-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Can Catholics use artificial means of birth control?
- Thread starter ventin
- Start date
L
LaRae
Guest
No, Catholics inline with Church teaching may not use ABC (artificial birth control).
LaRae
LaRae
ventin,
God is Life. He expects His created human beings to respect life. So Catholics may not use contraceptives. Most contraceptives cause abortions. Even the few which don't cannot be used by a faithful Catholic. The marital act must be open to life.
A marriage isn't even a valid marriage unless open to life, to bringing children into this world.
Younger faithful Catholics use Natural Family Planning. They say it is very accurate and that it makes the marriage a much better one. That it builds greater love and respect between man and wife. NFP can be used by Catholics under certain conditions. But even it must not be used for selfish reasons.
Pope Paul VI warned us that the use of contraception would bring many evils into the world. And what he predicted has come to pass. A lack of esteem for women and for marriage, considering children a burden rather than a joy, adultery, divorce, single parent families, loss of respect for life,
abortion, euthanasia -- all of these have come about as consequences of the Protestant churches caving in to the world and okaying contraception. It used to be that all Protestant churches taught contraception was a sin. Then one denomination caved in, then the slide began. And now, I don't know of one Protestant church that says it's a sin.
Only the Catholic Church has stood firm.
Pauline
God is Life. He expects His created human beings to respect life. So Catholics may not use contraceptives. Most contraceptives cause abortions. Even the few which don't cannot be used by a faithful Catholic. The marital act must be open to life.
A marriage isn't even a valid marriage unless open to life, to bringing children into this world.
Younger faithful Catholics use Natural Family Planning. They say it is very accurate and that it makes the marriage a much better one. That it builds greater love and respect between man and wife. NFP can be used by Catholics under certain conditions. But even it must not be used for selfish reasons.
Pope Paul VI warned us that the use of contraception would bring many evils into the world. And what he predicted has come to pass. A lack of esteem for women and for marriage, considering children a burden rather than a joy, adultery, divorce, single parent families, loss of respect for life,
abortion, euthanasia -- all of these have come about as consequences of the Protestant churches caving in to the world and okaying contraception. It used to be that all Protestant churches taught contraception was a sin. Then one denomination caved in, then the slide began. And now, I don't know of one Protestant church that says it's a sin.
Only the Catholic Church has stood firm.
Pauline
Kathryn S.
New Member
Can Catholics use artificial birth control?
No. It would be a sin, because it goes against being open to life and the will of God.
God Bless
No. It would be a sin, because it goes against being open to life and the will of God.
God Bless
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pauline:
A marriage isn't even a valid marriage unless open to life, to bringing children into this world.
Pope Paul VI warned us that the use of contraception would bring many evils into the world. And what he predicted has come to pass. A lack of esteem for women and for marriage, considering children a burden rather than a joy, adultery, divorce, single parent families, loss of respect for life,
abortion, euthanasia -- all of these have come about as consequences of the Protestant churches caving in to the world and okaying contraception. It used to be that all Protestant churches taught contraception was a sin. Then one denomination caved in, then the slide began. And now, I don't know of one Protestant church that says it's a sin.
Only the Catholic Church has stood firm.
Pauline<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
From the first part of your post that would say that Mary and Joseph's marriage wasn't a valid marriage. Since Catholicism teaches that they never had any other children, and that Mary stayed a virgin doesn't that mean that Mary and Joseph didn't have a valid marriage. Yet Scripture says they were indeed married.
Second where pope Paul says contraception is evil and will cause all those things. Wouldn't it be contraception for a husband and wife to abstain from sex the entire span of their marriage? Since both partners are physically able to have relations, wouldn't that be contraception?
Speaking of caving in, that must be what Catholics called it when Rome accepted the pagan holidays. What about when all the Christians that where in the Catholic Church caved in and accepted all of the blasphemous teachings of the vatican? It's not nice to point fingers Pauline. Or let me say it another way "People in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks". If we look at history we can see that it has been the Catholic Church caving in over and over and over and over and over and over....... You get the picture.
A marriage isn't even a valid marriage unless open to life, to bringing children into this world.
Pope Paul VI warned us that the use of contraception would bring many evils into the world. And what he predicted has come to pass. A lack of esteem for women and for marriage, considering children a burden rather than a joy, adultery, divorce, single parent families, loss of respect for life,
abortion, euthanasia -- all of these have come about as consequences of the Protestant churches caving in to the world and okaying contraception. It used to be that all Protestant churches taught contraception was a sin. Then one denomination caved in, then the slide began. And now, I don't know of one Protestant church that says it's a sin.
Only the Catholic Church has stood firm.
Pauline<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
From the first part of your post that would say that Mary and Joseph's marriage wasn't a valid marriage. Since Catholicism teaches that they never had any other children, and that Mary stayed a virgin doesn't that mean that Mary and Joseph didn't have a valid marriage. Yet Scripture says they were indeed married.
Second where pope Paul says contraception is evil and will cause all those things. Wouldn't it be contraception for a husband and wife to abstain from sex the entire span of their marriage? Since both partners are physically able to have relations, wouldn't that be contraception?
Speaking of caving in, that must be what Catholics called it when Rome accepted the pagan holidays. What about when all the Christians that where in the Catholic Church caved in and accepted all of the blasphemous teachings of the vatican? It's not nice to point fingers Pauline. Or let me say it another way "People in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks". If we look at history we can see that it has been the Catholic Church caving in over and over and over and over and over and over....... You get the picture.
CatholicConvert
New Member
Once again, you try to lay the template of 20th century understanding over 1st century Judaism.
From the first part of your post that would say that Mary and Joseph's marriage wasn't a valid marriage. Since Catholicism teaches that they never had any other children, and that Mary stayed a virgin doesn't that mean that Mary and Joseph didn't have a valid marriage. Yet Scripture says they were indeed married.
Until you understand exactly what was intended by that "marriage," you don't have a clue. Please go find some historical references and find out how Jewish marriages worked and especially what kind of marriage that Mary and Joseph had. It wasn't the kind that our sexually inundated 20th century media presents.
Your objections are basically null and void due to your lack of understanding.
Cordially in disagreement,
Brother Ed
From the first part of your post that would say that Mary and Joseph's marriage wasn't a valid marriage. Since Catholicism teaches that they never had any other children, and that Mary stayed a virgin doesn't that mean that Mary and Joseph didn't have a valid marriage. Yet Scripture says they were indeed married.
Until you understand exactly what was intended by that "marriage," you don't have a clue. Please go find some historical references and find out how Jewish marriages worked and especially what kind of marriage that Mary and Joseph had. It wasn't the kind that our sexually inundated 20th century media presents.
Your objections are basically null and void due to your lack of understanding.
Cordially in disagreement,
Brother Ed
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CatholicConvert:
Once again, you try to lay the template of 20th century understanding over 1st century Judaism.
Until you understand exactly what was intended by that "marriage," you don't have a clue. Please go find some historical references and find out how Jewish marriages worked and especially what kind of marriage that Mary and Joseph had. It wasn't the kind that our sexually inundated 20th century media presents.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what are you saying, the Jewish didn't get married to start families? If anything is null and void it is your comments. That doesn't make sence and it isn't backed up by Scripture. How about reading Pauls epistles and the references made about marriage, especially the relations parts. But thats right Catholics say Joseph was an old man and had been married before. So did he divorce the first Mary or was a polygamist?
Once again, you try to lay the template of 20th century understanding over 1st century Judaism.
Until you understand exactly what was intended by that "marriage," you don't have a clue. Please go find some historical references and find out how Jewish marriages worked and especially what kind of marriage that Mary and Joseph had. It wasn't the kind that our sexually inundated 20th century media presents.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what are you saying, the Jewish didn't get married to start families? If anything is null and void it is your comments. That doesn't make sence and it isn't backed up by Scripture. How about reading Pauls epistles and the references made about marriage, especially the relations parts. But thats right Catholics say Joseph was an old man and had been married before. So did he divorce the first Mary or was a polygamist?
me,
You're not dealing with the issue I presented. Name one Protestant denomination today that says that contraception is a sin. Doing a side run on an unrelated subject won't change the facts on the topic under discussion. I'm not being mean, I am stating facts. Can you dispute what I said concerning the teaching about contraception in Protestant churches today?
I hope it's beginning to change. I talked to a local Baptist pastor and gave him a Dr. Janet Smith tape. From his response I think he became convinced that contraception is sin. One Protestant pastor's wife started writing a paper on contraception while taking college courses. She saw the truth on the matter and that influenced her to quit using contraception. And I think some Catholic pro-life workers have influenced some Protestant pro-life workers. So hopefully, Protestants will come back to the truth on this issue.
Pauline
You're not dealing with the issue I presented. Name one Protestant denomination today that says that contraception is a sin. Doing a side run on an unrelated subject won't change the facts on the topic under discussion. I'm not being mean, I am stating facts. Can you dispute what I said concerning the teaching about contraception in Protestant churches today?
I hope it's beginning to change. I talked to a local Baptist pastor and gave him a Dr. Janet Smith tape. From his response I think he became convinced that contraception is sin. One Protestant pastor's wife started writing a paper on contraception while taking college courses. She saw the truth on the matter and that influenced her to quit using contraception. And I think some Catholic pro-life workers have influenced some Protestant pro-life workers. So hopefully, Protestants will come back to the truth on this issue.
Pauline
So hopefully, Protestants will come back to the truth on this issue.
Pauline[/QB][/QUOTE]
Pauline, from what Sir Ed has said, we've already gone off topic here. I can't answer for every protestant Church. Can you answer for every Catholic Church?
And I'm not beating around the bush. I have questions and I ask them. I can't help it if they get people in an uproar. Just answer the questions using Scripture and I'll be satisfied.
Pauline[/QB][/QUOTE]
Pauline, from what Sir Ed has said, we've already gone off topic here. I can't answer for every protestant Church. Can you answer for every Catholic Church?
And I'm not beating around the bush. I have questions and I ask them. I can't help it if they get people in an uproar. Just answer the questions using Scripture and I'll be satisfied.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>From the first part of your post that would say that Mary and Joseph's marriage wasn't a valid marriage. Since Catholicism teaches that they never had any other children, and that Mary stayed a virgin doesn't that mean that Mary and Joseph didn't have a valid marriage. Yet Scripture says they were indeed married. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So that means they did have kids. Otherwise it wouldn't be a God pleasing marriagee, by the definition of the pope.
So that means they did have kids. Otherwise it wouldn't be a God pleasing marriagee, by the definition of the pope.
Godmetal,
There have been cases in history of men and women never consummating the marital relationship. Hebrew Catholics have told me that in the day of Joseph and Mary, a young woman could make a vow of virginity and when she reached the age to marry, a protector would be chosen to watch over her safety. They thought that was the case with Mary and Joseph. I don't know. They also told me that once a woman had a child by anyone else, a faithful Jewish man would never have marital relations with her, despite a lawful marriage.
I would not say it would displease God if a man and wife never consummated the marital relationship. I have known of a case where a man and wife lived together as brother and sister for certain personal reasons. I don't think that displeased God. This could be done for pure reasons when both parties agreed to this arrangement.
Today the Church would say an unconsummated relationship would not be a valid marriage. That would mean the two would not be bound to stay together for life as we are in the case of a valid marriage. A valid marriage binds for life. I cannot speak to the NT time Jewish view of such things other than relate what the Hebrew Catholics told me.
But I can say there's big difference between a man and wife having marital relations and using contraception so as to not have children, so that the consummated marriage is not open to life. And, a man and woman who for mutually agreed and pure reasons live in the same house but never consummate the marital bond.
To abstain from consummation of the marital relationship is not contraception. It could be a sin under certain conditions, such as one partner refusing the other, when they had agreed to live together in the marital bond. It would not be a sin if both parties agreed to abstain for pure reasons.
Contraception is something used to prevent pregnancy during the marital act. That is a sin.
Pauline
[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: Pauline ]
[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: Pauline ]
There have been cases in history of men and women never consummating the marital relationship. Hebrew Catholics have told me that in the day of Joseph and Mary, a young woman could make a vow of virginity and when she reached the age to marry, a protector would be chosen to watch over her safety. They thought that was the case with Mary and Joseph. I don't know. They also told me that once a woman had a child by anyone else, a faithful Jewish man would never have marital relations with her, despite a lawful marriage.
I would not say it would displease God if a man and wife never consummated the marital relationship. I have known of a case where a man and wife lived together as brother and sister for certain personal reasons. I don't think that displeased God. This could be done for pure reasons when both parties agreed to this arrangement.
Today the Church would say an unconsummated relationship would not be a valid marriage. That would mean the two would not be bound to stay together for life as we are in the case of a valid marriage. A valid marriage binds for life. I cannot speak to the NT time Jewish view of such things other than relate what the Hebrew Catholics told me.
But I can say there's big difference between a man and wife having marital relations and using contraception so as to not have children, so that the consummated marriage is not open to life. And, a man and woman who for mutually agreed and pure reasons live in the same house but never consummate the marital bond.
To abstain from consummation of the marital relationship is not contraception. It could be a sin under certain conditions, such as one partner refusing the other, when they had agreed to live together in the marital bond. It would not be a sin if both parties agreed to abstain for pure reasons.
Contraception is something used to prevent pregnancy during the marital act. That is a sin.
Pauline
[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: Pauline ]
[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: Pauline ]
So they didn't have a valid marriage then. Pauline you can't have it both ways.
Also the "evidence" you have from your hebrew friends isn't exactly strong evidence since different hebrew sects have different traditions.
On top of that there are plenty of verses that mention Jesus's (half)brothers. And don't tell me that it meant his disciples. The context of the verses do not lend themselves to the interpretation that they were the disciples.
Also the "evidence" you have from your hebrew friends isn't exactly strong evidence since different hebrew sects have different traditions.
On top of that there are plenty of verses that mention Jesus's (half)brothers. And don't tell me that it meant his disciples. The context of the verses do not lend themselves to the interpretation that they were the disciples.
Godmetal,
That old stuff about Scripture proving that Jesus had brothers does not stand at all. So much has been posted on that already.
Look at the names of His supposed "brothers" and then read the scene at the crucifixion and you find out that those "brothers" have a different mother, also named Mary, there.
And the use of the word "brother" in the NT is too varied for anyone to claim that it means only blood brothers. Mary's sister is also named Mary. That seems unlikely if they were blood sisters, doesn't it? And Jesus sends Mary Magdalene to His "brothers" when He is sending her to His disciples. Lot is referred to as Abraham's brother, and we know Lot was his nephew.
That assertion about His brothers simply does not stand in the light of Scripture itself.
And it is an indication of a low regard for the Personhood of Jesus Christ to think that the womb which bore Him, God, then bore other mere sinful humans.
Pauline
That old stuff about Scripture proving that Jesus had brothers does not stand at all. So much has been posted on that already.
Look at the names of His supposed "brothers" and then read the scene at the crucifixion and you find out that those "brothers" have a different mother, also named Mary, there.
And the use of the word "brother" in the NT is too varied for anyone to claim that it means only blood brothers. Mary's sister is also named Mary. That seems unlikely if they were blood sisters, doesn't it? And Jesus sends Mary Magdalene to His "brothers" when He is sending her to His disciples. Lot is referred to as Abraham's brother, and we know Lot was his nephew.
That assertion about His brothers simply does not stand in the light of Scripture itself.
And it is an indication of a low regard for the Personhood of Jesus Christ to think that the womb which bore Him, God, then bore other mere sinful humans.
Pauline
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And it is an indication of a low regard for the Personhood of Jesus Christ to think that the womb which bore Him, God, then bore other mere sinful humans <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It doesn't effect my regard for Jesus at all. And I hold him in the highest regard.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And the use of the word "brother" in the NT is too varied for anyone to claim that it means only blood brothers <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess you missed the fact that I referred to the context.
It doesn't effect my regard for Jesus at all. And I hold him in the highest regard.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And the use of the word "brother" in the NT is too varied for anyone to claim that it means only blood brothers <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess you missed the fact that I referred to the context.
wishtolearn
New Member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pauline:
Most contraceptives cause abortions. Even the few which don't cannot be used by a faithful Catholic.
Really? Which ones? I've been on the Pill for 8 years and havn't had an abortion yet. Unwanted pregnancies cause abortions.
A marriage isn't even a valid marriage unless open to life, to bringing children into this world.
I'll mention that to my husband of 7 years, he'll be happy to hear that.
Pope Paul VI warned us that the use of contraception would bring many evils into the world. And what he predicted has come to pass. A lack of esteem for women and for marriage, considering children a burden rather than a joy, adultery, divorce, single parent families, loss of respect for life,
abortion, euthanasia -- all of these have come about as consequences of the Protestant churches caving in to the world and okaying contraception. It used to be that all Protestant churches taught contraception was a sin. Then one denomination caved in, then the slide began. And now, I don't know of one Protestant church that says it's a sin.
Only the Catholic Church has stood firm.
Pauline<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm sorry but birth control is not responsible for the evils of the world. Over population may be along with people unable or unwilling to be parents and having that forced upon them.
Most contraceptives cause abortions. Even the few which don't cannot be used by a faithful Catholic.
Really? Which ones? I've been on the Pill for 8 years and havn't had an abortion yet. Unwanted pregnancies cause abortions.
A marriage isn't even a valid marriage unless open to life, to bringing children into this world.
I'll mention that to my husband of 7 years, he'll be happy to hear that.
Pope Paul VI warned us that the use of contraception would bring many evils into the world. And what he predicted has come to pass. A lack of esteem for women and for marriage, considering children a burden rather than a joy, adultery, divorce, single parent families, loss of respect for life,
abortion, euthanasia -- all of these have come about as consequences of the Protestant churches caving in to the world and okaying contraception. It used to be that all Protestant churches taught contraception was a sin. Then one denomination caved in, then the slide began. And now, I don't know of one Protestant church that says it's a sin.
Only the Catholic Church has stood firm.
Pauline<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm sorry but birth control is not responsible for the evils of the world. Over population may be along with people unable or unwilling to be parents and having that forced upon them.
Pauline,
Matthew 13:56 And his SISTERS, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Can you explain this? If Mary was a perpetual virgin and Jesus had NO brothers, what about His sisters?
Also, came across these verses. You said that brother/brethren could mean cousin or kinsmen in greek. Why does the Bible use brother/sister in one verse and cousin in the next?
Examples:
Luke 1:58 And her neighbours and her cousins.......
Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth.....
Very interesting, very interesting.
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: 'I AM' hath sent me ]
Matthew 13:56 And his SISTERS, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Can you explain this? If Mary was a perpetual virgin and Jesus had NO brothers, what about His sisters?
Also, came across these verses. You said that brother/brethren could mean cousin or kinsmen in greek. Why does the Bible use brother/sister in one verse and cousin in the next?
Examples:
Luke 1:58 And her neighbours and her cousins.......
Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth.....
Very interesting, very interesting.
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: 'I AM' hath sent me ]
Dear wishtolearn,
Have you done an in-depth study of the history of Margaret Sanger, who founded Planned Parenthood, and her commitment to Hitler's idea of getting rid of those human beings they considered less desirable? Contraception is very much a part of the plan to bring about an improved human race.
Over population is a myth. Right now many countries are at dangerous levels below re-populating their people. At least one country is already dependent upon immigrants.
If more and more countries cave into the myth of overpopulation, where will the immigrants come from? Margaret Sanger's idea has backfired because the very people she considered better and worthy of life and re-population are the ones using contraception and abortion to limit their numbers.
I suggest you read or listen to some of the work of Dr. Janet Smith. She's factual, reliable, honest and balanced.
Do you deny the social problems today caused by the break up of the family through divorce, through adultery and fornication, through couples living together without commitment and bringing children into the world who will not have stable homes and of parents being willing to kill their own children by abortion? Now it has moved to people and doctors being willing to kill the elderly and disabled by euthanasia, including that which is involuntary. A case of this was publicly shown on television here in Oregon some years ago. A friend of mine was in hospital, struggling to live, when her doctor invited her to die. A nurse tells me it is quite alright to starve and de-hydrate someone to death so long as you keep them comfortable by putting petroleum jelly around their lips. These are all a consequence of the widespread use of contraception.
When Pope Paul VI came out with Humane Vitae he was persecuted by his own people, Catholics. But, here in Oregon, a Jewish man stepped publicly forward to defend the pope.
The Jewish man pointed out that Nazi Germany under Hitler took the same steps against life that Paul VI warned against, starting with contraception.
Yes, some pills do cause abortion. Women have no idea how many babies they have killed through the use of contraception. The fact that it's too small for you to feel it moving in your womb doesn't take away from the fact that it is a living human being.
And, yes, God does not recognize as valid a marriage in which life (which belongs to Him Who is Life) is denied and even rejected and destroyed out of a desire for enjoyment of the marital relationship without the responsibility for children. Alot of this use of contraception comes from making gods of material possessions, comfort, pleasure and security.
And, a further thought, at the final judgment, each of us will be judged on the consequences of our decisions and actions.
What if the baby who was going to find the cure for cancer was aborted? Or the baby who was going to bring the most souls to Jesus Christ? We reap the consequences of those choices while here on earth, and we face judgment for the consequences of them in eternity. And we are responsible to study out a subject this important until we know the truth about it.
Pauline
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: Pauline ]
Have you done an in-depth study of the history of Margaret Sanger, who founded Planned Parenthood, and her commitment to Hitler's idea of getting rid of those human beings they considered less desirable? Contraception is very much a part of the plan to bring about an improved human race.
Over population is a myth. Right now many countries are at dangerous levels below re-populating their people. At least one country is already dependent upon immigrants.
If more and more countries cave into the myth of overpopulation, where will the immigrants come from? Margaret Sanger's idea has backfired because the very people she considered better and worthy of life and re-population are the ones using contraception and abortion to limit their numbers.
I suggest you read or listen to some of the work of Dr. Janet Smith. She's factual, reliable, honest and balanced.
Do you deny the social problems today caused by the break up of the family through divorce, through adultery and fornication, through couples living together without commitment and bringing children into the world who will not have stable homes and of parents being willing to kill their own children by abortion? Now it has moved to people and doctors being willing to kill the elderly and disabled by euthanasia, including that which is involuntary. A case of this was publicly shown on television here in Oregon some years ago. A friend of mine was in hospital, struggling to live, when her doctor invited her to die. A nurse tells me it is quite alright to starve and de-hydrate someone to death so long as you keep them comfortable by putting petroleum jelly around their lips. These are all a consequence of the widespread use of contraception.
When Pope Paul VI came out with Humane Vitae he was persecuted by his own people, Catholics. But, here in Oregon, a Jewish man stepped publicly forward to defend the pope.
The Jewish man pointed out that Nazi Germany under Hitler took the same steps against life that Paul VI warned against, starting with contraception.
Yes, some pills do cause abortion. Women have no idea how many babies they have killed through the use of contraception. The fact that it's too small for you to feel it moving in your womb doesn't take away from the fact that it is a living human being.
And, yes, God does not recognize as valid a marriage in which life (which belongs to Him Who is Life) is denied and even rejected and destroyed out of a desire for enjoyment of the marital relationship without the responsibility for children. Alot of this use of contraception comes from making gods of material possessions, comfort, pleasure and security.
And, a further thought, at the final judgment, each of us will be judged on the consequences of our decisions and actions.
What if the baby who was going to find the cure for cancer was aborted? Or the baby who was going to bring the most souls to Jesus Christ? We reap the consequences of those choices while here on earth, and we face judgment for the consequences of them in eternity. And we are responsible to study out a subject this important until we know the truth about it.
Pauline
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: Pauline ]