Christians should be antinatalists

It says in the Bible that humans should be fruitful and multiply, but is that really the right choice? This depends on which Christian denomination a person follows and which one, if any, is correct. If it's universalism or free grace theology, then having children is a more reasonable proposition, as the risk of children ending up in eternal hellfire is reduced or non-existant.

But with most other denominations there is a risk that the child even if they believe in Jesus, doesn't endure to the end and maintains their faith. It's easy for them to fall away from the faith, especially in this modern world with science, entertainment and hedonism all around us.

So moral Christians who love their unborn children should really be antinatalists, they should aim to be like Paul who didn't have a wife or children. Because if you bring a child into the world against their will and they don't endure to the end in the faith, they could be tortured for eternity, which is a really long time. By not having children, Christians could potentially be preventing an infinite amount of pain and suffering to someone they love, if they really believe the teachings of hell and the lake of fire are in any way real.

Support my work

Did you find this post informative or enjoyable? Consider supporting my work here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How I became a hikikomori and later a hermit

Why I no longer believe in Christianity

Life has a purpose, but seems to lack objective meaning

Why I have become a doomer and been blackpilled

From agnostic to Christian to monotheist (leaving the door open for Jesus)