Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         14
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

       28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

       29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Surogates? - Pastors and Scholars Please Read and Advise


futurehope
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Tools for the Ministry

HS, what y are referring to is DFS (state) placed children in foster care due to the immediate interuption of parental rights caused by some danger to the child. I am getting ready to take in my niece (I hope) due to DFS placement because her mother and father are both unfit to parent and always in and out of drugs (not to mention the neglect). If I am given custody, it will be full and legaln and the state will provide financial assistance for her care whether needed or not, until such time that DFS deems either one or both of her parents fit to take her back and then she will be given back to them. The only way I can adopt her is if both parents sign off and give up their parental rights - which would be very inexpensive (just a few filing fees, etc.). Otherwise, I would have to file for adoption and prove them both permanently unfit parents in a court and convince the judge to revoke their parental rights and allow my wife and I to adopt her - which would be very expensive (my parents spent over $40k trying to get custody of their first grandaughter and did for a little while until the court of appeals changed the ruling and returned her to her mother.

Anyway, back to the point, adopting when the children are already in your custody is not all that expensive, but once the children are placed with an adoption agency, they basically "sell" these children to people for 10 to $20k so that they can help pay the costs of housing them. It's very sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote="futurehope"]If her true motivation is to bless, this family, why accept payment?? No offense to your friend, but I just don't think it's right to sell yourself.[/quote]

I've seen this idea pop up a couple of times now. Futurehope, what do you mean by "selling yourself?" We all "sell ourselves" to perform work; otherwise we wouldn't be able to make a living. If a baby (embryo) is a "baby"--a separate entity from its parents--before it is born (which I believe it is), then I'm wondering how surrogate motherhood is different in principle than foster parenting. A surrogate mother is simply providing care for a baby whose biological mother is unable to do the same for him. Sure, she's doing it in a "new-fangled," cutting-edge kind of way, but that's really all she's doing. Sure, there are definitely emotional and psychological demands made on the surrogate that aren't always easy to meet...but that, in and of itself, doesn't make this "job" any different that other jobs which are emotionally and psychologically draining.

I actually have considered this topic. My sister has had two miscarriages, and she and her husband really would love to have more kids. I jokingly offered to be a surrogate mom; I have a nice "oven" in good working order. :wink (Please pardon me if that language is offensive.) And then I got to thinking: "What a great idea!" I am not a person who loves to be pregnant; I have never felt a "bond" with any of my babies [i]in utero [/i]or immediately after birth. Of course, I love them all dearly, but have only "bonded" as my relationship with each of them has grown and deepened throughout their lives. I'm a pretty cut-and-dried, unemotional sort...Of course, my sister probably won't even consider taking me up on my offer; the procedure is still very expensive and fraught with ethical problems. And I'm pretty sure my husband would disapprove...but not for the reasons given on this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Tools for the Ministry

Annie,

I didn't post any of this to get into any sort of dispute and, given that it is obvious that we have a lot of differences in our ethical and Biblical standards, I'll just reply to your statement of us "selling ourselves" whenever we work a physical job: A physical job is done externally and carrying and delivering is done internally. Two entirely different concepts. If you care to know, I also think it's wrong to "sell" plasma. If you are going to give of yourself for the good of others, I think God blesses us - as He tells us to; but I don't see how selling your body is going to bring any glory or honour to God. This is my opinion and you can take it or leave it knowing that I tend to be just a little more conservative than what you may like for people to be.

God Bless,

Futurehope

EDITED:

I might also add that not only is a child in the womb an internal thing, it is connected to you and, in some ways, can actually control your body - even to the point of causing your body to shut down. This is far more than going to work and coming home - it is physically attatched to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Members

I think that surrogacy is a completely unselfish act whether a woman is paid or not. Personally, I don't think that doing it for pay is right, but I don't criticize those that do. As for using the example of Sarah, Abraham and Hagar the problem was not the surrogacy as much as it was circuMVenting God's plan. He specifically said that Abraham's child was to come from Sarah. Rachel and Leah did the same thing yet there is nothing negative about their situation. With that said, deciding to become a surrogate should be done with much godly counsel and prayer. It would not be an easy decision and any woman considering it should be prepared for all that it entails

As for "just adopt" vs fertility treatments, adopting is not cheap nor is it easy! Yes, you can adopt through foster care but you must be prepared to have the child in your home for a time and possibly have to give them back to an abusive, neglectful drug addicted parent that takes a few classes and it deemed "rehabilitated". I have a deep respect for anyone that does foster to adopt (and we may do it in the near future) but it is not easy. And international adoption costs are very high, most starting at $30,000. Unless you are in a position to adopt a child that is severely disabled then the costs will be lower. To adopt domestically is, on average, $20,000. Even after spending all of that there is not guarantee that you will bring a baby home. You can support a birth mother financially during the pregnancy, pay her medical costs and she can still change her mind. I know as it happened to us. When it is over you are left without a child or the money to try again. And if you want to get technical these mothers are getting "paid" for their child. How is this any different than paying a woman to be surrogate.

Fertility treatments can be just as expensive yet you do not have someone deciding whether or not you get to leave the hospital with your child. This is the route that we will be taking next. It is with much prayer and counsel that led us to this decision and there is no scripture stating that this is wrong. It is easy to say God opens and shuts a woman's womb, but in reality disease does that as well. I don't see God having a problem with me using a dr to help the eggs in my ovaries bypass the tubes (that are blocked by a disease) and place it into my uterus. Just as God would not have a problem with me using a ventilator to keep me alive even though he is in charge of life and death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Tools for the Ministry
I think that surrogacy is a completely unselfish act whether a woman is paid or not. Personally, I don't think that doing it for pay is right, but I don't criticize those that do. As for using the example of Sarah, Abraham and Hagar the problem was not the surrogacy as much as it was circuMVenting God's plan. He specifically said that Abraham's child was to come from Sarah. Rachel and Leah did the same thing yet there is nothing negative about their situation. With that said, deciding to become a surrogate should be done with much godly counsel and prayer. It would not be an easy decision and any woman considering it should be prepared for all that it entails

How do you know that it's not God's plan for you not to have a child of your own birthing or blood?

As for "just adopt" vs fertility treatments, adopting is not cheap nor is it easy! Yes, you can adopt through foster care but you must be prepared to have the child in your home for a time and possibly have to give them back to an abusive, neglectful drug addicted parent that takes a few classes and it deemed "rehabilitated". I have a deep respect for anyone that does foster to adopt (and we may do it in the near future) but it is not easy. And international adoption costs are very high, most starting at $30,000. Unless you are in a position to adopt a child that is severely disabled then the costs will be lower. To adopt domestically is, on average, $20,000. Even after spending all of that there is not guarantee that you will bring a baby home. You can support a birth mother financially during the pregnancy, pay her medical costs and she can still change her mind. I know as it happened to us. When it is over you are left without a child or the money to try again. And if you want to get technical these mothers are getting "paid" for their child. How is this any different than paying a woman to be surrogate.

Your numbers seem extremely high, as I have a good friend who completed adoption of a little girl (6 months at the time) with his wife just a few years ago and it cost them about $10,000. As for "paying her for her child": that is a choice of the adoptive parents and a foolish one at that. I know many people who have taken or looked into this "pre-birth" adoption and the only things you have to pay for is the medical bills and pay them to the doctors and hospitals not the birth mother. If you are concerned about losing this money to a mother who changes her mind, why not adopt a child that is already born? In the meen time, praise God that this woman decided to be a mother like God wants her to - or at least that she is going to try.

Fertility treatments can be just as expensive yet you do not have someone deciding whether or not you get to leave the hospital with your child. This is the route that we will be taking next. It is with much prayer and counsel that led us to this decision and there is no scripture stating that this is wrong. It is easy to say God opens and shuts a woman's womb, but in reality disease does that as well. I don't see God having a problem with me using a dr to help the eggs in my ovaries bypass the tubes (that are blocked by a disease) and place it into my uterus. Just as God would not have a problem with me using a ventilator to keep me alive even though he is in charge of life and death.

Your right, it is easy to say that God opens and shuts the womb - because it's true. It's also easy for someone who has money to say that it's easy to make money if you'll just work hard. It's also easy for someone to say that doing art work or singing or playing an instrument is easy if you just apply yourself. The fact is: God blesses us in different ways and some people just aren't willing to look at how God has chosen to bless them, but, instead, to look at how He hasn't and try to fix it. Who are you to tell God whether He should allow this disease to keep you from having children - or just "get around it" by man's ways. I have two good friends who suffer the same situation, but they praise God for having an opportunity to work with other peoples children since they can't have there own.

I'll leave you with this: Think about what happened because Moses smote the rock instead of speaking to it:


Numbers 20

6 And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and they fell upon their faces: and the glory of the LORD appeared unto them.
7 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
8 Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock: so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink.
9 And Moses took the rod from before the LORD, as he commanded him.
10 And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?
11 And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also.
12 And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.
13 This is the water of Meribah,; because the children of Israel strove with the LORD, and he was sanctified in them.
14 And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh unto the king of Edom, Thus saith thy brother Israel, Thou knowest all the travail that hath befallen us:
15 How our fathers went down into Egypt, and we have dwelt in Egypt a long time; and the Egyptians vexed us, and our fathers:
16 And when we cried unto the LORD, he heard our voice, and sent an angel, and hath brought us forth out of Egypt: and, behold, we are in Kadesh, a city in the uttermost of thy border:
17 Let us pass, I pray thee, through thy country: we will not pass through the fields, or through the vineyards, neither will we drink of the water of the wells: we will go by the king's high way, we will not turn to the right hand nor to the left, until we have passed thy borders.
18 And Edom said unto him, Thou shalt not pass by me, lest I come out against thee with the sword.
19 And the children of Israel said unto him, We will go by the high way: and if I and my cattle drink of thy water, then I will pay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

:goodpost: Futurehope!

Childbirth is to be left to the hands of God. God's plan for childbirth is by His blessing within marriage.

As part of God's overall plan not all women are meant to have children. Not every woman is meant to be a mother and not every man is meant to be a dad.

If God has chosen for a woman to be childless then it's for a reason and that's something the woman and her husband should take to the Lord in prayer so they may discover God's will for their lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your right' date=' it is easy to say that God opens and shuts the womb - because it's true. It's also easy for someone who has money to say that it's easy to make money if you'll just work hard. It's also easy for someone to say that doing art work or singing or playing an instrument is easy if you just apply yourself. The fact is: God blesses us in different ways and some people just aren't willing to look at how God has chosen to bless them, but, instead, to look at how He hasn't and try to fix it. Who are you to tell God whether He should allow this disease to keep you from having children - or just "get around it" by man's ways. [/quote']

Futurehope, I think savedbygrace has a good point here...one that you have either overlooked or misunderstood. The fact is that "God is in control" over our lives. Death and life are in His hands...but when we are seriously ill, do we just "let go and let God," not taking any medication or having surgery, because we don't want to interfere with His plan for our lives? Similarly, we say that "God is in control" of our job situations...but when we're out of work, do we just sit at home and wait for God to move someone to call us? No--we take action. Same with so many other areas. Taking action in any given situation is not in and of itself undermining God's control, is it? I don't understand how or why this issue is any different than the ones I've mentioned, especially because Scripture doesn't even address it. Can you explain how is is?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Tools for the Ministry

God designed for conception to take place in the womb, not in a test tube. If we want to compare this to medicine, then why doesn't she just take medicine? No, this is quite different. This is conception outside of the marriage bed and then placed into another woman and then delivered and given back to the egg and/or sperm donors. If it is God's will for a woman to conceive, let it happen in the womb. I have no problem with fighting the disease, but this is not that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
God designed for conception to take place in the womb' date=' not in a test tube. If we want to compare this to medicine, then why doesn't she just take medicine? No, this is quite different. This is conception outside of the marriage bed and then placed into another woman and then delivered and given back to the egg and/or sperm donors. If it is God's will for a woman to conceive, let it happen in the womb. I have no problem with fighting the disease, but this is not that.[/quote']

Good reply.

We are able to do many things but that doesn't mean we should do them. We can murder a baby before it's even born but that's not something we should be doing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
As part of God's overall plan not all women are meant to have children. Not every woman is meant to be a mother and not every man is meant to be a dad.


To say that because my womb is closed that I may not be "meant to have children" is saying that an HIV positive crack whore pregnant with her 6th is IS meant to be a mother.

And I am assuming that all of you that believe it is to be left to God to open or shut a womb does not use any preventative measures (birth control, tubes tied, etc). Considering that, by this reasoning, doing so would be against His will as He will shut your (your wife's) womb when He is ready for you to no longer have children.


Who are you to tell God whether He should allow this disease to keep you from having children - or just "get around it" by man's ways


The same as a person who doesn't accept cancer as a death sentence and seeks treatment. "Man's ways" are to use chemo and radiation. Does that make it wrong for a person to reject God's plan of death and use medicine? Ultimately it is God's decision but I don't see it as being wrong to everything within our power to live.

I think the most important thing is to make sure that we pray for His will. Each step of our infertility journey has been covered in prayer. And not prayer that our will be done, but His. The scariest story in the Bible to me is Rachel demanding children "lest she die". She never once asked what God wanted of her only that she get what she wanted. She got what she wanted and died in the process. And then there was Sarah who followed her will and we all know what happened there. We ask God that He guide our steps and that we do His will. I ask him daily that if His will is for us to remain childless that He give me the strength to accept it and to remove this desire from me. If it is His will for us to have children we ask that He show us the way and show us if we are going down the wrong path. We are planning on doing IVF (not with a surrogate) and we ask Him to only give us a child if it is His will. If we conceive then how do you explain that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God designed for conception to take place in the womb' date=' not in a test tube. If we want to compare this to medicine, then why doesn't she just take medicine? No, this is quite different. This is conception outside of the marriage bed and then placed into another woman and then delivered and given back to the egg and/or sperm donors. If it is God's will for a woman to conceive, let it happen in the womb. I have no problem with fighting the disease, but this is not that.[/quote']

I may have misunderstood, but savedbygrace was talking about fertility treatments, not surrogacy, at the point in her post you were referencing. But I do think her arguments apply to surrogacy as well.

Also, using your argument, someone could say that God, the Healer and Keeper of Life, never designed for people to cut each other open and remove organs (therefore, surgery is wrong), or for people to put synthetic chemicals in their body which are otherwise potentially dangerous for them (therefore, taking medicine is wrong), or for people to use organs that others are done with (therefore, kidney transplants are wrong).

I think it is much more reasonable (and certainly not anti-biblical) to say that God designed for conception to happen when an egg and sperm come together. Sure, for thousands of years, before the advance of modern medicine, the location of conception has always been in the fallopian tube (not really in the "womb") of a woman. God designed the world in such a way, and created us in such a way, that its "mysteries" can be discovered, and humans can be helped as a result. Sure, there are lines that we shouldn't cross, but I have yet to see a plausible argument why surrogacy (in and of itself) is one of those lines.

You also reference "the marriage bed." There is no fornication taking place in surrogacy, is there? There is no forbidden sexual relationship taking place at all, that I can see...just the union of a husband and wife's reproductive cells, resulting in the conception of their child. Where is this forbidden in Scripture?

It's been awhile since I've posted in this discussion, so, just to remind y'all...I do acknowledge that surrogacy has the same ethical problems as IVF, IF living embryos are discarded. But I am (obviously) not opposed to another woman nurturing an already conceived baby--an already living soul--in her uterus. It's like foster care for the unborn, IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, the HIV positive crack whore who has children was meant to be a mother; she was never meant to be an HIV positive crack whore.

God has gifted us with all sorts of knowledge, abilities and things we can use. Some can and is used in keeping with His Word, some isn't.

God has allowed us to have the ability to cure or treat some diseases and illnesses. We know these diseases and illnesses are a result of the Fall. God makes it clear He is to be in control of the womb. If God allows a womb to be closed then He has a reason for that; if God opens a womb, He has a reason for that. God laid out a clear plan with regards to having children. Children are to be the product of the union of a man and his wife as God blesses in that area.

None of this has anything to do with taking an aspirin for a headache or a doctor removing a bullet from a punctured lung.

Not everyone is meant to be a parent. For some, God has other plans. We don't all receive the same blessings and we don't all have the same calling. God has prepared different works for each of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
Yes, the HIV positive crack whore who has children was meant to be a mother; she was never meant to be an HIV positive crack whore.

God has gifted us with all sorts of knowledge, abilities and things we can use. Some can and is used in keeping with His Word, some isn't.

God has allowed us to have the ability to cure or treat some diseases and illnesses. We know these diseases and illnesses are a result of the Fall. God makes it clear He is to be in control of the womb. If God allows a womb to be closed then He has a reason for that; if God opens a womb, He has a reason for that. God laid out a clear plan with regards to having children. Children are to be the product of the union of a man and his wife as God blesses in that area.

None of this has anything to do with taking an aspirin for a headache or a doctor removing a bullet from a punctured lung.

Not everyone is meant to be a parent. For some, God has other plans. We don't all receive the same blessings and we don't all have the same calling. God has prepared different works for each of us.



I don't know, man. What If God "allows" your child to be born with a heart defect? Do you try do something? I know a little girl born, with several congenital defects, who has had kidney transplants and now goes for kidney dialysis. You could just as easily say that God "had a reason" for those defects, but thanks to prayer and medical science, she is still alive after 11 years. Not being able to conceive naturally, is also a medical problem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member



I don't know, man. What If God "allows" your child to be born with a heart defect? Do you try do something? I know a little girl born, with several congenital defects, who has had kidney transplants and now goes for kidney dialysis. You could just as easily say that God "had a reason" for those defects, but thanks to prayer and medical science, she is still alive after 11 years. Not being able to conceive naturally, is also a medical problem.


being deaf, yes he does have a reason. The bible is clear that he made the deaf and mute (because he said so in his own words to Moses). but at the same time, I can be implanted with cochlear implant or wear hearing aids (or learn sign languages if I had to). Although I can't hear as well as a hearing person but I am being assisted. Although, when I don't use assistance, I am back in silent to remind me that I am deaf. So I don't know being assisted to have children is something God doesn't want us to do or not, but I do know that every child that born through IVF or surrogacy (as well as children being born outside of marriage) do have a soul.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist


being deaf, yes he does have a reason. The bible is clear that he made the deaf and mute (because he said so in his own words to Moses). but at the same time, I can be implanted with cochlear implant or wear hearing aids (or learn sign languages if I had to). Although I can't hear as well as a hearing person but I am being assisted. Although, when I don't use assistance, I am back in silent to remind me that I am deaf. So I don't know being assisted to have children is something God doesn't want us to do or not, but I do know that every child that born through IVF or surrogacy (as well as children being born outside of marriage) do have a soul.



Yes, God had a reason for allowing you to be deaf...and you could have just sat back and said, It's God's will and do nothing. But through the providence of GOD, medical help was available was it not? So you took action. I used to suffer...and I mean suffer....with a constantly stopped-up nose. I had sinus headaches, took thousands Tylenol capsules, snorted gallons of nasal sprays and breathed through my mouth until I was grown and married with two kids. It was then that a doctor finally discovered I was born with a deviated nasal septum. I had surgery and it changed my whole life. So my condition and your condition of being deaf was no different than a person's having a physical problem, preventing conception. So, speaking for myself. I wouldn't hesitate to try IVF. But I would really have to pray about the 'surrogate' thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member



Yes, God had a reason for allowing you to be deaf...and you could have just sat back and said, It's God's will and do nothing. But through the providence of GOD, medical help was available was it not? So you took action. I used to suffer...and I mean suffer....with a constantly stopped-up nose. I had sinus headaches, took thousands Tylenol capsules, snorted gallons of nasal sprays and breathed through my mouth until I was grown and married with two kids. It was then that a doctor finally discovered I was born with a deviated nasal septum. I had surgery and it changed my whole life. So my condition and your condition of being deaf was no different than a person's having a physical problem, preventing conception. So, speaking for myself. I wouldn't hesitate to try IVF. But I would really have to pray about the 'surrogate' thing.



actually, my parents took action. I'm just hooked for life. But I could have live in the deaf culture lifestyle if my mother choose differently
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 10 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...