually try to put forward.

Now what I actually don't care about is whether or not you feel some type of way about what I just said. That I don't care about.

jason_delisle said:

And in answer to your question and the question of the OP, Christians do the same. Christians also believe that God commanded us to procreate. (Genesis 1:28)

Click to expand...

Although, technically, it was Adam and Eve specifically to
whom that directive was given, not necessarily all
Christians who ever exist.


-

anonymous person said:

It's not that I don't care, it's that I do care. I care about truth.

Click to expand...

No you don't.

anonymous person said:

As a side note, my properly basic belief in the self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit will act as an intrinsic defeater of any would be defeater you might actually try to put forward.

Click to expand...

Case in point. Any religionist can play this trick, Jeremy.

anonymous person said:

Now what I actually don't care about is whether or not you feel some type of way about what I just said. That I don't care about.

Click to expand...

We've already established that you don't care how people evaluate your intellectual honesty and that you refuse to act on feedback to improve it.

Archaeopteryx said:

No you don't.

Case in point. Any religionist can play this trick, Jeremy.

We've already established that you don't care how people evaluate your intellectual honesty and that you refuse to act on feedback to improve it.

Click to expand...

I actually have taken your advice. I did so on my blog for example.

I won't make apologies for ignoring much of what you say. For much of it is worthy of such a response. On the off chance you do give advice that is actually helpful, I take it.

anonymous person said:

I actually have taken your advice. I did so on my blog for example.

I won't make apologies for ignoring much of what you say. For much of it is worthy of such a response. On the off chance you do give advice that is actually helpful, I take it.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, your blog. How's that coming along? At least you take my advice on things that really matter, like your blog.

Eudaimonist said:

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


eudaimonia,

Mark

Click to expand...

At my age choices are few

nightflight said:

No, its not ridiculous. What's ridiculous is comparing temporal death to conscious eternal torment.

Click to expand...

You got something against God for the existence of hell?

anonymous person said:

You got something against God for the existence of hell?

Click to expand...

Wouldn't one first have to prove such a place
even existed?






-

chaela said:

Wouldn't one first have to prove such a place
even existed?






-

Click to expand...

If Jesus' words are not proof enough, then it's not proof of the existence of hell that you need, but to be persuaded that Jesus is who the gospels portray Him to be.

Jesus said hell was real and that people are going there. If He is God incarnate, then He cannot lie. Therefore, if Jesus says hell exists, then it exists.