Re: An interesting essay for evangelicals

From: John Burgeson (burgythree@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jan 20 2003 - 18:23:02 EST

  • Next message: RFaussette@aol.com: "Re: Reproduction from homosexuality..."

    >>However, if the statement is correct, that does that say that my friends
    >>who, after they found out that they could not have children, adopted one
    >>little girl taken from her family for abuse - and then took her sister as
    >>well to keep the girls together - have no purpose in life since as a
    >>couple they cannot reproduce? >>

    Your friends are to be deeply commended, fervently respected and lovingly
    supported by their faith fellowship. To say they have no purpose would be a
    travesty on the Christian faith.

    As far as I know Jesus never had children either.

    John W. Burgeson (Burgy)
    www.burgy.50megs.com

    >From: JLR173rdNY@aol.com
    >To: asa@calvin.edu
    >Subject: Re: An interesting essay for evangelicals
    >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:11:51 EST
    >
    >If a lurker might ask a question relative to the post which said relative
    >to
    >homosexual behavior:
    >
    > >You don't breed. The purpose of life is to live and to create more life.
    >A
    > >population that pursues 100% gays is doomed. That would be the end of
    > >Biblical history.
    > >I'm sorry. I'm squarely behind reproducing couples.
    >
    >My son just did confirmation class (and is being confirmed next Sunday) and
    >I
    >checked the PCUSA catechism and found:
    >
    > >Question 1. What is God's purpose for your life?
    >
    > >God wills that I should live by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, for
    >the
    >love of God, >and in the communion of the Holy Spirit.
    >
    >Ummm, I thought some variation on that was present in most catechisms, but
    >I
    >could be wrong. And I'll readily admit I could be misunderstanding the
    >point. But I don't see how the purpose of HUMAN life can ever be expressed
    >without reference to God.
    >
    >However, if the statement is correct, that does that say that my friends
    >who,
    >after they found out that they could not have children, adopted one little
    >girl taken from her family for abuse - and then took her sister as well to
    >keep the girls together - have no purpose in life since as a couple they
    >cannot reproduce? Should they have tried some of the more radical methods
    >to
    >have a child? Should they have divorced and which ever could have
    >children,
    >remarry, so as to reproduce? Is adoption an unacceptable alternative and
    >the
    >lives of infertile men and women without purpose? Admittedly, I've used
    >one
    >couple as an example, but the father in this case was a coworker and was
    >one
    >of those people who helped me figure out what it meant to be a Christian,
    >in
    >part by his willingness to parent children who desperately needed
    >parenting.
    >
    >
    >Janet Rice
    >Back to lurking
    >
    >

    _________________________________________________________________
    MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
    http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 20 2003 - 18:23:54 EST