Looking for wise advice on Birth Control and inlaws

[puritanpilgrim]

To be rude we gotta start out breeding the Muslims and the Atheists. Natural church growth is the best church growth.

I know this sounds crazy, but there is truth to this view. Actually, Christians and nonchristians are not having enough children to keep the American society. That is why we have so many of the labor problems we have in this society. China will be in for a big surprise in a few years when The one child can not support the two parents. Economically it just will not work. But, the church needs to not merely have more children, but they also need take back the home, since close to 80% of the children raised in the church leave the church.

SermonAudio.com - The Centrality of the Home in the Evangelism and Discipleship of the Next Generation


And furthermore, it should be us who desire to adopt the orphans which the world is rejecting.

http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Adoption/

 

[Hebrew Student]

Yvonne,

Go back and reread the context of what I said. I said they are like the sluggard in the way they do not plan for the future with respect to children.

Finally, I still have yet to hear an exegesis of this text:

Proverbs 25:16 ave you found honey? Eat only what you need, That you not have it in excess and vomit it.

The point is, kvanlaan, not that children are not a blessing, but that quiverfull has an unbiblical concept of a blessing. The concept of a blessing must be derived from the Bible alone. There is everything in the wisdom literature to suggest the blessings need to be handled in liminality. It is not just Proverbs 25:16, and it is not just Proverbs 6; this concept is all over the wisdom literature. Hence, when you talk about anything as a blessing, this has got to figure in.

God Bless,
Adam

 

[au5t1n]

Yvonne,

Go back and reread the context of what I said. I said they are like the sluggard in the way they do not plan for the future with respect to children.

Finally, I still have yet to hear an exegesis of this text:

Proverbs 25:16 ave you found honey? Eat only what you need, That you not have it in excess and vomit it.

The point is, kvanlaan, not that children are not a blessing, but that quiverfull has an unbiblical concept of a blessing. The concept of a blessing must be derived from the Bible alone. There is everything in the wisdom literature to suggest the blessings need to be handled in liminality. It is not just Proverbs 25:16, and it is not just Proverbs 6; this concept is all over the wisdom literature. Hence, when you talk about anything as a blessing, this has got to figure in.

God Bless,
Adam

Every other blessing listed in the Wisdom literature is an inanimate object that is consumed by humans in some fashion. Children are human beings in the image of God. They do not just give a temporary benefit (like honey) -- they go on to have some impact on society, hopefully for the Lord. This, at the very least, places children in a different category from other blessings which are just consumed goods.

 

[TexanRose]

Yvonne,

Go back and reread the context of what I said. I said they are like the sluggard in the way they do not plan for the future with respect to children.

I guess I don't see that "quiverfull" families are not planning for the future with respect to children. I know a lot of families who have decided to allow God to determine family size. They have all planned wisely for the future in a number of ways, for instance, by postponing marriage until the husband is in a position to support his wife and any children that might come along; by developing/honing the ability to live frugally; by choosing careers with the anticipation of possibly needing to support a large number of children; by obtaining ample life insurance and disability insurance plans so that the wife and kids will still be provided for in case of the husband's death or illness; etc. etc.

I don't know of one situation where a Christian husband has not been able to provide for his family because he had a large number of children. Do you? I do know of a large family or two where the husband did not provide due to slothfulness or other circumstances, but in those cases, provision would have been an issue no matter what the size of the family. I think that generally speaking, if you allow God to determine family size, and trust that He will provide, He will.

(Though I'm not advocating the other extreme, where Mom weans the baby super early so that she can hurry up and get pregnant again--I think we ought to trust God with our fertility even when he makes us wait.)

 

[kvanlaan]

Go back and reread the context of what I said. I said they are like the sluggard in the way they do not plan for the future with respect to children.

Well, then that's easy enough, because the above is a false statement.

I don't know of one situation where a Christian husband has not been able to provide for his family because he had a large number of children. Do you? I do know of a large family or two where the husband did not provide due to slothfulness or other circumstances, but in those cases, provision would have been an issue no matter what the size of the family. I think that generally speaking, if you allow God to determine family size, and trust that He will provide, He will.

And this is a true one.

 

[BlackCalvinist]

To be rude we gotta start out breeding the Muslims and the Atheists. Natural church growth is the best church growth.

I know this sounds crazy, but there is truth to this view. Actually, Christians and nonchristians are not having enough children to keep the American society. That is why we have so many of the labor problems we have in this society. China will be in for a big surprise in a few years when The one child can not support the two parents. Economically it just will not work.

China's already feeling it in other areas:

NBC: China begins to face sex-ratio imbalance - World news- msnbc.com

 

[he beholds]

Yvonne,

Go back and reread the context of what I said. I said they are like the sluggard in the way they do not plan for the future with respect to children.

Finally, I still have yet to hear an exegesis of this text:

Proverbs 25:16 ave you found honey? Eat only what you need, That you not have it in excess and vomit it.

The point is, kvanlaan, not that children are not a blessing, but that quiverfull has an unbiblical concept of a blessing. The concept of a blessing must be derived from the Bible alone. There is everything in the wisdom literature to suggest the blessings need to be handled in liminality. It is not just Proverbs 25:16, and it is not just Proverbs 6; this concept is all over the wisdom literature. Hence, when you talk about anything as a blessing, this has got to figure in.

God Bless,
Adam

I figured it out!!!

Children, not being commodities, cannot be weighed by "need," since they are not things that we need. Rather they are "things" (if we must) that we are commanded to have in order to be fruitful and multiply. SNAP! There's some exegesis for you.

I, being a woman who personally welcomes each and every child that the Lord has given me and hopes for more, realize that my children are not honey. I serve them more than they serve me. They are blessings in that they bring great blessing to my life, but they are not a blessing I need to seek out. The Lord gives them to me. Yes, I believe that the Lord also gives the blessing of children to those that don't desire them, to those that will kill them, and to those who "plan" each child. But not using BC is NOT seeking extra blessings. I am not having children because I collect them and hope to be blessed more than I should be (as w/your American excess and your vomiting honey pots), but because I do my wifely "duties" and some of those times lead to the creation of babies. Since I was a little rude in my first response I will address your earlier Q as to how your professor could give you an A. My answer: I don't know. I have gotten A's on papers when I haven't even read the material assigned. Perhaps it was an A for effort. Or perhaps everyone got an A, or perhaps the man agreed with you. But he, like the saints in history whom you ask us to disregard in a Protestant fashion, is not Scripture.

But there are so many verses that do say how wonderful children are.
I do not think it is a blanket sin to use BC. But you do seem to say that it is one to not. I think you are wrong.

 

[au5t1n]

Since I was a little rude in my first response I will address your earlier Q as to how your professor could give you an A. My answer: I don't know. I have gotten A's on papers when I haven't even read the material assigned. Perhaps it was an A for effort. Or perhaps everyone got an A, or perhaps the man agreed with you. But he, like the saints in history whom you ask us to disregard in a Protestant fashion, is not Scripture.

Another thing is that a good professor will not grade primarily on whether your conclusion is correct, but on whether your logic is communicated well and presented in an organized manner. If Adam is a good writer, that puts him above 90% of his class (no offense to them) right off the bat, regardless of whether his conclusion is valid. A paper that communicates the logic well and demonstrates an understanding of what the class covers (e.g. Hebrew) should earn more even with an incorrect conclusion than a poorly-written paper that just happens to have an accurate thesis.

 

[kvanlaan]

Every other blessing listed in the Wisdom literature is an inanimate object that is consumed by humans in some fashion. Children are human beings in the image of God. They do not just give a temporary benefit (like honey) -- they go on to have some impact on society, hopefully for the Lord. This, at the very least, places children in a different category from other blessings which are just consumed goods.

A-MEN, brother!

Children, not being commodities, cannot be weighed by "need," since they are not things that we need. Rather they are "things" (if we must) that we are commanded to have in order to be fruitful and multiply. SNAP! There's some exegesis for you.

I, being a woman who personally welcomes each and every child that the Lord has given me and hopes for more, realize that my children are not honey. I serve them more than they serve me. They are blessings in that they bring great blessing to my life, but they are not a blessing I need to seek out. The Lord gives them to me. Yes, I believe that the Lord also gives the blessing of children to those that don't desire them, to those that will kill them, and to those who "plan" each child. But not using BC is NOT seeking extra blessings. I am not having children because I collect them and hope to be blessed more than I should be (as w/your American excess and your vomiting honey pots), but because I do my wifely "duties" and some of those times lead to the creation of babies. Since I was a little rude in my first response I will address your earlier Q as to how your professor could give you an A. My answer: I don't know. I have gotten A's on papers when I haven't even read the material assigned. Perhaps it was an A for effort. Or perhaps everyone got an A, or perhaps the man agreed with you. But he, like the saints in history whom you ask us to disregard in a Protestant fashion, is not Scripture.

But there are so many verses that do say how wonderful children are.
I do not think it is a blanket sin to use BC. But you do seem to say that it is one to not. I think you are wrong.

And A-MEN, sister!

(I'm suddenly feeling a little charismatic tonight!)

 

[Zenas]

Jeremy,

I have a feeling I know you. Tell Michelle I said "Hi."

1. We thought my parents would be of the same mindset, and they kind of were. However, the fact that they have been able to meet and spend time with their grandson totally eclipsed that. It never really came back up past a few remarks my dad would make on a rare occasion.

2. God will provide. We found out Phillip-Giles was coming and got a tax-return that paid his whole deductible. Birth paid for. My wife's health insurance covers him and my insurance will cover them both when I go full-time at work after the Bar exam. It all worked out perfectly. I couldn't have and didn't plan it myself.

3. God's people will help. We got more clothing, diapers, and other baby paraphernalia from other people than we'll ever need. One thing that makes babies expensive is buying new stuff. Don't buy new stuff if you don't need to. If someone offers you hand-me downs that their child wore 2 years ago they're perfectly fine and free. Some folks turn their noses up at hand-me downs and end up paying a lot of money for new baby stuff that they outgrow in a month. We had so many outfits Phillip-Giles only wore some things once and then was too big for them. (He's a huge baby though.)

Re: being off birth control. I would highly recommend it. We know people who were on it for long periods of time and it's created fertility problems. That's anecdotal, but I wouldn't risk it on that alone. Getting pregnant isn't some super easy thing that just happens either. For some people, they look at each other and have a child. For many others, it's a lot harder. Being off the pill doesn't necessarily equal being pregnant.

 

[Peairtach]

To be rude we gotta start out breeding the Muslims and the Atheists. Natural church growth is the best church growth.

I agree. But saying that all birth control is wrong isn't the solution. Christians just have to realise that following the crowd and having two or - at the most, three - kids isn't necessarily God's revealed will for all or most families.