What Do You Believe is God’s View?

[dwmoeller1]

That's not entering into parenthood without both parents. That's "after the fact." Not the same issue as the OP.

Again...not the same issue as the OP. Would it be wise to compound the actions of a sin with the actions of a hasty, unwise decision? I think not. Sometimes, the couple should get married. Other times, I think that's a terrible decision. Honestly, I wish there were more adoptions from this situation than there are...but that's another thread.

Too broad a question for a unilateral answer. Should a single person seek to adopt orphans? Not usually, IMO. I do think there is some room for debate, with regards to what condition the kids are currently in. For instance--if a single, growing Christian offers a willing and immediate alternative to an abusive, irresponsible, non-Christian couple willing to give up the child for adoption--that's one thing. But a single mom who "wants to experience motherhood"--that's another story altogether.

So your general principles does have exceptions and loopholes. Thats fine, I just wanted to be clear on how universal your principle was and what sort of exceptions might be allowed. For you, it seems to be more a general guideline rather than a rule which defines right and wrong. I agree with that.

I still come back to what God has prescribed as the most desirable way.

Does that mean He can't bring about good from less than the best? No...of course He can.

However, I think it unwise of us to intentionally get things "out of order."

I would agree with it being unwise. Still though, I can find no way to Scripturally condemn it. What may be unwise for one is not necessarily so for another. If they can do so in true faith, then I can't absolutely say that it would be against God's will or desire for that person.

So any problems I have apply equally to any case where sperm donations is used.

 

[annsni]

I agree ABC. I know I dealt with infertility and the limits for my husband and I were fertility drugs and the natural way of conceiving. If we needed to have the fertilization outside the body, we would not do it. Even if we had no children, we felt that God creates children through a couple's intimacy. So if we could not have children on our own, we would have adopted.

 

[Steven2006]

Children are a gift from God, created from both the father and mother who were joined together in marriage. Using a "donation" from someone else seems like man circumventing God's plan for their own choosing by instead forming a union of the wife and a stranger.

I am thankful God has blessed us with children. If not we would have tried to adopt.

 

[webdog]

Children are a gift from God, created from both the father and mother who were joined together in marriage. Using a "donation" from someone else seems like man circumventing God's plan for their own choosing by instead forming a union of the wife and a stranger.

I am thankful God has blessed us with children. If not we would have tried to adopt.

It could be argued that premature babies should not be helped with medical equipment as it could be viewed as the same thing. Adoption is also donation...but from both parents

 

[Steven2006]

It could be argued that premature babies should not be helped with medical equipment as it could be viewed as the same thing. Adoption is also donation...but from both parents

Sorry but I fail to see the similarity to my point. Neither one of those things is deliberately choosing to form a child from the union of the wife and a stranger.

 

[webdog]

Sorry but I fail to see the similarity to my point. Neither one of those things is deliberately choosing to form a child from the union of the wife and a stranger.

First point was in reply to the portion that states "...seems like man circumventing God's plan for their own choosing..."

To be consistent, if it is OK to adopt a child that was formed out of wedlock apart from God's plan, it should also be OK for the couple to achieve the same end result using a sperm or egg donor as both are donations to the couple.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Looking like this needs to be added to the mix:

Surrogate mothers.

 

[webdog]

Looking like this needs to be added to the mix:

Surrogate mothers.

Now you've gone and thrown a monkey wrench into the whole thread :laugh:

 

[dwmoeller1]

Sorry but I fail to see the similarity to my point. Neither one of those things is deliberately choosing to form a child from the union of the wife and a stranger.

Your initial statement was based only on "circumventing God's plan". How is adoption not also "circumventing God's plan"? Adoption is outside of God's plan of mother and father conceiving and raising their own child. Adoption involves a deliberate choosing to circumvent God's plan. The only difference you point out is that the circumventing with sperm donation occurs at an earlier point in the whole process. Given that both adoption and sperm donation involve "circumvention God's plan", this difference would then seem to be one of degree (they circumvented earlier) rather than a difference of kind.

IOW, you need to more precisely define what you mean by "God's plan" and in what way sperm donation circumvents it but (presumably) adoption does not.

 

[Steven2006]

First point was in reply to the portion that states "...seems like man circumventing God's plan for their own choosing..."
;

I am talking specifically about the creation of a child.

To be consistent, if it is OK to adopt a child that was formed out of wedlock apart from God's plan, it should also be OK for the couple to achieve the same end result using a sperm or egg donor.

The bible does instruct us to help orphans. It is a reach to compare wanting to love and raise an orphan, to a couple choosing to use sperm from a stranger to mix with the wife to form a child.

 

[webdog]

The bible does instruct us to help orphans. It is a reach to compare wanting to love and raise an orphan, to a couple choosing to use sperm from a stranger to mix with the wife to form a child.

True, we are to help orphans...but can it be gleaned from the passage this is speaking of adoption? It would appear an Orphanage would qualify.
In adoption, a couple chooses to use sperm from a stranger AND the egg from a stranger.

 

[Steven2006]

Your initial statement was based only on "circumventing God's plan". How is adoption not also "circumventing God's plan"? Adoption is outside of God's plan of mother and father conceiving and raising their own child. Adoption involves a deliberate choosing to circumvent God's plan. The only difference you point out is that the circumventing with sperm donation occurs at an earlier point in the whole process. Given that both adoption and sperm donation involve "circumvention God's plan", this difference would then seem to be one of degree (they circumvented earlier) rather than a difference of kind.

IOW, you need to more precisely define what you mean by "God's plan" and in what way sperm donation circumvents it but (presumably) adoption does not.

Sure a child that is adopted might have been born from circumstances that wouldn't have been Gods plan. But we are talking about making choices going forward not peoples mistakes of the past. I fail to see where a couple choosing to love an unwanted child is the same thing regardless of the circumstances of how the child was conceived.

 

[Steven2006]

True, we are to help orphans...but can it be gleaned from the passage this is speaking of adoption? It would appear an Orphanage would qualify.
In adoption, a couple chooses to use sperm from a stranger AND the egg from a stranger.

That is a real reach. Showing love and compassion for an orphan by adopting them is not partaking in the choosing how that child was born.

You are usually a lot more reasonable than this Webdog, I am surprised at your logic here.

 

[webdog]

That is a real reach. Showing love and compassion for an orphan by adopting them is not partaking in the choosing how that child was born.

Why is the method of the child being conceived the hinge and not the desire of the couple? If the couple cannot conceive, it's circumventing God's will regardless by even adopting. One can support an orphan without adopting in the same way they can support a widow (both linked, btw) without marrying them.

You are usually a lot more reasonable than this Webdog, I am surprised at your logic here.

I'm sorry I disappointed you

 

[dwmoeller1]

I am talking specifically about the creation of a child.

The bible does instruct us to help orphans. It is a reach to compare wanting to love and raise an orphan, to a couple choosing to use sperm from a stranger to mix with the wife to form a child.

The Bible also says that children are a blessing from God. This is true regardless of how they come about. Thus, not so much of a stretch. Particularly if one allows that is it good and acceptable for a single person to care for an orphan.

 

[Steven2006]

Why is the method of the child being conceived the hinge and not the desire of the couple? If the couple cannot conceive, it's circumventing God's will regardless by even adopting. One can support an orphan without adopting in the same way they can support a widow (both linked, btw) without marrying them.

The issue is making a decision that would bring a child into the world, and if we have any indication of what the Godly way of doing that is. I think we do, through a Godly union of a husband and a wife, period. I am sorry but I still fail to see where adopting a child is similar to planing a birth of one.

I'm sorry I disappointed you

Don't sweat it, usually I am in agreement with you. :thumbs:

 

[dwmoeller1]

Sure a child that is adopted might have been born from circumstances that wouldn't have been Gods plan. But we are talking about making choices going forward not peoples mistakes of the past. I fail to see where a couple choosing to love an unwanted child is the same thing regardless of the circumstances of how the child was conceived.

I am not saying its the same thing - merely that the difference is not enough to allow one and disallow the other. You are in essence saying that its acceptable to 'circumvent God's plan' when it comes to having a child (and maybe even in raising the child), but not acceptable to 'circumvent God's plan' when it comes to conceiving a child. If the first is acceptable, it doesn't make sense (based on what you have argued so far at least) that the latter would be unacceptable. It seems you are drawing an arbitrary line between what is acceptable and what is not.

FWIW, I have the same difficulty with Webdog's position - he just seems to be drawing an arbitrary line in another place The arguments he presents against your position would seem to create the same sorts of problems for his.

 

[Steven2006]

The Bible also says that children are a blessing from God. This is true regardless of how they come about. Thus, not so much of a stretch. Particularly if one allows that is it good and acceptable for a single person to care for an orphan.

No one is suggesting a child should not be loved regardless of how they were conceived, but using your logic there would be nothing biblically wrong with unwed women purposely conceiving children because they must be a blessing.

 

[Steven2006]

I am not saying its the same thing - merely that the difference is not enough to allow one and disallow the other. You are in essence saying that its acceptable to 'circumvent God's plan' when it comes to having a child (and maybe even in raising the child), but not acceptable to 'circumvent God's plan' when it comes to conceiving a child. If the first is acceptable, it doesn't make sense (based on what you have argued so far at least) that the latter would be unacceptable. It seems you are drawing an arbitrary line between what is acceptable and what is not.

.

You are missing my point. I am not saying is is OK to circumvent Gods plan. If someone else did so and had a child, and gave up that child, that is an entirely separate issue to a couple adopting that child.

As far as your eluding to it being being wrong to adopt ("and maybe even in raising the child") the first example that comes to mind would be Joseph.

 

[webdog]

FWIW, I have the same difficulty with Webdog's position - he just seems to be drawing an arbitrary line in another place The arguments he presents against your position would seem to create the same sorts of problems for his.

Actually, my line is at God's will and desire. I do not believe it is His will or desire for a homosexual couple to adopt, use a sperm donor, surrogate mother, etc at any point as the entire union is based on sin. In regards to a single mother, I'm going to have to backtrack on my earlier stance. I can see times when a single father or mother could work, but ultimately it falls back on what God desires in the whole picture. Personally I think it would be acceptable in adoption and not trying to conceive.