Why do Christians procreate?

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

None of the Christians are going to face your question head on.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I don't see any atheist here who really want to hear an answer.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Tree of Life]

Yes, from the Apostle Paul regarding point 1.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Yes I should slightly amend point 1. Christians who are able are commanded to procreate. This would exclude non-married people and married people who are unable to have children.

Note also that this command can be fulfilled spiritually. Paul had many sons in the faith, so to speak, and was fulfilling this command in his own way.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Christians are commanded to procreate (Genesis 1:28). To refuse to do so would be rebelling against the Lord.

So I take it you do not like monasticism.

Procreation and raising up godly offspring is the most effective way to change the world for good (Genesis 15:5). Multi-generational Christians families have more power to change culture than culture has to change them.

Why, then, is Christian culture now so very divergent from what it was, say, 1000 years ago? Why is the Christian calendar so influenced by outside pagan sources? What of all the Christians who have done awful things in the name of God?

Christians are very optimistic about the prospects of salvation for their children. They are born into the covenant community and are exposed to the word of God from birth. The promise of salvation is not just for believers but for believers and their children (Acts 2:39). Some 90% of Christians are Christians because their parents were Christians. The family unit is the normal way that God works to make believers.

A number of things here... so if familial inheritance is the normal means by which Christianity is transmitted, what of everyone not born of a Christian family? Why don't all Christians practice infant baptism if salvation is for believers and their offspring? And I find that you are dodging the question here, because I cannot count the number of Christians kids I grew up with who have since apostatized. Just because you grow up in a Christian home doesn't mean God isn't going to one day damn you for believing the wrong thing.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

I don't see any atheist here who really want to hear an answer.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

If I didn't want to hear an answer, I wouldn't continue asking.

 

[Tree of Life]

So I take it you do not like monasticism.

I do think that monasticism was misguided. Though the Lord did use monasticism to do some good things (like preserve western culture during the dark ages).

Why, then, is Christian culture now so very divergent from what it was, say, 1000 years ago?

It depends on what kind of divergence you mean. Christians use electric guitars in worship today because electric guitars were not around 1000 years ago.

Why is the Christian calendar so influenced by outside pagan sources?

Not all of the good ideas in the world originate in the church. Why can't we take the best of what pagans have to offer and use it for our own purposes?

What of all the Christians who have done awful things in the name of God?

I never claimed that Christians were immune to sin.

A number of things here... so if familial inheritance is the normal means by which Christianity is transmitted, what of everyone not born of a Christian family?

There is certainly hope for them as well. Being born into the church is an enormous blessing but God is always at work, expanding the boundaries of his kingdom into unbelieving families as well.

Why don't all Christians practice infant baptism if salvation is for believers and their offspring?

Most do. A minority of Christian sects don't practice infant baptism because, I think, they don't understand the significance of the family.

And I find that you are dodging the question here, because I cannot count the number of Christians kids I grew up with who have since apostatized. Just because you grow up in a Christian home doesn't mean God isn't going to one day damn you for believing the wrong thing.

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.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

If I didn't want to hear an answer, I wouldn't continue asking.

Yet, when an answer is provided, it falls of deaf ears. So why are you really asking questions? What is your real intentions on coming to a Christian forum?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Yet, when an answer is provided, it falls of deaf ears.

You aren't providing answers. However, another poster above is actually engaging in real conversation. It is not I who am the problem here.

So why are you really asking questions? What is your real intentions on coming to a Christian forum?

Completely outside of the scope of this thread, not any of your business, and actually completely answerable if you bothered to look through my post history. Hint: I have been a member of this forum far, far longer than you have, and I did not join as an atheist. Try reading my signature.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

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?

It's fun.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

I do think that monasticism was misguided. Though the Lord did use monasticism to do some good things (like preserve western culture during the dark ages).

Misguided or completely wrong? Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy all embrace it. It has existed far longer than Protestant Christianity. How is it misguided? (I apologize if this is too off-topic to be considered here.)

It depends on what kind of divergence you mean. Christians use electric guitars in worship today because electric guitars were not around 1000 years ago.

That may be, but it was outside culture that influenced Christians to begin using them at all. Christians took worldly music and adopted it into their worship. Even my former church, the Russian Orthodox, did this... polyphonic chanting is definitely an innovation adopted from Western European culture. I am not saying this is a bad thing; I am saying that Christianity is, by and large, hugely influenced by surrounding culture.

Not all of the good ideas in the world originate in the church. Why can't we take the best of what pagans have to offer and use it for our own purposes?

Indeed, but again, this makes my argument: you stated that Christian families have more power to change culture than culture has the power to change them, but I am charging the exact opposite.

I never claimed that Christians were immune to sin.

Clearly not, though I have encountered Christians who claim that a "true" Christian never sins. The point is that Christianity is no guarantee, or even necessarily a good indicator, that a person will behave in a moral manner.

There is certainly hope for them as well. Being born into the church is an enormous blessing but God is always at work, expanding the boundaries of his kingdom into unbelieving families as well.

Do you think it's fair that God blesses some children with Christian upbringing -- which, if I understand your argument, makes them more likely to avoid damnation -- while denying those blessings to others, which increases the probability of damnation?

Most do. A minority of Christian sects don't practice infant baptism because, I think, they don't understand the significance of the family.

Is infant baptism an indicator of eventual salvation?

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.

Here I point you to my above question: how is this fair to children born into non-Christian families?

 

[SeraphimSarov]

It's fun.

Can't argue with that!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You aren't providing answers. However, another poster above is actually engaging in real conversation. It is not I who am the problem here.

Here is my answer for the 4th time. Christians choose to have children for the exact same reasons atheist have children. That is a fact that you cannot deny and it really does not need any further explanations. However, that is not the answer that will fit with your real agenda, which does not include learning anything.

Completely outside of the scope of this thread, not any of your business, and actually completely answerable if you bothered to look through my post history. Hint: I have been a member of this forum far, far longer than you have, and I did not join as an atheist. Try reading my signature.

On my Tapatalk app, I cannot see signatures and you are correct in the fact that my question is off topic. I am just curious that if you are so unwilling to accept any answer that is given to you, why be on a Christian forum to begin with? Why ask questions if it is not to get answers? But like I said, just a curious off topic question.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Here is my answer for the 4th time. Christians choose to have children for the exact same reasons atheist have children. That is a fact that you cannot deny and it really does not need any further explanations. However, that is not the answer that will fit with your real agenda, which does not include learning anything.

And for the fourth time, that is not an answer. There are a multitude of reasons a non-Christian chooses to have children. As an atheist, if I ever have children, I will not have to take into consideration whether one day my child will burn in hell forever. I am asking why Christians do it with the knowledge that this is a possibility. Another poster is engaging the question; you are avoiding it. And please, enlighten everyone reading: what is my agenda? I didn't even start this thread. As I've mentioned, I did not join this forum as an atheist, so what agenda is it that you think I have, exactly? If you think I stuck around after de-converting just to de-convert others, again, try looking through my post history and see how that argument holds up.

 

[Tree of Life]

Misguided or completely wrong? Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy all embrace it. It has existed far longer than Protestant Christianity. How is it misguided? (I apologize if this is too off-topic to be considered here.)

While this discussion is interesting it is complicated and will probably take us too far afield from the OP. You can PM me on this one if you're really interested in discussing it further.

That may be, but it was outside culture that influenced Christians to begin using them at all. Christians took worldly music and adopted it into their worship. Even my former church, the Russian Orthodox, did this... polyphonic chanting is definitely an innovation adopted from Western European culture. I am not saying this is a bad thing; I am saying that Christianity is, by and large, hugely influenced by surrounding culture.

Indeed, but again, this makes my argument: you stated that Christian families have more power to change culture than culture has the power to change them, but I am charging the exact opposite.

It is not a problem that the church is influenced by good things in pagan culture. Genesis 4:16-26 is all about good things that came from the unbelieving world which were later adopted by the people of God. The unbelieving world certainly has an influence on the church. But my point is that believing families have more power to influence the unbelieving world for good than the unbelieving world has to influence them for evil. Christians taking advantage of electric guitars is not the church being influenced by evil in the world, but by the good that's in the world.

The point is that Christianity is no guarantee, or even necessarily a good indicator, that a person will behave in a moral manner.

This is true.

Do you think it's fair that God blesses some children with Christian upbringing -- which, if I understand your argument, makes them more likely to avoid damnation -- while denying those blessings to others, which increases the probability of damnation?

Salvation is not about us receiving what's fair. God does not owe eternal life and love to anyone. It is amazing that he gives it to anyone at all, especially considering that all people are sinners.

So no, I don't think it's unfair that God saves some and condemns others.

Is infant baptism an indicator of eventual salvation?

No. But it is an expression of great hope for salvation. We baptize them in faith that God will save them.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

And for the fourth time, that is not an answer. There are a multitude of reasons a non-Christian chooses to have children. As an atheist, if I ever have children, I will not have to take into consideration whether one day my child will burn in hell forever. I am asking why Christians do it with the knowledge that this is a possibility.

Ever hear about the "birds and the bees"?

 

[Chesterton]

Why do Christians procreate?

Because Islam.

 

[Vicomte13]

Are you for real? The question is why would a Christian have a child, knowing full well that child could effectively decide to send itself to hell. The implication here, of course, is that it is better not to exist than to suffer eternal damnation. So why do it? This is far, far different than any kind of temporal decision offspring could make that would result in pain. No, a bad decision may cause drastic degradation of life, but by the Christian's estimation, all that will one day come to an end when the child (well, possibly adult) meets God and enters heaven. Not being a Christian has eternal consequences that can't be undone, ever, under any circumstances. Knowing that the child could choose "wrongly," why risk it at all? Would you have a child if you knew God was going to damn it?

In some forms of Christianity, but not in others.

My form of Christianity, which happens to be the largest branch of it (supermajoritarian, in fact), does not believe or teach that only those who are Christians in life have the hope of being acceptable to God at the end. "Be a Christian or go to Hell" is not Catholic belief. I suppose I could go on about what Catholic belief is - and considering that Catholics make up about 75% of all of the world's Christians one could say that Catholic belief is the heavily predominant form of Christianity, the "default" position of Christianity if one is going to paint Christianity broadly and generically (as you do in what you have written).

So, to answer your questions directly, and to provide you with the majoritarian position of Christianity, let's go through your paragraph.

Christians have children out of love for the idea of having and raising children, out of love for spouses, out of love for the idea of continuity, and because sex feels good and is pretty irresistible, and children naturally result from it.

"Eternal damnation" is possible, but most people die with some unrepentant sin and proceed into Gehenna, which is Purgatory, where those sins are paid. Then they proceed to Paradise awaiting the end of the world, the coming of Christ, the resurrection and final judgment. At that point, those who have been cleansed of their sins in Purgatory whose balance of good deeds is positive, enter the City of God, come to earth, and live with God in happiness. Those whose sins are unexpiated, those in deep rebellion against God, those with deadly sins, are rejected and thrown into the Lake of Fire for utter destruction.

Now, before the end of the world, Revelation tells us that there will be considerable times of troubles and signs - which means that unlike those of us today who die, with sin, and have time in Purgatory to get right with God, those remaining in rebellion against God with all of the obvious miracles of devastation raining down at the end may well not get the chance to spend time in Purgatory. But then, whereas people today have doubts, with angels filling the skies, and dragons, and marks and all of that, the people in the end times who are resisting God are actively doing it against visible forces, like Pharaoh did. Not bumbling around in blind ignorance, like us.

When we have babies, and watch children grow up, we know that they will sin just as we did. But we know that God is merciful and forgiving. We hope our children do well, and that we too do well and are accepted straight into Paradise at our deaths. But we also know that God cleanses sinners in Gehenna, so there is always hope. We know, too, that true repentance even at the very end, turning to God at the end, will result in a favorable response from God. We know that because Jesus gave an example of that in the Scriptures, to the thief beside him on the cross.

So, when you say "Not being a Christian has ETERNAL consequences", that may be so, but it doesn't mean that whomever did not get the message in life - a Hindu in Uttar Pradesh, for instance - is doomed to the lake of fire at final judgment. No. When he dies, he will pay for his sins in Gehenna/Purgatory, and then pass into Gan Eden/Paradise to await final judgment. Will he be resisting the God he sees in Paradise? No.

The various minority sects of Christianity violently reject the majority view, but what I just wrote IS the bulk of Christianity, so when you write about "Christianity" generically, see to it that you do not take the view of some minority and claim that that belief is Christianity. What I wrote here IS the vast majority of Christianity, and if you have to pick ONE sect and state "Christianity says", then you must choose Catholicism, because Catholicism is three times the size of the rest of Christianity combined.

And Catholics simply don't have the fears that you enunciated in your question, because we don't believe the premises you set out.

Christians have children generally not fearing that their children will be going to hell. You baptize your children and raise them with knowledge of God. They grow up and sin, and struggle, as all do. They either come around in their old age, repent, confess, are absolved and proceed directly to Paradise at death, or they die in an imperfect state, and attain cleansing in Purgatory, then proceed to Paradise to await final judgment and the City of God.

It's ultimately up to God, and God is kind, merciful and loving. Also just, which is why there is Gehenna/Purgatory.

Most Christians don't worry about hell, and don't believe that everybody who isn't a churched, believing Christian will go to Hell. Some do. They are the minority. You certainly can address the minority if you'd like. What you cannot do is ignore the majority view of 3/4ths of Christianity and set that aside, and call the opposing view of less than 1/4 of Christianity (many of the other Christian groups also believe something similar to the Catholics) "Christianity".

Certainly if the minority view turns out to be true, there is cause for great pessimism, of the sort that might even suppress the birth rate. But the majority obviously don't believe that at all, and therefore have none of the fears that your question refers to.

We have children for love, because of romance, and because family is good, and we expect that our children will work out their salvation and rejoin us in Paradise, sooner or later, and ultimately in the City of God. That is what Christians believe - if you have to use one word to refer to all of us.

 

[Vicomte13]

Good question. A few responses:Christians are very optimistic about the prospects of salvation for their children. They are born into the covenant community and are exposed to the word of God from birth. The promise of salvation is not just for believers but for believers and their children (Acts 2:39). Some 90% of Christians are Christians because their parents were Christians. The family unit is the normal way that God works to make believers.

Just so!

 

[Vicomte13]

Why have a child if there is a significant statistical probability that God will damn it?

Because the "statistical probability" is believed by most Christians to be very low.

 

[Vicomte13]

No, a bad decision may cause drastic degradation of life, but by the Christian's estimation, all that will one day come to an end when the child (well, possibly adult) meets God and enters heaven.

But that is not what happens. When we die, we do not go to "Heaven". We go to one of two places, awaiting the end of the world. We go to Gan Eden, Paradise - the Garden of Eden. Or we go to Gehenna, which is Purgatory, and there we are cleansed of our sins as metal is refined in the fire. THEN, once cleansed, we proceed to Paradise.

Only at the end of the world are we resurrected, finally judged, and either enter the City of God, which comes down to earth from the skies ("heaven"), or are hurled into the Lake of Fire.

Nobody who has been cleansed in Purgatory is hurled into the Lake of Fire.

So, who is then? Two groups: those who die in the final calamity of the world, in full rebellion against the visible God. There is no time for them, and no excuse either. Pharaoh had the excuse that, faced with God's obvious miracles, God kept hardening his heart to resist. But as the end nears, there will be miracle after miracle, and God isn't going to be hardening those hearts. Those who see and submit to the truth and accept it and seek to follow Christ to the end will also be saved from the fire. But those who are defiant to the end, who die in the end - THEY will have no opportunity for Purgatory. Having rebelled in the face of the obvious God, they're fuel for the fire.

The others who may be there are those whose sins were so monstrous that remaining in Purgatory until the end of the world will not be enough time to purge the sins.

God has not given us a metric to know that. But it's fair to say that if one is a serial committer of grave mortal sins, unrepentant of them, unbelieving and a militant enemy of God both in life and then in death - they're probably not in a good way. But that's up to God.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

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...