http://www.worldevangelicals.org/news/article.htm?id=1588
Please read, but I won't be available for comment about this article.
Please read, but I won't be available for comment about this article.
A population facing future extinction
- Thread starter Pergamum
- Start date
- Status
Not having read it yet, I will state that the correct link is:
http://www.worldevangelicals.org/news/article.htm?id=1588
Read it; shocking. Sounds like a thoroughly Muslim strategy, though; extinction by demographics. They are trying to apply the same thing (without the active oppression, of course, as they are not in power there) in Israel and, to a lesser extent, here in Europe. Their growth rates are enormous.
As much as colonialism can be condemned, the US should never have forced us out of Indonesia - and we definitely should not have left Papua-New Guinea.
(By we, I mean, of course, the Kingdom of the Netherlands.)
http://www.worldevangelicals.org/news/article.htm?id=1588
Read it; shocking. Sounds like a thoroughly Muslim strategy, though; extinction by demographics. They are trying to apply the same thing (without the active oppression, of course, as they are not in power there) in Israel and, to a lesser extent, here in Europe. Their growth rates are enormous.
As much as colonialism can be condemned, the US should never have forced us out of Indonesia - and we definitely should not have left Papua-New Guinea.
(By we, I mean, of course, the Kingdom of the Netherlands.)
LawrenceU
Puritan Board Doctor
Pergy,
The link was dead for me. I do know that at the current US rate of birth among 'evangelicals' , 1.8 per family, it won't be long before we are 'out bred'. France and Italy are within a couple of generations of becoming Islamic purely from birth rate. Italy, I believe is at 1.4 per family for non Muslims and Muslims are at 6.
The link was dead for me. I do know that at the current US rate of birth among 'evangelicals' , 1.8 per family, it won't be long before we are 'out bred'. France and Italy are within a couple of generations of becoming Islamic purely from birth rate. Italy, I believe is at 1.4 per family for non Muslims and Muslims are at 6.
PresbyDane
Puritanboard Doctor
In England it is supposedly worse than France and Italy, at least that is what my future brother in law tells me, and they are considering sharia law in prisons, because so many of the inmates are muslim and they will not eat from what has touched something "unclean" so in the future there will have to be 2 refrigduators, 2 ... you get the picture and I can not spell the things 
And in Denmark the are asking Jews to take their children out of sertain public schools because there are majoretis of arabs in the school and it is easier to move the Jews.
And is school system in general they are slowly but surely moving all "christian" out.
I think "the end" is near for us as well.
And in Denmark the are asking Jews to take their children out of sertain public schools because there are majoretis of arabs in the school and it is easier to move the Jews.
And is school system in general they are slowly but surely moving all "christian" out.
I think "the end" is near for us as well.
LawrenceU
Puritan Board Doctor
I wasn't implying they are in sin. WE are in sin. Just look at how the modern church hates children. They look askance at any family that has more than two children. Three is almost tolerable. To have a large family, Ahem. . . being fruitful and multiplying, is looked on as strange, cultic, not thinking of the children's welfare, etc. The rip the children from the arms of their fathers so they may be instructed by 'professionals' rather than their fathers (Deut. 6).
We have gone all squishy on abortion; in part because it is so rampant in the pew. Either that or we think that we have fought too long and not accomplished anything so, 'what's the use?'
Yep, we are in sin.
What were God's words to Adam and Eve? Be fruitful and mulitiply.
What were his words to the Israelites in Babylonian captivity? Get wives for your sons. Give your daughters in marriage. Have lots of babies so that you do not decrease.
Yep, we think we know better.
Isn't it odd how the most affluent societies see children as a drain on the family income and lifestyle and the poorer societies see them as a blessing? My Papa was never a wealthy man. He farmed 40 acres with a mule and ended his life still having to work in a mill as a mechanic. He had 10 children, nine of whom lived to adulthood. They were never able to 'afford such a large family'. I'm sure glad they saw children as a blessing. I'm the first born of his tenth.
My wife and I have only been able to have one child. We'd have a dozen in if the Lord gave them to us. Our society has made it so expensive to adopt that we can't have the family we would love to have. And, just look at how few churches actually help with adoption expenses.
Yep, WE are the sinners.
Stomata leontôn
Puritan Board Sophomore
Spiritual warfare often seems to take the form of physical cleansing of populations. Even Americans of the Southwest, in the past an evangelical stronghold, are being rapidly replaced with Roman Catholics from other countries.
I think you misinterpreted what I said. Firstly, it is not a Muslim sin, but a simple fact; they outbreed secular Western folks. Secondly, I am not Italian, but Dutch; and we now have 1 million Muslims in a total population of 16.5 million; the only population group which can keep up with them are the orthodox reformed people, but we are under two percent of the entire population, sadly. Even more sadly, a lot of youth is lost to the world in our churches. Muslims, on the other hand, cannot convert without risking their lives; if they could, most of them would have secularized over here. And that, my friend, is a very dominant Muslim sin and the one which causes the former; without their forcefully keeping in their members they would rapidly secularize: they dominate by oppression.
It IS a Mslm sin if gifts are given out to poor people if they volunteer to receive sterilization or sterilization is given instead of birth control or districts are recarved to give their religion a majority in a growing number of places, or if prostitutes with AIDS are intentionally traded for sandalwood with the goal of erasing the locals so that sandalwood can be taken for free, or if health services are allocated to places where mslm transmgrants moveto and not where local melanesian populations inhabit.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
Co, at least you have Geert Wilders and a few others who are waking up. I've seen "Fitna" and it seems like many of the native Dutch have had enough of this rubbish. I have a friend who says that hospitals are getting fed up with making sure that all their kitchens are Halal, etc. I pray that there is still hope for the Netherlands in this regard, though it does not seem likely in a land famed for 'tolerance'.
The sad thing is that the indifference in the general populace is also increasing the ranks of the white supremacists in Europe, since in many cases the neo-Nazis are the only ones who seem to care. If you are young, unemployed, and without a future, and someone tells you that you are part of a native-born group of people that will help rid your Fatherland of the creeping invasion of Islam (and they conveniently lay the blame for your poor state of affairs on the Muslims in the land), there is a good chance you will follow. They will invoke the name of Beatrix, Julianna, the Nederlands Binnenland Strijdkracht and the like, and even heroes of old like Piet Heyn, Willem van Oranje and Grutte Pier. And all that puffery goes a long way to filling young heads with dreams, dreams that seem on the surface to be noble and worthwhile.
Pastor Underwood, if I could thank you a hundred time for that post, I would.
(We're trying to do our part!)
The sad thing is that the indifference in the general populace is also increasing the ranks of the white supremacists in Europe, since in many cases the neo-Nazis are the only ones who seem to care. If you are young, unemployed, and without a future, and someone tells you that you are part of a native-born group of people that will help rid your Fatherland of the creeping invasion of Islam (and they conveniently lay the blame for your poor state of affairs on the Muslims in the land), there is a good chance you will follow. They will invoke the name of Beatrix, Julianna, the Nederlands Binnenland Strijdkracht and the like, and even heroes of old like Piet Heyn, Willem van Oranje and Grutte Pier. And all that puffery goes a long way to filling young heads with dreams, dreams that seem on the surface to be noble and worthwhile.
Pastor Underwood, if I could thank you a hundred time for that post, I would.
(We're trying to do our part!)
Last edited:
Christusregnat
Puritan Board Professor
My wife comes from a family of 13 children; Andrew died shortly after birth, so 12 are living.
My in-laws have 37 grandchildren, and my wife and I have been blessed with three little ones, and we got married in May of 2005 (baby's due in Feb). There are still Christians who take dominion seriously. The basic problem is eschatology: escapist or pessimistic, or both. We will be victorious. The world is a very bad place: that's why we should be multiplying, so that Christ's people can build a city on a hill, and go forth as missionaries, pastors, doctors, statesmen, businessmen, homemakers, etc. and turn the world upside down.
Cheers,
Adam
My in-laws have 37 grandchildren, and my wife and I have been blessed with three little ones, and we got married in May of 2005 (baby's due in Feb). There are still Christians who take dominion seriously. The basic problem is eschatology: escapist or pessimistic, or both. We will be victorious. The world is a very bad place: that's why we should be multiplying, so that Christ's people can build a city on a hill, and go forth as missionaries, pastors, doctors, statesmen, businessmen, homemakers, etc. and turn the world upside down.
Cheers,
Adam
Pastor Underwood,
Could I respectfully ask, isn’t it too board a statement to make that “we” are in sin?
Since you and your wife are prevented from having more children by circumstances outside your control, how are you personally in sin?
The attitudes toward children… the attitude towards abortion… those are things that vary from church to church and, to a lesser extent from family to family.
We, either as individual Christians or as a particular church are not in sin because of the way world behaves. Paul said it was not his business to judge those without.
Again, respectfully, it seems to me that to make a blanket statement that “we” are in sin because of the way the world, or churches with which we have no association, behave is an over-generalisation which is not really warranted.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
It's the attitude, brother, that's the sin. If we willingly gave over to God every Christian womb, the world would be a different place today. Pastor Underwood has done just that, and God has blessed him with a child. If the Lord then closes the womb, such is His will. Adopt if the desire for more children is there.
But the long and the short of it is that our attitude toward His blessings is a big part of the problem. And he is talking about how "we" behave as (as I understand it) the visible church.
But the long and the short of it is that our attitude toward His blessings is a big part of the problem. And he is talking about how "we" behave as (as I understand it) the visible church.
LawrenceU
Puritan Board Doctor
I say 'we' because 'we' are the church. Have you ever noticed how often Godly righteous men prayed in repentance in the first person plural in Scripture. I believe strongly that our over independent attitudes are one thing that has led us into the position in which we find ourselves.
And, if you were to survey the churches of this nation, USA, I dare say that the overwhelming majority of them fit my description to a 'T'. If this were not the case it wouldn't even be an issue.
So, no, on both accounts I do not think 'we' is too broad.
Ivan
Pastor
You may find this hard to believe, being the Southern Baptist I am, but I totally agree with you.
I don’t want to get into the presbyterian / independent differences that Pastor Ivan hinted at, but I do not think that “we” can be lumped together as one church.
A sincere question - which prayers did you have in mind? If they were from the OT, I think we must apply the context that in those days there was one church which was the nation of Israel. This is no longer true today. There are multiple, seperate churches and each church is judged for its own faithfulness.
In Revelations 2-3 Jesus Christ walked amongst the candlesticks and gave an assessment of the faithfulness or lack thereof of each individual church. He did not give a general assessment of the faithfulness of all the churches considered together, for they were separate entities. In fact, he even drew a distinction between the majority and the faithful remnant even in churches which he admonished. (2:24, 3:4).
In that sense I do not understand why the behaviour of the majority of the churches in the USA, or anywhere else should cause a particular church or Christian to be a sinner, if that church and family is in order.
I agree with Lawrence. The Bible is full of "we" repentances (Nehemiah, Daniel, Ezra, Solomon, etc.) and the epistle to the Hebrews.
At the same time, I think we are kidding ourselves if we think that the Muslims will be defeated by having children. They have proven themselves more than able over the centuries to castrate men, enslave children and butcher women. God must smite them. Either smite them with His grace, turning them from worshipping the devil (who pretends to be God) to the living God, or with His wrath, as He did Herod.
At the same time, I think we are kidding ourselves if we think that the Muslims will be defeated by having children. They have proven themselves more than able over the centuries to castrate men, enslave children and butcher women. God must smite them. Either smite them with His grace, turning them from worshipping the devil (who pretends to be God) to the living God, or with His wrath, as He did Herod.
Ivan
Pastor
I may not be your average Southern Baptist and in a way neither is my church. As I think about the families in our church the average number of children per family is about 4 or 5. We have one family with ten children.
And I think that is a very good thing.
I now wish that my wife and I had started eariler having children in our marriage and that we would have had at least a couple more children. However, after the third C-section with the third child at 37 years old, we decided that was enough. In hindsight, I wish we had consider adoption.
I thank God for my wonderful daugthers, three ladies who are as different as can be, yet all who love the LORD.
And I think that is a very good thing.
I now wish that my wife and I had started eariler having children in our marriage and that we would have had at least a couple more children. However, after the third C-section with the third child at 37 years old, we decided that was enough. In hindsight, I wish we had consider adoption.
I thank God for my wonderful daugthers, three ladies who are as different as can be, yet all who love the LORD.
Hebrews 2:1-4, 3:12-15, 4:1-4, 12:1-2 among other passages. The language is different (being sermonic and not prayer) but the idea is the same: turn from the sin that is in your life toward obedience to the Lord.
TimV
Puritanboard Botanist
I think I understand where you are coming from, Rocketeer. I lived in SA when everyone was trying to force a non Western, uneducated, socialist majority on us, and of all the European countries, Holland was the most aggressive in demanding that we give up our rule, so forgive me if there's a bit of schadenfreude that comes through in some of my posts. And while Holland was the most vocal in pressing sanctions, Jewish groups were hugely disproportionate in handing SA over to the ANC. Of the original 6 leaders, three were Xhosa and three were Jewish. And the English speaking press in that country is almost totally dominated by Jews, and they also pushed for the end of Afrikaner rule. And while I know schadenfreude is wrong, and I do try to beat it into submission, at the end of the day the way you treat people is the way you're going to get treated, so fasten your seat belt.
When you say
I have 7 kids, and almost all the Jews I know have few kids. That's their choice, as was the choices of their parent or grandparents to move to Israel.
Currently 25% of Israel's voting population are Arab (about 1.5 million) and another 3.5 Israeli Arabs, people who have been there for centuries aren't allowed even to vote.
The trick is to ask yourself what you would do in their place, both if you were an Israeli Jew and an Israeli Arab, and if you do that, things get less clear cut.
When you say
you are saying that Arabs have more kids than Israeli Jews, as if it's just a hatred of Jews and not that having lots of kids is valued by their culture. This "trying to apply" deal is something I disagree with. Those Arabs in Israel have been there at least 500 years, and certainly dozens of generations longer than the vast majority of Israeli Jews.
I have 7 kids, and almost all the Jews I know have few kids. That's their choice, as was the choices of their parent or grandparents to move to Israel.
Currently 25% of Israel's voting population are Arab (about 1.5 million) and another 3.5 Israeli Arabs, people who have been there for centuries aren't allowed even to vote.
The trick is to ask yourself what you would do in their place, both if you were an Israeli Jew and an Israeli Arab, and if you do that, things get less clear cut.
Thank you.
I had a quick look at those passages and from my understanding they are "we" passages because they describe duties pertaining to all christians. As you put, all of us must believe, turn from sin and obey God.
What I do not see these passages as saying is that we as christians are personally responsible for the sins of the world, or of churches we are not associated with. The "we" repentances of Nehemiah, Daniel, Ezra and Solomon must, from my understanding, we understood in the context that the "we" there is the nation of Israel, of which all of God's people in the OT were a part. There is no longer such an overarching body that links together all NT christians, and certainly there is nothing that links us and the world such that their sin becomes ours.
The "we" passages in the OT are not about a civil kingdom. They are about the covenant people of God. That is why reference is made to the covenantal breaches. It is the same with the New Testament church. It is a covenanted people. It is the one holy and apostolic church. As Christians, cannot speak of "we" in a "world" sense, but we can in a worldwide sense.
My understanding was that in the OT the civil kingdom was the same as the covenant people. Or, all the Israelites were in the one church, the "church in the wilderness" as Acts describes it. That is why the men of the OT would offer prayers of repentance with respect to the whole nation. I do not see that this is any more the case in NT.
Do you consider that if a church in another town or city tolerates abortion that makes you personally a sinner?
I don't think it is a matter of personal sin, but corporate responsibility. It is why the Israelite who was not guilty of covenant breaking (e.g. Nehemiah, Daniel) could say "we." He knew that God's judgment was corporate, and would affect him. So it is with the Church. So yes, I am affected by the church in another city. It affects how unbelievers see me, since we have the same identity (not as Jews, but as Christians) and the same calling.
Pastor Greco,
My point was that Nehemiah, Daniel and others like them shared corporate responsibility with the covenant breaking Israelites because they were all, to use crude language, in the same church. Israel was, in the words of Acts, the "church in the wilderness".
This form of formal association does not exist in the NT. The Corinthians were shamed by the behavior of one of their number, not by a member of another church. I mentioned Revelations 2-3 where Jesus Christ judged each church individually for their works, not for the behavior of all Christians generally.
I would agree that we are all affected by the behavior of other christians in the sense of how unbelievers view us. But we are not made sinners by their behavior, which was the statement of Pastor Underwood's which I objected to / was confused about.
Christusregnat
Puritan Board Professor
Good point about the vicious nature of Muslims in history. One thought, however, of encouragement would be this:
So, not only is it important to have a lot of children, it is as important to train them up so that they will defeat God's enemies, whether by just warfare or by evangelism.
Cheers,
Adam
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
