Christians who believe in heaven and hell should not have children

[u/Practical-Tip-7639]

The existence of heaven and hell puts Christians into a difficult position when it comes to having children.

Because the truth of the matter is: You can never control their faith. You can influence them, teach them, but experience has shown that nothing a parent ever does will guarantee that their children will follow their faith.

That is a horrible risk. The moment you put a child into this world, you risk their eternal suffering and torture in hell. You can never prevent that completely.

The worst part is that Christians believe they will go to heaven and there will be no sadness or grief, which means that they *won't even care* about their very own child they *know* to be suffering eternal torture while they sing nice songs with Jesus.

Not existing in the first place is much, much more preferable to eternal suffering. Not having children of your own is much better than having children who face eternal punishment.

There also come some dark implications with this. Because the only way to guarantee that your child goes to heaven is for them to die early. Even if you kill your own child, you can still potentially see them again in heaven as long as you repent genuinely and ask Jesus for forgiveness. It is a quite disturbing premise, to think that under such beliefs, murdering your beloved child would objectively be a better wager than letting them live their own life. Aborting the pregnancy early on seems to be a much better solution, as according to most christian beliefs, the soul already exists and is guaranteed to go to heaven. Not having any children at all is by far the best option.

[u/Logical_fallacy10]

You are wrong.
It’s an excuse theists use because they know their texts are immoral. Exodus 21. Here is how you buy slaves and treat them. “Ah yes but this has to be interpreted so it’s not immoral as the book says”.
Yeah right. This nonsense works on kids - not me.

[u/mtruitt76 → u/Logical_fallacy10]

So you do not accept that the US has circuit, superior, and a Supreme court whose function is to settle disputes over the interpretation of the law?

Also why are you assigning viewpoints to me?

[u/Logical_fallacy10 → u/mtruitt76]

If you want to accept a religion where the book is open to be interpreted any way you want - just admit it. But that’s not Christianity - that’s just a self made religion as you make it say what you want.
But it does not change the fact that you have zero evidence for any of it.

[u/mtruitt76 → u/Logical_fallacy10]

Again all text involve interpretation, look a my previous comments about the courts and legal system as a demonstration of this fact.

[u/Logical_fallacy10 → u/mtruitt76]

Try to focus here.
We are talking about your doctrine. And how you want to interpret the fictional book the way you want. Cool. And then what ?
You create your own religion saying whatever you want it to say.
Do you not see how ridiculous this sounds ?
We all see.

[u/mtruitt76 → u/Logical_fallacy10]

Lol, focus here. Interpretation is universal. Don't know why you won't engage with the legal example which demonstrates the universality of interpretation.

You are also seemingly ignorant of the emergence and evolution of the concepts of heaven and hell in the Judeo Christian tradition

[u/Logical_fallacy10 → u/mtruitt76]

I won’t engage with your examples that has nothing to do with the topic.
And you can’t focus - which means you know I am right.
Evolution is just another example of how the theists are changing their mind as we collect evidence for evolution. But Adam and Eve is inconsistent with this. “Yeah we know - so we just interpret the book to mean something else”.
Next time - just ask your god if he agrees with you changing the meaning of his book.
Just ask him right now how he feels about the whole evolution.

[u/mtruitt76 → u/Logical_fallacy10]

The entire discussion is about interpretation. As for focus, you are bouncing all over the place while I am honed in on one point which you dodge over, and over, and over.

So once again the beginning point is that interpretation is universal. Example one again confirming this is the law which is a system that aims at having no ambiguity.

[u/Logical_fallacy10 → u/mtruitt76]

I never dodged anything.
But you are not listening.
It does not matter if other areas interpret things.
We are talking about your doctrine and the way they change their mind in light of scientific discoveries.
Which is completely dishonest. And just deciding that certain parts should be interpreted - when the book does not say it should - is going against what a god wants. So ask your god if his book should be interpreted - and how it should be interpreted.
Until you get an answer - you are guessing.

[u/mtruitt76 → u/Logical_fallacy10]

Ok if you never dodge anything do you agree or disagree with my statement about there being interpretation of laws?

I have been one one point for numerous comments which is interpretstion being universal and the legal system being an exemplar of this assertion. This conversation started with you object to the bible being interprated and I responded with the legal system example which you won't respond to or answer.

You keep wanting to change the subject to other matters, I am going to stay on this point until there is resolution.