I completely agree.

“love the sinner, hate the sin” — I’ve never personally heard anyone ascribe this to Scripture. I’ve only heard it used as a general philosophy in reaching out to the lost. Of course, when you’re trying to reach people who define themselves by their sin (homosexuals, for example) this approach becomes somewhat problematic.

I mean, John told us “God… loved the world [and then] sent His Son….” Which tells me that He loved me when I was yet dead in my sin, and the only difference between me and the murderer/drunk/pederast/kleptomaniac/little white liar next to me is that I have agreed to give up “that which I cannot keep” in order to get “that which I cannot lose.” — I know not only where the Narrow Gate is, but that there is a Gate to begin with.

As liberals have fewer and fewer children (e.g., France), mainly because “how can we bring a child into such a horrible world?”, and since biologists define a species’ success as the ability to thrive (i.e., reproduce) in its environs, I see absolutely nothing wrong with Christians having as many children as they are willing and able to; this includes adoption, IVF, what have you. And assuming the fathers are men who take their jobs seriously, and if Jeff is right on one of his many finer theological positions, this practice would tend to support amillenial eschatology.

In other words, we would eventually breed them (liberals) out of political and social relevance.

…or was that where y’all have been taking this the whole time?

Tom, there are SO many things that people think are in the Bible that aren’t. Me included. I looked at that list on the link I gave to Brian and was surprised.

This too shall pass.
Spare the rod, spoil the child.

Neither are in Scripture.

Carrie, I just love you!! Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Another saying not found in scripture, but most people think is there:

“Love the sinner, hate the sin.”

Well, if it were that easy, God could just send our sin to hell and we wouldn’t need salvation!

Tom

I see parents limiting their family size for so many reasons (concerns about the cost of college, about the children getting enough attention, etc) that can be rationalized as non-materialistic, even though none of us would choose to retroactively terminate our existence because Daddy can’t afford to pay for college or give us enough attention.

For my children, I think it’s appropriate to set a firm guideline (four kids), based on the weight of scripture and the general self-interest of the family. I see too many temptations for people to reason themselves (even honestly) into a smaller family given the extremely high short-term cost of raising children.

When you consider that Social Security, corporate pensions and the US government itself are virtually guaranteed to go bankrupt in a Weimar-style hyperinflation at some point (and that many of us are likely to get our personal wealth caught up in it if we aren’t quick to move out of dollars), having a lot of able-bodied children seems like pretty good insurance against the Alpo diet in old age.

Tom

Regarding children being a blessing, I certainly agree! I think that it is a blessing for those who have children and those who have a “quiver full,” but not a command. I’m not saying parents shouldn’t seek the Lord on this. My personal opinion is that parents should examine themselves and their motives for preventing pregnancy, in my opinion materialism and self-centeredness are not valid reasons, but the actual sin is the heart condition, not preventing a pregnancy.

I do agree with the comments already posted about how you go about preventing a pregancy as being a moral issue as well. Thankfully, we learned the truth about oral contraceptives early on in our marriage, but I still grieve over the possibility that I could have unknowingly aborted precious children in our early months of marriage. Regarding the “spilling the seed” topic . . . my interpretation of this issue, biblically, is that Onan’s sin was that he did not want to impregnate his sister-in-law because the heir would be his deceased brother’s and not his own. It seems to me that selfishness was the root issue, and God took this very seriously and consequently killed the man.

There is more I could say on this issue, but it is experiential in nature and my medical limitations cause me to be emotional over this “hot topic.” I will say that our desire has always been for a large family, and we have seen the Lord move in His timing in each of our three pregnancies, and trust that He will guide our family in any additional additions in the future.

Going back to the original discussion on legalism, I feel that this word has almost become a “buzz word” in our circle these days (or perhaps this is where I have been “camped out” lately, as the Lord has been working on me). After talking to many godly friends about this, I have seen that it does mean different things to different people. I have lately begun to wonder if true legalism is simply saying you have to do something else to be saved or to be “more spiritual.” So, maybe we’re calling something legalism when it is more likely a critical spirt or being judgemental? I don’t know . . . still struggling with this one.