Islam is outgrowing Christianity

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Anytime you tell a bunch of warlike tribes that they can take women as their booty, have mutliple wives and kill with God's sanction, that particular religion is going to grow through strenous efforts to conquer.

Is that the sort of dominion you want?

Making women possessions of men I guess is masculine, but is this the masculinity we want?


Christianity, on the other hand, has empowered the weak and the NT gives much freedom to women.

Let's not apologize for the "weakness" of Christianity. Christians have always served, and died for their faith instead of dominating others.

Allah sends the sons of Muslims to kill for their faith, God has sent His Son to die for us, and we ought to send our sons to serve and even die for the good of others.
 

Claudiu

Puritan Board Junior
Anytime you tell a bunch of warlike tribes that they can take women as their booty, have mutliple wives and kill with God's sanction, that particular religion is going to grow through strenous efforts to conquer.

Is that the sort of dominion you want?

Making women possessions of men I guess is masculine, but is this the masculinity we want?


Christianity, on the other hand, has empowered the weak and the NT gives much freedom to women.

Let's not apologize for the "weakness" of Christianity. Christians have always served, and died for their faith instead of dominating others.

Allah sends the sons of Muslims to kill for their faith, God has sent His Son to die for us, and we ought to send our sons to serve and even die for the good of others.


On a similar note, it seems to me that the Islam also runs on fear. If one does not follow the rules they can be killed.
 

TimV

Puritanboard Botanist
I am trying to strike at the apparent potency of Islam and the impotency of Christianity. Something is obviously wrong.
Neocon scare tactics and Fundamentalist "scholarship" aside, Spain by itself has a bigger GDP than all the Arab nations in the world combined.

The French or British navy by themselves could sink all the warships of every Muslim nation on earth, even fighting them all at the same time.

Muslim nations are poor, we are rich. Muslim nations are weak, we are strong. Muslim nations are failures, we put people on the moon.

When thinking about Muslim manliness, add up the Olympic gold medals for all Muslim athletes combined, then pick a small European nation like Norway and see how the medal comparison looks.
 

Claudiu

Puritan Board Junior
I am trying to strike at the apparent potency of Islam and the impotency of Christianity. Something is obviously wrong.
Neocon scare tactics and Fundamentalist "scholarship" aside, Spain by itself has a bigger GDP than all the Arab nations in the world combined.

The French or British navy by themselves could sink all the warships of every Muslim nation on earth, even fighting them all at the same time.

Muslim nations are poor, we are rich. Muslim nations are weak, we are strong. Muslim nations are failures, we put people on the moon.

When thinking about Muslim manliness, add up the Olympic gold medals for all Muslim athletes combined, then pick a small European nation like Norway and see how the medal comparison looks.
:cheers2: :banana:
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
Regarding rutting swine:

On the PB there have been several posts about couples with large families. Each time this was met with approval. However, what was sometimes lacking was the approval of how they raised the kids rather than how fertile they were.

Sort of like, "The news just said so-and-so just had their 14th child..." and then an unqualified good is given.

I have seen several very fertile families have terrible offspring and so I just wanted to make sure we were also focusing on quality and not just quantity here.

Having children is not as praiseworthy as raising the ones we have with care.

But again, we should be thinking of Conversion Growth in the Muslim world; not mere Biological Growth in our own.
Pergy, we are a confessional board (to start on the inner-most ring of our community of believers). If I hear that Pastor Lewis had #'s 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, I would say "Praise God!!!" because I know that much of his reason for living is to raise his children to be a living sacrifice to the Lord. I will also get excited about any devout Christian family that has many offspring because those are God-given soldiers of Christ and their families will focus their energies on raising their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. If they do not, that is an issue to be raised at the next huisbezoek, and is a serious failing - like having a beautiful Ferrari but driving it at 200mph without insurance, a driver's license, and with one's eyes closed.

My point there is that "are they being raised properly?" is (or at least should be) a non-issue within this context. I don't get excited when non-believers or lacksadaisical believing parents have 20 children (and I find this exceedingly rare anyway, most unbelievers are too selfish to have many children). But when it is the believing lacksadaisical parents that have that many children, I have the opportunity (actually, the responsibility) of calling attention to it. However, I have never met a Christian family with many children that did not see the raising of their children to be a hugely important issue.

I agree that properly raising what we've got is more important than trying to just have as many as is possible; that's a no-brainer. But what raised the hackles of the QF-ish-types among us is not that people aren't trying to have as many as possible, it's that people are saying "I don't want the blessings that the Lord has promised in scripture by virtue of the covenant that my wife and I have entered into". Yes, I realise that God is sovereign and there's not a condom in the world that can prevent His will from being done. It is instead the act of defiance itself and the attitude that goes with it that is the issue.

I am attempting to raise the kind of children that the World is in desperate need of. I am attempting to raise children that will bring the gospel to their street, town, city, county, province, nation, and planet. In doing this, I am NOT going above and beyond the call of duty, but merely fulfilling the most basic of obligations in raising my children properly in God's eyes.

Honestly, when people tell my wife that it is irresponsible to have this many children (due to environmental/population issues, etc.), she will say "but the world needs my children."
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Regarding rutting swine:

On the PB there have been several posts about couples with large families. Each time this was met with approval. However, what was sometimes lacking was the approval of how they raised the kids rather than how fertile they were.

Sort of like, "The news just said so-and-so just had their 14th child..." and then an unqualified good is given.

I have seen several very fertile families have terrible offspring and so I just wanted to make sure we were also focusing on quality and not just quantity here.

Having children is not as praiseworthy as raising the ones we have with care.

But again, we should be thinking of Conversion Growth in the Muslim world; not mere Biological Growth in our own.
Pergy, we are a confessional board (to start on the inner-most ring of our community of believers). If I hear that Pastor Lewis had #'s 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, I would say "Praise God!!!" because I know that much of his reason for living is to raise his children to be a living sacrifice to the Lord. I will also get excited about any devout Christian family that has many offspring because those are God-given soldiers of Christ and their families will focus their energies on raising their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. If they do not, that is an issue to be raised at the next huisbezoek, and is a serious failing - like having a beautiful Ferrari but driving it at 200mph without insurance, a driver's license, and with one's eyes closed.

My point there is that "are they being raised properly?" is (or at least should be) a non-issue within this context. I don't get excited when non-believers or lacksadaisical believing parents have 20 children (and I find this exceedingly rare anyway, most unbelievers are too selfish to have many children). But when it is the believing lacksadaisical parents that have that many children, I have the opportunity (actually, the responsibility) of calling attention to it. However, I have never met a Christian family with many children that did not see the raising of their children to be a hugely important issue.

I agree that properly raising what we've got is more important than trying to just have as many as is possible; that's a no-brainer. But what raised the hackles of the QF-ish-types among us is not that people aren't trying to have as many as possible, it's that people are saying "I don't want the blessings that the Lord has promised in scripture by virtue of the covenant that my wife and I have entered into". Yes, I realise that God is sovereign and there's not a condom in the world that can prevent His will from being done. It is instead the act of defiance itself and the attitude that goes with it that is the issue.

I am attempting to raise the kind of children that the World is in desperate need of. I am attempting to raise children that will bring the gospel to their street, town, city, county, province, nation, and planet. In doing this, I am NOT going above and beyond the call of duty, but merely fulfilling the most basic of obligations in raising my children properly in God's eyes.

Honestly, when people tell my wife that it is irresponsible to have this many children (due to environmental/population issues, etc.), she will say "but the world needs my children."
Okay, you made your point. I agree. If I disagreed at any point, I'll repent in ashes and then sing you my little ditty:

You're right, I'm wrong. You're good, I'm bad. You're smart, I'm dumb. You spell good, I spell bad, you make good posts, I write drek....


Now, you do agree with me, right, about conversion growth and not mere biological growth being our main strategy against the Muslim hordes, right? That is what set my off-kilter in the first place.
 

Claudiu

Puritan Board Junior
However, I have never met a Christian family with many children that did not see the raising of their children to be a hugely important issue.

This is kind of :offtopic: but, I have meet many many large families where the parents just have 12 kids but never bring them up properly. The parents never invested any time in at least teaching them basic things. The children then just grew up and left their parents house when they are old enough (but were in really bad shape). These are mainly the type of families I have encountered that have many children. There are exceptions where I have meet families that have many children but the parents did an excellent job in bringing them up. Then again, these large families I'm talking about are all Eastern Europeans who during the communist days were getting paid to have over 5 children (under Ceausescu's communist regime). At one point some Romanian families didn't even have to go to work because they were making enough money to stay at home.

(From wiki: The 1966 decree
In 1966, the Ceauşescu regime banned all abortion, and introduced other policies to increase the very low birth rate and fertility rate - including a special tax amounting to between ten and twenty percent on the incomes of men and women who remained childless after the age of twenty-five, whether married or single. The inability to procreate due to medical reasons did not make a difference. Abortion was permitted only in cases where the woman in question was over forty-two, or already the mother of four (later five) children. Mothers of at least five children would be entitled to significant benefits, while mothers of at least ten children were declared heroine mothers by the Romanian State; few women ever sought this status, the average Romanian family during the communist era having two to three children (see Demographics of Romania).[4] Furthermore, a considerable number of women either died or were maimed during clandestine abortions.[5])

At the same time that this degree came out, conveniently, churches in Romania were really pushing for families having more children. The more children a family had, they were seen in the religious community as ones who God had favor upon, as more children meant more blessings. Yet at the same time these Christian families were just having more kids, a lot of them were losing them (spiritually).




I believe that if a family is going to have many children they should make sure they can handle it. I've seen too many families just have kids but then move along in life as if they never had them. Again, these are my experiences with mostly Romanians.

My point is that because truly children are a blessing, we must treat like a blessing. Some families say their children are a blessing but then act as if it is more of a hassle. If families acknowledge that children are a blessing, then children will become a precious possession where they will be loved. I don't disagree that children are a blessing, but parents have to treat them like a blessing, as opposed to maybe a hassle in life (or possibly even a curse).
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
However, I have never met a Christian family with many children that did not see the raising of their children to be a hugely important issue.

This is kind of :offtopic: but, I have meet many many large families where the parents just have 12 kids but never bring them up properly. The parents never invested any time in at least teaching them basic things. The children then just grew up and left their parents house when they are old enough (but were in really bad shape). These are mainly the type of families I have encountered that have many children. There are exceptions where I have meet families that have many children but the parents did an excellent job in bringing them up. Then again, these large families I'm talking about are all Eastern Europeans who during the communist days were getting paid to have over 5 children (under Ceausescu's communist regime). At one point some Romanian families didn't even have to go to work because they were making enough money to stay at home.

(From wiki: The 1966 decree
In 1966, the Ceauşescu regime banned all abortion, and introduced other policies to increase the very low birth rate and fertility rate - including a special tax amounting to between ten and twenty percent on the incomes of men and women who remained childless after the age of twenty-five, whether married or single. The inability to procreate due to medical reasons did not make a difference. Abortion was permitted only in cases where the woman in question was over forty-two, or already the mother of four (later five) children. Mothers of at least five children would be entitled to significant benefits, while mothers of at least ten children were declared heroine mothers by the Romanian State; few women ever sought this status, the average Romanian family during the communist era having two to three children (see Demographics of Romania).[4] Furthermore, a considerable number of women either died or were maimed during clandestine abortions.[5])

At the same time that this degree came out, conveniently, churches in Romania were really pushing for families having more children. The more children a family had, they were seen in the religious community as ones who God had favor upon, as more children meant more blessings. Yet at the same time these Christian families were just having more kids, a lot of them were losing them (spiritually).




I believe that if a family is going to have many children they should make sure they can handle it. I've seen too many families just have kids but then move along in life as if they never had them. Again, these are my experiences with mostly Romanians.

My point is that because truly children are a blessing, we must treat like a blessing. Some families say their children are a blessing but then act as if it is more of a hassle. If families acknowledge that children are a blessing, then children will become a precious possession where they will be loved. I don't disagree that children are a blessing, but parents have to treat them like a blessing, as opposed to maybe a hassle in life (or possibly even a curse).
Heroine mothers....ha, I read that wrong and started thinking of Crack Babies and Drugs.?
 

VilnaGaon

Puritan Board Sophomore
Thats an interesting way of looking at.
Well, The Christian witness of the church is compromised when we create an environment where false converts thrive. Paul is so concerned with maintaining a pure community, that he argues for either barring church membership or for just general avoidance of believers who live inconsistent with the truth they profess, depending upon how you interpret the last verses in 1 Cor. 5, and in Ephesians says that sinful practices should not even be mentioned among believers.

What would be a faster way to get a pure assembly than to live under the dominion of a blood thirsty Caliphate? :D
.

That would be a pure delusion to think that Islam would purify the Church!! Did that happen in North Africa in the 7th Century when Islam came conquering?
Before Islam, North Africa was Christian. Almost all our Reformed Theology today, is of North African origin. Augustine, Athanasius, Cyprian,Tertullian, Cyril of Alexandria were North Africans.
What is North Africa today? 99% Muslim. The destruction of the Church in North Africa happened over a thousand year period. Outright massacres, persecution, forced conversions, punishing taxes exacted from Christians under the Laws of Dhimmitude wiped out Christianity in North Africa. This future is for the West if Islam ever takes over.
Anyone who doubts this should read any of the books on Dhimmitude by Bat Yeor. She has researched better than anyone I know on this seldom mentioned topic.

Amazon.com: The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam : From Jihad to Dhimmitude : Seventh-Twentieth Century: Bat Ye'or, Miriam Kochan, David Littman: Books
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
Now, you do agree with me, right, about conversion growth and not mere biological growth being our main strategy against the Muslim hordes, right? That is what set my off-kilter in the first place.
Agreed, agreed, agreed.

This is kind of but, I have meet many many large families where the parents just have 12 kids but never bring them up properly. The parents never invested any time in at least teaching them basic things. The children then just grew up and left their parents house when they are old enough (but were in really bad shape). These are mainly the type of families I have encountered that have many children. There are exceptions where I have meet families that have many children but the parents did an excellent job in bringing them up. Then again, these large families I'm talking about are all Eastern Europeans who during the communist days were getting paid to have over 5 children (under Ceausescu's communist regime). At one point some Romanian families didn't even have to go to work because they were making enough money to stay at home.

(From wiki: The 1966 decree
In 1966, the Ceauşescu regime banned all abortion, and introduced other policies to increase the very low birth rate and fertility rate - including a special tax amounting to between ten and twenty percent on the incomes of men and women who remained childless after the age of twenty-five, whether married or single. The inability to procreate due to medical reasons did not make a difference. Abortion was permitted only in cases where the woman in question was over forty-two, or already the mother of four (later five) children. Mothers of at least five children would be entitled to significant benefits, while mothers of at least ten children were declared heroine mothers by the Romanian State; few women ever sought this status, the average Romanian family during the communist era having two to three children (see Demographics of Romania).[4] Furthermore, a considerable number of women either died or were maimed during clandestine abortions.[5])

At the same time that this degree came out, conveniently, churches in Romania were really pushing for families having more children. The more children a family had, they were seen in the religious community as ones who God had favor upon, as more children meant more blessings. Yet at the same time these Christian families were just having more kids, a lot of them were losing them (spiritually).
OK, then that's bad. But it shows that when your motivation for doing this is not biblically-based things go bad. Christians who chase after things like this likewise need a talking to. Are we not to live our lives sola scriptura?

My point is that because truly children are a blessing, we must treat like a blessing. Some families say their children are a blessing but then act as if it is more of a hassle. If families acknowledge that children are a blessing, then children will become a precious possession where they will be loved. I don't disagree that children are a blessing, but parents have to treat them like a blessing, as opposed to maybe a hassle in life (or possibly even a curse).
Agreed - I think this is a big part of the problem.
 

dr_parsley

Puritan Board Freshman
My understanding is that the growth of Islam in Europe is due to immigration. If you took out immigration as a factor I don't think there would be statistically significant trends. The fact is that wealthy nations across the world have a dropping birth rate. This is due to a secular environmentalism that indicates children are a burden to the planet and due to people's love of money (being already wealthy). I think it's also because if you are poor, there is a biological drive to have more children so you can be supported by a large family. So there is a shift in population from poor countries to richer as well as a worsening imbalance in population level.

The fact that many of the richer nations are historically Christian means that that identification as Christian will ebb away as non-Christian immigration gains pace. The UK is already definitely not a Christian country any more. The USA is not immune to these social dynamics and it will happen there as well unless the counter-cultural people (Christians) make a concerted effort to have more children to prevent a crisis of population level like is being seen in Europe and Japan.

Just my 2c.
 

christianyouth

Puritan Board Senior
Thats an interesting way of looking at.
Well, The Christian witness of the church is compromised when we create an environment where false converts thrive. Paul is so concerned with maintaining a pure community, that he argues for either barring church membership or for just general avoidance of believers who live inconsistent with the truth they profess, depending upon how you interpret the last verses in 1 Cor. 5, and in Ephesians says that sinful practices should not even be mentioned among believers.

What would be a faster way to get a pure assembly than to live under the dominion of a blood thirsty Caliphate? :D
.

That would be a pure delusion to think that Islam would purify the Church!! Did that happen in North Africa in the 7th Century when Islam came conquering?
Before Islam, North Africa was Christian. Almost all our Reformed Theology today, is of North African origin. Augustine, Athanasius, Cyprian,Tertullian, Cyril of Alexandria were North Africans.
What is North Africa today? 99% Muslim. The destruction of the Church in North Africa happened over a thousand year period. Outright massacres, persecution, forced conversions, punishing taxes exacted from Christians under the Laws of Dhimmitude wiped out Christianity in North Africa. This future is for the West if Islam ever takes over.
Anyone who doubts this should read any of the books on Dhimmitude by Bat Yeor. She has researched better than anyone I know on this seldom mentioned topic.

Amazon.com: The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam : From Jihad to Dhimmitude : Seventh-Twentieth Century: Bat Ye'or, Miriam Kochan, David Littman: Books
The observation that I made--that God uses persecution to purify His people, is just a very common theme throughout the scriptures and is demonstrated in history. I don't relish the idea of being persecuted, but if Christians were persecuted, we would be forced to actually start obeying scripture and once again become a separatist movement, which would fix a lot of the problems we are facing in the Church now.

God is sovereign and has calculated all potentialities, in eternity past, and decided on a course that would bring him greatest glory, so I'm not worried.:cool:
 

Hebrew Student

Puritan Board Freshman
Dr. Parsley,

I think you have hit the nail on the head. If you have a religious group with a lot of backbone that moves freely into an area, then the liberals simply back down because they don't want to offend anyone except Christians.

However, still, birthrate is a problem, and it is amazing how self-centered the left is when it comes to children. When you combine the two, it is simply dynamite waiting to explode.

God Bless,
Adam
 

Southern Twang

Puritan Board Freshman
Anytime you tell a bunch of warlike tribes that they can take women as their booty, have mutliple wives and kill with God's sanction, that particular religion is going to grow through strenous efforts to conquer.

Is that the sort of dominion you want?

Making women possessions of men I guess is masculine, but is this the masculinity we want?


Christianity, on the other hand, has empowered the weak and the NT gives much freedom to women.

Let's not apologize for the "weakness" of Christianity. Christians have always served, and died for their faith instead of dominating others.

Allah sends the sons of Muslims to kill for their faith, God has sent His Son to die for us, and we ought to send our sons to serve and even die for the good of others.
Pergamum,

You shouldn't have to go to the extremes to overcome an observation.

In no way is the dominion that Islam practices right. My point was at least they practice dominion, while the majority of Christians could care less about this Biblical concept.

The ideal masculinity I am thinking of is for the Christian men of the day to take a stand and start to lead. Our culture has infected us with egalitarian nonsense and Christian men of this day have abrogated a lot of their responsibility. Let the men take it back on and off the shoulders of our women.

Christians should serve others, and remain bold in our "weakness." We are weak in that we depend on Christ as our everything, but that doesn't mean that others may trample on us nor that we should let sin run rampant in our culture. We are to take a stand against the perversities of our day, but we see Christians cowering to abortion, homosexual marriage, idolatry and on and on on…

We need answers to why Christianity is losing in today's culture and why Islam is growing (if it is such an evil religion as you purport). Islam having a higher birth rate is just a piece of the puzzle.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Anytime you tell a bunch of warlike tribes that they can take women as their booty, have mutliple wives and kill with God's sanction, that particular religion is going to grow through strenous efforts to conquer.

Is that the sort of dominion you want?

Making women possessions of men I guess is masculine, but is this the masculinity we want?


Christianity, on the other hand, has empowered the weak and the NT gives much freedom to women.

Let's not apologize for the "weakness" of Christianity. Christians have always served, and died for their faith instead of dominating others.

Allah sends the sons of Muslims to kill for their faith, God has sent His Son to die for us, and we ought to send our sons to serve and even die for the good of others.
Pergamum,

You shouldn't have to go to the extremes to overcome an observation.

In no way is the dominion that Islam practices right. My point was at least they practice dominion, while the majority of Christians could care less about this Biblical concept.

The ideal masculinity I am thinking of is for the Christian men of the day to take a stand and start to lead. Our culture has infected us with egalitarian nonsense and Christian men of this day have abrogated a lot of their responsibility. Let the men take it back on and off the shoulders of our women.

Christians should serve others, and remain bold in our "weakness." We are weak in that we depend on Christ as our everything, but that doesn't mean that others may trample on us nor that we should let sin run rampant in our culture. We are to take a stand against the perversities of our day, but we see Christians cowering to abortion, homosexual marriage, idolatry and on and on on…

We need answers to why Christianity is losing in today's culture and why Islam is growing (if it is such an evil religion as you purport). Islam having a higher birth rate is just a piece of the puzzle.
I think the way we take dominion is by the humble preaching of the Gospel.

Militant missions slogans and warfare analogies will not work as we try to evangelize the Muslim world.

We must go as servants and be ready to be persecuted.

Reliance on gov'ts, or even our fertility, to overtake the Muslim world are wrong-headed.
 

Zenas

Snow Miser
One problem:

American Christians bought the American Dream (read: Idol) hook, line, and sinker. For the American Christian, a white pickett fence, a dog, and 2.5 kids is the end all-be all of existence. Those who deviate from the dream are shunned, looked down on, or thought of as generally strange. People who have more than 2 children are regarded as crazy by fellow Christians.

Not so in the Islamic world, 3, 4, 9 children is normal and celebrated as a blessing.

We've got some darn right theology don't we?
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
The gates of hell will not prevail over the Church. There's no doubt about it. If anything would result in the "Christianization" of the world it will be the preaching of the Gospel. I want to make clear, lest it be misunderstood, that my comment earlier was not to say that Christians having more children should be relied upon to "overtake the Muslim world." I never even implied such a thing. I simply said it's a shame that Christians, of all people, think of childbearing and large families as a hard thing, instead of a blessing. Some trust in horses, some in chariots, but we should trust in the Name of the Lord our God.
We agree.

I just wanted to keep first things first.

It IS, indeed, a shame that we do not count children as a blessing -just like you said.

We should have children to have children, not as a take-over strategy.

We can stress both the priority of evangelism and also encourage a vigorous view of counting children as blessings. I am just weary of using kids for other reasons besides the sheer joy and blessing of them.
 

Montanablue

Puritan Board Doctor
I believe that if a family is going to have many children they should make sure they can handle it. I've seen too many families just have kids but then move along in life as if they never had them. Again, these are my experiences with mostly Romanians.

My point is that because truly children are a blessing, we must treat like a blessing. Some families say their children are a blessing but then act as if it is more of a hassle. If families acknowledge that children are a blessing, then children will become a precious possession where they will be loved. I don't disagree that children are a blessing, but parents have to treat them like a blessing, as opposed to maybe a hassle in life (or possibly even a curse).
My experience has been sadly similar. I grew up in a fundamentalist church where our family (4 children) was the smallest. Most of the children were neglected. There were about 3 families that provided adequate food, clothing, shelter, education, and spiritual training for their children. I'm not opposed to families having large numbers of children - children are a blessing as its been said. But we must make sure to treat them as a blessing. I'm not sure its much use of have dozens of children if we treat them like animals.

Disclaimer: I am NOT saying that anyone on the PB treats their children in this manner. I would be shocked to find that so.
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
We agree.

I just wanted to keep first things first.

It IS, indeed, a shame that we do not count children as a blessing -just like you said.

We should have children to have children, not as a take-over strategy.

We can stress both the priority of evangelism and also encourage a vigorous view of counting children as blessings. I am just weary of using kids for other reasons besides the sheer joy and blessing of them.
But who actually does this in our community? Dispensationalists do it, sure. Some fundies too (are dispensationalists always fundamentalists? Not sure...) Puritans would never. They didn't have the warped theology for it. And yet they had many children (though many died in childbirth, they took what the Lord would give). And it is not because they were farmers. It's not because they needed extra hands in the family business. It is because they let the Lord's hand direct their way on every level. Something to shoot for, most certainly.

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:00:21 EST-----

But we must make sure to treat them as a blessing. I'm not sure its much use of have dozens of children if we treat them like animals.
Then let the elders deal with this and focus on this sinful behaviour - but it has nothing to do with the act of having a large family. It has to do with neglect of duty and selfishness, not the number of children one has.

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:04:35 EST-----

I'm not sure if anyone has noticed this, but I hate this attitude of "well, they had a dozen children, and look at them now." The legion families of two point one children whose offspring end up as crackheads is not mentioned. Why? Because they were responsible in their childbearing and only had as many "as they could handle."

Well, last I checked, that was the province of God, not of Man.

My wife never asks for help and will rarely accept it when it is pushed on her. Why? Because the frazzled woman with two children is to be pitied, but the woman with ten "was asking for it."

:banghead:

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:06:48 EST-----

Sometimes I feel like Noah.
 

Jennie

Puritan Board Freshman
This is an interesting discussion. I have no information to add regarding the numbers, but I'm currently reading a book called America Alone which has as its central thesis that European countries will become Muslim because the nonMuslim birthrate has dropped so drastically. The author (whose name I can't remember right now) seems to think that Hispanic immigrants are the main force keeping American Christianity afloat. If anyone else has read this book, I'd love to hear your reactions to it.
 

Claudiu

Puritan Board Junior
We agree.

I just wanted to keep first things first.

It IS, indeed, a shame that we do not count children as a blessing -just like you said.

We should have children to have children, not as a take-over strategy.

We can stress both the priority of evangelism and also encourage a vigorous view of counting children as blessings. I am just weary of using kids for other reasons besides the sheer joy and blessing of them.
But who actually does this in our community? Dispensationalists do it, sure. Some fundies too (are dispensationalists always fundamentalists? Not sure...) Puritans would never. They didn't have the warped theology for it. And yet they had many children (though many died in childbirth, they took what the Lord would give). And it is not because they were farmers. It's not because they needed extra hands in the family business. It is because they let the Lord's hand direct their way on every level. Something to shoot for, most certainly.

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:00:21 EST-----

But we must make sure to treat them as a blessing. I'm not sure its much use of have dozens of children if we treat them like animals.
Then let the elders deal with this and focus on this sinful behaviour - but it has nothing to do with the act of having a large family. It has to do with neglect of duty and selfishness, not the number of children one has.

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:04:35 EST-----

I'm not sure if anyone has noticed this, but I hate this attitude of "well, they had a dozen children, and look at them now." The legion families of two point one children whose offspring end up as crackheads is not mentioned. Why? Because they were responsible in their childbearing and only had as many "as they could handle."

Well, last I checked, that was the province of God, not of Man.

My wife never asks for help and will rarely accept it when it is pushed on her. Why? Because the frazzled woman with two children is to be pitied, but the woman with ten "was asking for it."

:banghead:

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:06:48 EST-----

Sometimes I feel like Noah.

I agree that even families who only have one or two kids can and do, sadly, neglect their children. The thing is, a family must follow what God wants for them. Maybe the family can only handle six kids, as opposed to ten. I think a family should strive to follow the will of God. This could go the other way too. If the family has the ability and calling to have more kids, then again, they should follow the will of God. I think too many people take the matter too lightly and don't seek what the will of God is before even starting a family.

-----Added 7/15/2009 at 12:59:47 EST-----

"Sometimes I feel like Noah."


Don't be discouraged!
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
We agree.

I just wanted to keep first things first.

It IS, indeed, a shame that we do not count children as a blessing -just like you said.

We should have children to have children, not as a take-over strategy.

We can stress both the priority of evangelism and also encourage a vigorous view of counting children as blessings. I am just weary of using kids for other reasons besides the sheer joy and blessing of them.
But who actually does this in our community? Dispensationalists do it, sure. Some fundies too (are dispensationalists always fundamentalists? Not sure...) Puritans would never. They didn't have the warped theology for it. And yet they had many children (though many died in childbirth, they took what the Lord would give). And it is not because they were farmers. It's not because they needed extra hands in the family business. It is because they let the Lord's hand direct their way on every level. Something to shoot for, most certainly.

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:00:21 EST-----

But we must make sure to treat them as a blessing. I'm not sure its much use of have dozens of children if we treat them like animals.
Then let the elders deal with this and focus on this sinful behaviour - but it has nothing to do with the act of having a large family. It has to do with neglect of duty and selfishness, not the number of children one has.

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:04:35 EST-----

I'm not sure if anyone has noticed this, but I hate this attitude of "well, they had a dozen children, and look at them now." The legion families of two point one children whose offspring end up as crackheads is not mentioned. Why? Because they were responsible in their childbearing and only had as many "as they could handle."

Well, last I checked, that was the province of God, not of Man.

My wife never asks for help and will rarely accept it when it is pushed on her. Why? Because the frazzled woman with two children is to be pitied, but the woman with ten "was asking for it."

:banghead:

-----Added 7/14/2009 at 11:06:48 EST-----

Sometimes I feel like Noah.
Mr. Noah.

Don't bang your head clear through the wall yet. I think you've got a pretty swell-looking family you Super-Breeder you!
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
The thing is, a family must follow what God wants for them. Maybe the family can only handle six kids, as opposed to ten. I think a family should strive to follow the will of God.
And that's all I'm arguing for. A couple can attempt to 'breed' all they want, but the Lord will give as many offspring as He deigns, as many as He thinks they can handle. To me, that's the crux of the matter.

I totally agree that it is a calling to have a large family, and not for everyone. Remember, we have only 4 bio-kids, the other six are adopted. We breast-feed until the children are about 2 (that's the royal 'we', as I myself have never actually lactated), which means for the most part that as much as you try, you're just not going to get a child every year.

"Sometimes I feel like Noah."
Don't be discouraged!
I don't get discouraged, but I do get mighty evangelical about it. And I don't think I'm getting a special revelation from God or any such thing, as was Noah's case. I just don't understand the opposing mindset, because to me, scripture is just so crystal clear.
 

LawrenceU

Puritan Board Doctor
Just try being the husband and wife who have a heart for 12 or 13 children and, by God's providence, have only had one. Adoptions have never worked out. It is very strange that for years we have desired this. I don't know how to describe the feeling and thoughts of, 'Where are the rest of our children?'
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
Brother, I hear you, my heart goes out to you, and I cannot understand it myself. But be patient and wait on the Lord - Abraham had to wait as well (we waited nine years for each of our two adopted children from China). There may yet be little Underwoods added to you. I will be praying.
 

LawrenceU

Puritan Board Doctor
I just hope I don't have to wait until I reach the age of Abraham at Issac's birth to find the rest of our children! But, if that were to be the case you'd see an old man doing flips.
 

TimV

Puritanboard Botanist
It's too early to get too philosophical, even if I had the training. But In my humble opinion there's a bit of "either/or" going on here. One can have the desire to populate the earth with our type of folks and can really, really want lots of kids for the sake of having kids and there's no reasons that those different motives have to be, well, different motives.

We've had these types of discussions before, and for the life of me I still can't see how, under normal circumstances (not wife being sick or something like that) anyone would want to prevent something that is as clear as day portrayed as a blessing from the Lord.

I mean really, what is a blessing anyway? A fuzzy feeling, or something tangible?

Or maybe we should just sit down and whine about Muslims, those great warriors who would lose a war to Portugal, and are technologically behind Brazil. Might as well throw in the towel; after all what chance have we got?

The days of faith and Kingdom building are over. Sure, it was fine standing on the walls of Leiden with a pitchfork, leading your Swedes against Tilly, or standing with Lazar at Kosovo even though you knew you would die.

It's different this time. This time Muslims can make their own air conditioners. What chance do we have? Especially as in 10 years those 3 percent of Europe's biggest economy who are Muslims are going to take over Germany, and in 12 years French history will come to an end. The glories of Spain are a thing of the past, what with all those temporary agricultural laborers from Tunis, and the stalwart Dutch will collapse like a rotten oak tree since one of the suburbs of Amsterdam just build another Mosque.

I just love these threads, and am so thankful for the Jewish neocons and apocalyptic Christian Fundamentalists who inspire them.
 

Claudiu

Puritan Board Junior
It's too early to get too philosophical, even if I had the training. But In my humble opinion there's a bit of "either/or" going on here. One can have the desire to populate the earth with our type of folks and can really, really want lots of kids for the sake of having kids and there's no reasons that those different motives have to be, well, different motives.

We've had these types of discussions before, and for the life of me I still can't see how, under normal circumstances (not wife being sick or something like that) anyone would want to prevent something that is as clear as day portrayed as a blessing from the Lord.

I mean really, what is a blessing anyway? A fuzzy feeling, or something tangible?

Or maybe we should just sit down and whine about Muslims, those great warriors who would lose a war to Portugal, and are technologically behind Brazil. Might as well throw in the towel; after all what chance have we got?

The days of faith and Kingdom building are over. Sure, it was fine standing on the walls of Leiden with a pitchfork, leading your Swedes against Tilly, or standing with Lazar at Kosovo even though you knew you would die.

It's different this time. This time Muslims can make their own air conditioners. What chance do we have? Especially as in 10 years those 3 percent of Europe's biggest economy who are Muslims are going to take over Germany, and in 12 years French history will come to an end. The glories of Spain are a thing of the past, what with all those temporary agricultural laborers from Tunis, and the stalwart Dutch will collapse like a rotten oak tree since one of the suburbs of Amsterdam just build another Mosque.

I just love these threads, and am so thankful for the Jewish neocons and apocalyptic Christian Fundamentalists who inspire them.
:stirpot:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top