A new born baby is not a sinner but grows into a sinner,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Every single one? Without exception?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A new born baby is not a sinner but grows into a sinner,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I am a staunch believer in Evolution. I am a Christian. So...whenever a Christian takes "Adam and Eve" seriously, well...I quit the debate
do we think that babies are our enemies to our prosperity, comfort and convenience that we eliminate them?
For Adam and Eve it was not nurture but they could have refused to do evil
Those that don't want babies simply don't have them. But yes, babies are a threat to one's prosperity, comfort, and lifestyle. My life would have been much smaller had my wife and I had children. If one isn't the kind of person who revels in being with children - and we all know some, the people whose lives would feel empty without them, the people who run day care centers and become kindergarten teachers - then raising kids is undesirable. It's to be expected when one's options are contracted by theocratic incursions into government that view women as incubators. 'OK, I might not be able to get an abortion, I might be prosecuted for trying, and soon they'll remove birth control as an option if they can, so let's nip that in the bud now.'
Find me in the Gospels one single passage that says that Jesus' coming took place because of "Adam and Eve" or to erase "original sin". Just one.Also, if there were no first humans as evolution suggests, there was no original sin and no need for Jesus. How can a Christian jettison that belief?
In the above video Stephen Lett (Governing Body member of the Jehovah's Witnesses) claims babies are, "enemies of God".
He immediately clarifies that he loves babies, but it is worth a good laugh seeing the theological clumsiness of one of 8 leaders of approx. 8.7 million people.
Which brings us to the question, are babies enemies of God in your faith tradition?
In my opinion
Yes... I understand your point.
I guess it all depends on what you think "smaller" means. I have three children that are changing lives... seems like my life is larger because of them. Not that you can't have the option of not having babies, I think that is a viable, noble and acceptable position.
but to sacrifice babies on the altar of convenience, posterity, comfort and lifestyle seems more like the worship of the god of Molech of the times of old.
That being said and in the context of my signature, my sisters are thankful for the mercy, healing and love when they had abortions.
I'm trying to recall the last time I saw a kitten eating a cow...
Are you asking if "baby Putin" was an enemy of God or "baby Jesus"?Which brings us to the question, are babies enemies of God in your faith tradition?
In my opinion
Every single one? Without exception?
Abortions aren't substitutes for condoms.
On the other hand, Christians feel that it is more important to stop the distribution of condoms in high schools because it condones sex. I think that sex will happen whether or not condoms are there. Sex has been around for quite some time (millions of years). Condoms prevent STDs, such as AIDS, and prevent unwanted pregnancies.
If condoms were readily available, we wouldn't see as many abortions. If sex education taught that early withdrawal during intercourse didn't prevent pregnancies, we wouldn't have as many unwanted babies and abortions.
Young people, especially, are harmed by having babies. Girls have to drop out of high school (or elementary school), and find work and take care of a baby. They are too young to take on all of those responsibilities. Babies are a lifelong commitment (unless you toss them out on the street as soon as they turn 18. . . then you have a homeless problem with pregnant teens).
Abortions will be performed legally or illegally. Who is more qualified to abort a baby....an unqualified amateur midwife, or a doctor in a fully staffed and equipped hospital? Why have amateurs with coat hangers deliver babies?
I guess it all depends on what you think "smaller" means.
Not that you can't have the option of not having babies, I think that is a viable, noble and acceptable position. but to sacrifice babies on the altar of convenience, posterity, comfort and lifestyle seems more like the worship of the god of Molech of the times of old.
Find me in the Gospels one single passage that says that Jesus' coming took place because of "Adam and Eve" or to erase "original sin". Just one.
In my case, it means more homebound with less adult interaction and fewer adult activities. Meeting another couple for sushi after work or flying to see a concert are either more difficult or off the table for parents with children. Yesterday, a friend who had been out of the country for months reuned with us at our home, after which we all went down to a local restaurant, had a couple margaritas, and returned to the house for more refreshments and conversation. Later, my wife went to her urban sketchers class, while I watched a ballgame. Picture what our day would have been like instead if we had had children at home.
In the above video Stephen Lett (Governing Body member of the Jehovah's Witnesses) claims babies are, "enemies of God".
He immediately clarifies that he loves babies, but it is worth a good laugh seeing the theological clumsiness of one of 8 leaders of approx. 8.7 million people.
Which brings us to the question, are babies enemies of God in your faith tradition?
In my opinion
In my case, it means more homebound with less adult interaction and fewer adult activities. Meeting another couple for sushi after work or flying to see a concert are either more difficult or off the table for parents with children. Yesterday, a friend who had been out of the country for months reuned with us at our home, after which we all went down to a local restaurant, had a couple margaritas, and returned to the house for more refreshments and conversation. Later, my wife went to her urban sketchers class, while I watched a ballgame. Picture what our day would have been like instead if we had had children at home.
My wife and I formed bands that played in local restaurants and coffee houses several times a year. How does that work with kids? We also liked to plan Grateful Dead weekends, where we would switch from office attire to tie-dye, fly off to some west coast venue like Phoenix or Las Vegas for a weekend, stay at nice hotel and eat in nice restaurants, take in three shows, and be back to work Monday morning. How does that work with children? Most or all of this would have to be sacrificed if we were raising children instead. That's what I meant by a smaller life.
So which is it, noble, or like worshiping Moloch, which I assume is bad? What's an example of opting to remain childless that you consider noble and not like sacrificing babies to a Semitic god for "convenience" sake? It sounds like you are giving lip service to the option before condemning choosing it. Not that it matters. The secular world is not seeking the endorsement of Christianity, which values it rejects, as is becoming increasingly apparent in America today.
The context is explained in the clip, paraphrasing what it says - he is trying to make a point about original sin.That was taken out of context.
PS - Is the sentence "In my opinion" part of your signature? It really doesn't make sense in the post.
Personally I don't think that back when they were babies either of them were enemies of God.Are you asking if "baby Putin" was an enemy of God or "baby Jesus"?
It means everyone is born capable of sinning, and all eventually sin, therefore all need to repent.This is another Christian belief I never really could wrap my head around, and no member of the clergy could offer a logical explanation as to why. Can any Christians here explain to me how a newborn baby is a "sinner?"
It means everyone is born capable of sinning, and all eventually sin, therefore all need to repent.
Free will always has limits. I can't choose to do the impossible.So no free will, we're all sinners regardless of if want to be or not.
Free will always has limits. I can't choose to do the impossible.
That doesn't negate our choices. They are still ours alone.