Childlessness A Sin, Southern Baptist Leader Says

KWTX ^ | 1-17-06

[WKB]

Rev. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says it's "an absolute revolt against God's design" if husbands and wives purposely avoid bearing children.

On his Web site and other articles and interviews, Mohler argues that "marriage, sex and children are part of one package" and that "to deny any part of this wholeness is to reject God's intention in creation and his mandate revealed in the Bible."

In a CNN interview, the Baptist leader added, “We grow up by having children. Without that responsibility, we have a generation of perpetual adolescents just growing old."

[sweetliberty]

Thanks...I think.

[Free Baptist]

"Heartbreaking how very very much He has blessed this nation and what do we do with all the blessings.....

"And then to add insult to injury, even the faithful continue to tune into the pagan talking heads each day, to get another 1000 more reasons why it is just not practical or do-able in this day and age to have kids - and all the faithful nod amen in agreement while flipping their noses at God's commands and wisdom!

"Your will Lord, not mine - ya just don't hear that much any more in these last days!"

This view is not respected by many even here on this supposedly conservative sight. Keep posting.

[AnalogReigns]

What a bunch of liberal FReepers! The Baptist is simply teaching what the Church has taught from the beginning...ask any Roman Catholic, and yet here he's called a crank.

Protestant doctrine on child bearing was nearly exactly the same as Catholic until the 1930s....and now it's nearly the same as that of planned parenthood. Shame on you so-called "conservatives" for going along with the flow--that after all brought us the joys of abortion.

[cva66snipe]

Of course, it is their choice. The question is: Is it a good choice. A sin is not merely an affront to kid, it is, humanly speaking, a misstep. Misstep on the stairs and you may break your neck. If enough people break their necks, then the hospitals will be full. If enough people make wrong choices about parenting, then society suffers. If enough choose not to have children, then society may cease to exist.

I honestly don't think that will happen. If that happened then the Bible would be wrong then. Think about it. That's not how it all ends. I'm 100% pro-life. So I think all persons capable of producing children should weigh that decision carefully BEFORE having them. Unfortunately some give more consideration to whether to get a puppy than having a kid.

If a persons temperament is not suited for raising children then it is wise not to have them. But that person may be a fine spouse to another person of the same temperament. Let them marry and live in peace. I pointed out examples before on this thread and one of them was medical reasons which is why we did not have a kid together.

Now I could have had a kid had I simply not married my wife and married someone else. I knew before we married we could not ever have kids. But I did not go seek another woman for my wife because this woman is the one GOD through many intervening events in both of our lives placed me with. Take it anyway you wish but I was told to take her as my wife. I had more Why's for GOD than I can now recall but the answer was It's going to be OK. No kids by my first wife of 3 years and none from my present one of over 20 years.

It wasn't GOD's plan. GOD saw the future I could not see. He saw my wifes daughters and their need for a stable home. He saw the kids they were to later have. Later on I understood the Why's.

I wish so very much the things that happened had not come to pass. By that I mean I wish she was healthy as well as myself and we would have possibly had two or more kids ourself. But GOD had his reasons why we didn't and some I'll likely not know in this life. The doctors said no kids and I responded accordingly to prevent it which in some churches is also a sin. Better for her to die perhaps then or the child have severe health issues from her medications? Some preachers need to let GOD be GOD and stop trying to replace him with church doctrine.

Now I'll put the same condition on myself I placed on married couples whom GOD has placed on their hearts to have kids but don't. Had I walked away from my then girlfriend and now wife it would have been sin. Why? Because it was placed on my heart to marry her and by not doing so it would have been sin.

[dangus]

>> Wow, what pooched that deal? <<

Eventually, war caused disease, disease caused population declines, and population declines caused... cheap land. Cheap land meant emancipated serfs, and the development of a middle class of traders.

Life on the manor had been communal. With traders came economic competition, and with economic competition came the temptation to work through the festivals and holidays. This then caused economic growth, and with it population growth.

Suddenly land was not so cheap anymore, but there were other ways of making wealth besides farming, with the development of traders and a middle class. Soon, cities began developing; sustenance agriculture became insufficient.

Where once landlords' ambitions were limited by the amount of land they could effectively govern, landlords now became greedy. They didn't want their serfs pacified by religious festivals; they wanted their surfs to work, so religious festivals, feast days, and sabbaths became scarcer and scarcer. People didn't abstain from work anymore... or sex. (that was the catch... no sex on the feast days either!) So they made more babies and more mouths to feed.

The lords' share of the crops became burdensome to the peasants. Disconent grew, and people m oved to the cities. The once stable population now saw raid growth spurts and sudden urban-filth-caused plagues.

Most importantly, with the evolving of the middle class, the priesthood shrivelled. (Once the massive land holdings of the churches offered certain comfort and education in exchange for celibacy, further stabilizing the population.) Now, with land valuable,and the priesthood in decline, the church became hated for what was now seen as hoarding land unproductively.

ANd hence the reformation, industrial revolution, Malthusian crisis, and plague.

[Howlin]

Some of them are posting on this thread.

[orionblamblam]

> I was a mediocre journalist at best...

Then that puts you in the top 0.1%. Be proud.

[kms61]

Except for a very select few, most people's memories are only carried on for the long term by their children, and then their children's children.

It can't be a pleasant thought for the elderly when it dawns on them that before long nobody will really remember them or even look at their photographs

---

As a 44 year old single, childless man, such thoughts have crossed my mind. You, and others who have posted similar on this thread aren't telling me anything I don't already know. My old age may well be lonely--Perhaps even bleak. But for reasons I won't go into here, I've concluded that I wouldn't be a good husband or father, and that it's better for all concerned that I not marry or produce children. I've made my decision, and I'll live with whatever consequnces flow from it.

I do have neices and nephews that I'm crazy about, and try to spend as much time with as possible. Perhaps they'll have a kind memory of me when I'm gone.

[Dashing Dasher]

My friends jokingly say that I was raised by wolves. My parents are selfish freaks. However, I survived.

Since then, I dare not tell people to have or not to have children. This is a decision that is way beyond friendly advice. All I have to say is if you choose to have kids, you better do the best job you possibly can to make them well balanced, productive members of society.

[Melas]

In truth journalists are unfairly knocked on FR. The average FReeper hears "journalist" and his mind jumps to Dan Rather. Truth is that the average journalist is the guy that's taking pictures of the fire at 3am in his local community, or watching the HS football game to write about in Saturday's paper. 99.9% of journalists will never pen a political word.

[nopardons]

It worked...you're a genius!

Thanks for the help. :-)

[chasio649]

good post.........

[DameAutour]

It is so true that most of the time children turn out great in spite of their parents.

If that were true, it would mean that the majority of people are "great". That's not even close to reality. The majority of people on this planet are not "great" people. They're not even good people. Most of them don't even know the true God. Most of the people in this country, all of whom have access to a Bible, probably don't crack it open much, much less obey God. These are the last days and it is only getting worse.

For this reason, I think it may be prudent for people to reconsider having children in this time of the end. What kind of world are we bringing them into? Not the Garden of Eden! We're bringing them into a world that is about to face Armageddon.

We are living in days much like the time leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. What did Jesus (himself childless) say then?

"Woe to the pregnant women and those suckling a baby in those days!" Matthew 4:19

I would never say that people are wrong for this choice, one way or the other. But there is certainly another side.

Jesus commanded Christians to preach the good news of the kingdom, the only hope for anyone in this world. He did not command them to bring children into a system he will personally destroy.

I notice that many people here are afraid that "western civilization" will suffer and other, more "primitive" cultures will take over the world, because they are having children. This whole system of things is destined for destruction, and the world is currently in the power of the wicked one. It's not a system worth saving. Western civilization is going down with the rest of this old system, but don't worry, the false religion Islam will go down too.

[Dawsonville_Doc]

Dude, you go and have all the kids you want. Have a dozen for all I care. But the minute you or anyone else tries to judge my decision not to have any, you're way out of line.

[Dawsonville_Doc]

You shadow boxing guys sound scared, not of opinionated jerks, but that you may have made the wrong choice.

Also, the concept of a "license to breed" is as ridiculous as saying that people who refuse to have children should be castrated.

Theo-
Like I said...you want to judge me and my decisions, have the courage to come to my house first. And although castration would be illogically extreme, vasectomies work quite nicely.

[BibChr]

Thanks, that's certainly fuller.

Got link?

Dan

[gotribe]

Yes. The American mullahs.

[WKB]

And at the same time you will be showing where it was prohibited in the OT?


If I thought for one minute you were serious about
wanting to know the truth about polygamy in the Bible
I would go to more trouble to find the answer.
But it is obvious from your first post to your last
that all you are interested in is arguing and calling names
and denigrating God's messengers. So I will let the following suffice as my answer. Common sense goes along way in the argument against polygamy.
Oh and BTW I am still waiting for Windsong to show me where God approved of it.

Polygamy is a very ancient practice found in many human societies.
Basically ALL passages in the Bible
where the practice of polygamy is mentioned also give a vivid picture
of the problems coming with it. There is NOT ONE passage which talks
about the blessings of polygamy. But there are dozens of passages
where polygamy is reported and it is always resulting in trouble,
jealousy and strife. It is always accompanied by unhappiness.
If one is at all sensitive to the meaning of stories, and the impact
of storytelling and the teaching through stories even without stating
things as "clear doctrine", then one will realize that this is more
than a subtle hint that polygamy is not recommended at all, and by
exposing its reality it is actually warning strongly against this
practice.

|

Reporting the fact of sin is not the same as allowing sin as being
acceptable.

The Torah states in Deuteronomy 17, verse 17:

He [the king] must not take many wives,
or his heart will be led astray.

And what do the verses say which report about the fact of 700 wives and
300 concubines for King Solomon?

1 Kings 11:1-11 reads as follows

1 King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh's
daughter--Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians and Hittites.
2 They were from nations about which the LORD had told the Israelites,
"You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn
your hearts after their gods." Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to
them in love.
3 He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines,
AND HIS WIVES LED HIM ASTRAY.

Not only do the last two verses report that this was AGAINST God's law,
they also report that exactly the predicted result was coming to pass,
namely that they were leading Solomon astray from the worship of the one
true God only.

4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and
his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of
David his father had been.
5 He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molech [1] the
detestable god of the Ammonites.
6 So Solomon did evil in the eyes of the LORD; he did not follow the LORD
completely, as David his father had done.
7 On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the
detestable god of Moab, and for Molech the detestable god of the
Ammonites.
8 He did the same for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and
offered sacrifices to their gods.
9 The LORD became angry with Solomon because his heart had turned away
from the LORD, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice.
10 Although he had forbidden Solomon to follow other gods, Solomon did not
keep the LORD's command.
11 So the LORD said to Solomon, "Since this is your attitude and you have
not kept my covenant and my decrees, which I commanded you, I will most
certainly tear the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your
subordinates.

| Also, king David is said to have had many wives and concubines (2 Samuel 5:13).

And even that didn't keep him from committing adultery with yet another woman.
But even if that hadn't happened, we do read much about the strife between the
children of the different wives, up to murder. If that doesn't send a clear
message...

[WKB]

It worked...you're a genius!



Thanks Be sure and tell all your "dear friends" :>)

[linda_22003]

Some couples talk about this BEFORE they get married. :]