Saturday, 26 November 2011
-
Be Fruitful and Don't Multiply
As I listened to a sermon discussing the biblical purposes for marriage took notes on Twitter. My friend responded by asking about an absent purpose which was "to be fruitful and multiply." He was asking if bearing children was a universal command for all Christians who marry. I said no and my explanation turned into the following examination of that command. There are many wonderful Christians who believe that the command to "be fruitful and multiply" is a command for all believers, or all married believers, or all married believers who are able to bear their own children. It's easy to see how this can get tricky right off the bat. I believe that this is a command for all Christians as well but not in the way these siblings do (and we'll get back to how I see things playing out for child-bearing at the end). In fact, I think their interpretation and application of this command demands that they miss a key element of the context of the command in scripture.
While the words "be fruitful and multiply" show up several times in scripture it is not always as a command. Often times the phrase is a promise from God or a blessing from a person towards a specific recipient. Some great examples of this are Genesis 17:20, 28:3, 48:4, Leviticus 26:9, Jeremiah 23:3, and Ezekiel 36:11. The words "be fruitful and multiply" show up as a command in three different situations in scripture. Let's take a quick look at these individual cases and then we can draw a conclusion from their similarities on how we are to understand this command and it's application for believers today.
Passage 1
-
So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day . . .
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth" (Genesis 1:21-23, 27-28).
This passage is a piece of the Creation story. God creates the creatures of earth and tells them to fill the earth. God then creates mankind and commands them to be fruitful and multiply as well. In doing this mankind shall have dominion over all the other creatures. This passage has the notion that mankind will be where creatures will be. The planet is meant to house the creatures and mankind, so use the rooms of the house. That's the point of the command in this passage; to continue the beginning of creations by producing goodness and reproducing what God has produced so that the earth may be filled.
Passage 2
-
Then God said to Noah, "Go out from the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing that is with you of all flesh—birds and animals and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth—that they may swarm on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth" . . .
And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon every bird of the heavens, upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea. Into your hand they are delivered . . .
And you, be fruitful and multiply, teem on the earth and multiply in it" (Genesis 8:15-17, 9:1-2, 7).
Though some verses have been omitted to highlight the specifics being discussed it is clear to see the striking similarities between the commands of God towards the creatures and humans in Creation and the commands for Noah in the Flood. Both passages first consist of a command for the creatures to be fruitful and fill the planet and then consist of God commanding the humans to fill the planet. So far we've seen God create the world and command those in it to be fruitful (producing good things) and multiply (fill the earth). Then God saw the wickedness of the inhabitants, sent the Flood, kept a remnant, and commanded the remnant to do what the original creations did. This is almost a second creation. Both accounts consist of an empty world needing to be filled with the good God has created which can reproduce themselves. The world is empty and thus should be filled. The world must be used, occupied.
Passage 3
- God appeared to Jacob again, when he came from Paddan-aram, and blessed him. And God said to him, "Your name is Jacob; no longer shall your name be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name." So he called his name Israel. And God said to him, "I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply. A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come from your own body. The land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and I will give the land to your offspring after you" (Genesis 35:9).
This passage is a bit different from the previous two in that the earth is no longer empty of inhabitants. However, the earth does seem to be empty of people whom God has found favor in. The righteous are few. In other words, while there has been multiplication there has not been much fruitfulness. God came to a fruitful/righteous man named Abraham and made a covenant with him and his descendants. Jacob is the second generation of these descendants and Jacob, though troubling for a time, has come to God, wrestled with him, and found a new identity in doing so. He is now Israel and this renaming is part of a greater blessing. The blessing is that the Abrahamic covenant lives on through him, under the name Israel (this shall be the name of God's people). At this point in the story God is still looking for mankind to fulfill the command to be fruitful and multiply and his catalyst is now the lineage of Abraham, because of Abraham's faith and fruit. Not surprisingly, God made Abraham and his wife bear children (multiply) after his covenant was made. This was quite the miracle since the couple was previously unable to bear children. It was imperative that this particular couple bear children now that the covenant had been made.
We see here that God is fulfilling his covenant through Jacob, now Israel, and fulfilling his desire for a world filled with his created beings that produce good fruit. Through Israel that fruit shall now come just as multiplication has now come. God informs Jacob that a nation, and a company of nations, and kings shall come from his line. This is why it is so important that Jacob be fruitful and multiply. Jacob will certainly multiply. God has clearly promised that. God is commanding that Jacob live into that and to be fruitful in doing so. In short, God is building his fruitful people so that the world which has seen multiplication may now also see fruitfullness! After all, the desire of God with Israel has always been to bless all people and bring them back to him through Israel (Genesis 18:18, 22:18, 26:4) and we see this being fulfilled in the New Testament (Romans 11).
Conclusion
In this article I have pointed to all the passages in which the phrase "be fruitful and multiply" appear. All of the passages exist within the Old Testament alone. Only three of them are actual commands from God. In all three scenarios it is easy to observe that God is starting something new. This command is not a common command. This is a special, unique, holy command. The command is given at three specific times and to three specific groups of people in order that three specific purposes may be fulfilled.The differences between the context in which these commands appear and the world in which we now live is that in the first two the world was empty of both good fruit and inhabitants whereas in the third the world was full of inhabitants but not fruitfulness and thus God promised inhabitants to come out of fruitful men and commanded that the coming inhabitants be fruitful as they multiply. God was starting creation, restarting creation, and restarting his people. After this endeavor the command never shows up again. We can conclude from this evaluation that the command to be fruitful and multiply is not directed at all people, all married people, or even all married people who have the ability to bear children. Thus, it is not wrong or disobedient to be married and to not bear children according to scripture.* However, there are the later passages in which God speaks his promise to make his people fruitful and to multiply. At the same time, that is God's doing and it is in the context of his workings with his unique people on the earth.
So where does this lead us in terms of childbearing? We've already concluded that this is not a command to all married people. We can also conclude that the earth needed to be filled when it was empty and since the world is no longer empty the command no longer applies to us today. Must the earth remain filled? Yes. It is good to have children. However, from the third passage we see that the inhabiting the world is not the most important part of the command. Fruitfulness must exist as well. It's interesting that the command is not to multiply and be fruitful but instead to first be fruitful and then to multiply. This is exactly why God takes the route he does with Israel. Fruitfulness was lacking. As a result God went to where fruit existed and commanded the fruitful ones to multiply and they obeyed. This raises the question "If Christians are fruitful and this world is still filled with unfruitful inhabitants then is not the command to Jacob still the command to the Church?" It's a fantastic question but I don't think we can simply answer "yes" to it.
While the Church is still Israel she is different from the Israel of the Old Testament. Christ has come and he brought the kingdom of God with him, for he paradoxically is also the kingdom of God. Christ is the definitive answer to the rebellion and lack of fruit in the world. Israel was to bless the world but could never do it fully so Christ came to save everyone and to directly call all back to the God not only of Israel but all Creation, all of mankind which is in his image. Was Christ a quick fix for current unfruitfulness? No. He promised to return, judging all creation according to the fruit it has produced, and to renew the earth. In that renewed time God will be our all in all. There will only be fruitfulness in that time for all the fruitless inhabitants will be cast out for they proved that they were not God's people but not obeying him in being fruitful as they multiplied. Not only that but they multiplied without being fruitful and thus expanded the unfruitful creation. They rebelled and they grew the rebellion against God. Until that time comes Christ has established on this earth his body in the form of the Church, which is led by his Spirit whom he has sent to us. God is working out his promise to make his people fruitful (through Christ and the Spirit) and to multiply them (through bringing people to him). Where multiplication once meant mere childbirth it now means second birth into the family of God (John 3:1-15, Acts 2:47, 5:14). Conversion and salvation are the multiplication of God's people. Unfruitful creations becoming fruitful is multiplication. This means it is now possible for God's people, Israel, the Church to be fruitful and multiply without physical childbearing, though it is by no means outlawed or frowned upon. Multiplication through childbirth is still good and still a blessing. If called to childbearing, a couple is obedient to obey and thus worships well. However, we can now say confidently that adoption of children is a way to multiplication since it would consist of fruitful people multiplying fruitful people.
The spreading of the gospel into the hearts of people is now the form of multiplication God seeks. As Christians and nonChristians produce it is the duty of the Christian to continue loving and bringing all people to God, reconciling them (2 Corinthians 5:11-21). In this, God adds to our numbers, multiplying us, multiplying his people, multiplying his fruitful people and thus fulfilling his own command which we were never truly able to fulfill ourselves. It is through the Triune God that this work is fulfilled. So bear children (a lot of people need to), adopt children (a lot of people need to), be without children, or be single (if you can accept that calling). Whether you reproduce or not, be fruitful. Make disciples of Jesus Christ, reconciling men to God, raising the youth to know Him, and in that way know that you are being fruitful and multiplying. Peace be upon you.
What do you think? Have I misunderstood the context or how this command exists in scripture? Is my interpretation of how the current church is to be fruitful and multiply unsupported or a stretch?
*Some might argue based on the passages in 1 Timothy 3 and Ephesians 6 that because there is a command from Paul to treat children well it is assumed that all the Christian couples have children. It is also argued by some that since the list of credentials demanded for church leaders includes how one manages their children that only christians who have children are worthy of leadership and thus all should strive to be such leaders. Both of these assumptions are not safe to make. In the same letter (even chapter) that Paul instructs fathers how to treat their children he instructs slave owners how to treat slaves. Where there are commands for husbands ad wives in general there is never any command which implies they are to be procreating. When the single people in scripture are spoken of it's never said of them that they ought to get married so that they may have children. Children are great blessings but not great commands. This doesn't mean we should assume all Christians ought to have slaves or even employees. As for the lists of proving a good church leader, the list is about fruitfulness or character. The test is not what the person has done (multiplied) but who they are and how it is seen in their lives (fruitfulness). Besides, we know for a fact that those tests also speak only of married men and there were unmarried and childless men and women who were leaders in the Church (Paul included).
-
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)


Recommend



Comments (60)
Children are an integral part of life, they teach many wonderful lessons and bring greater maturity- as well as being part of the testimony of our family. But, I would say it does a discredit to treat them as acommand; and I agree, that is not the idea here.
Following the apostle John and Paul's language, those whom they had converted and taught the gospel to became their children. John uses "my little children" quite often in 1st John, as well as being called the Elder.
So all that to say I think I agree primarily with the post.
Be fruitful and multiply means exactly what it says. Like all of God's teachings it is simple and easy to understand.
Life is precious. Life is good. God loves it. God wants his universe teaming with life, especially human life. It's amazing what people do to God's Word to get it to conform to their own personal ideologies.
It's also amazing how the pagans multiply their words. It is a sign of fruitless confusion and human intellect that is a stranger to Truth and the faculty of reason.
Not many people know about that one. God doesn't just want us to fill the earth for the sake of filling it. He wants us to produce "godly offspring."
And also I think it's important to remember that Jesus told us to care for orphans too. I'll admit, it does kinda bother me that someone would spend $20,000 on IVF when they could just adopt for nearly half that cost (it depends, of course). I can't wait to adopt. What a beautiful portrait of how God adopts us into his family, and what a great way to reach the nations.
The Bible teaches that having one biologically is great and adopting is great. So decide which one that you feel God is leading you to.
if reproduction is really that important to the human experience, why didn't Jesus have children? i thought the whole point of him being born was so he, being God, could experience humanity as one of us.
I think I agree with you in that it's not a command for married couples to necessarily have children. The way I see it is possibly as an Old Testament parallel to that verse in Galatians talking about the fruits of the spirit. Maybe it's meant to mean be fruitful as Christians and multiply numbers in the faith by sharing this fruit that God gives each of us.
No offense, but this sounds like a giant excuse to use contraception. I'm not buying it.
Be fruitful and multiply. Simple.
There are different vocations. Married couples are called to be open to life. Love: unitive and procreative; take one facet away and you go against God.
Our culture isn't exactly prolife, but it needs us Christians standing in unity on the subject of Pro-Life verses anti-life, and shedding light on the world.
Look around -- couples who have kids and go to Church become the role models, Israel if you will, for the world.
And to non-Catholics: there are 1.1 billion Catholics walking around, being fruitful; sure, we are not perfect, but if you non-Catholics can do better, go ahead... and be more fruitful.
No Holy person ever said, "Go forth and contracept".
This is a good post. I appreciate the time you take to support your arguments and analyze the issues. Honestly, it's sort of sad to see how much work you put in some posts and how much flak you get...
@LifeWithGod - I agree with you. It is a quality not a quantity thing. In this place, God is first calling for fruits of the Spirit. The article awakened worthy discussion to the glory of God without diminishing the Grace of Baptism and the price paid.
"Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. John 3:5 "children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God." John 1:13 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, Baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 1 Peter 1:3
Someone should tell the Duggers this and plug that woman up.
It's so easy to interpret the Bible to support your personal desires, anyone can do it!
And that's just one of the reasons why it's crap.
I'm not against contraception or having a lot of children, but I just think this whole article sounds like someone trying to use the Bible to support a trend that's popular in western society right now. Why can't people just have babies -- or not -- and have a clear conscience before God about it either way? Why do we have to analyze and critique and judge everything to death?
God is perfect, and in his perfection, he understands that all humans do not have what it takes to multiply endlessly. Some don't have what it takes to multiply once. Many are born with brain conditions that disallow them the type of nurturing it takes to be a proper parent. And we look at those who seem to believe that all should be pooping out babies year after year, and we wonder what exactly was Christ's purpose in coming? Because my understanding is that he fulfilled the law. Even though through my lens I don't consider relentless multiplying the law, some do, so I would say to them that Christ fulfilled yet even that law. And a woman is far more precious to God than simply using her body to create babies, something that doesn't come easily for very many. And then there's the concept of how some women feel when they discover they cannot have babies year after year. Can you imagine how one of those Duggar girls would feel if told she had a medical condition and couldn't have endless babies? Those parents have set the girls up for relentless heart break because of their ridiculous belief system.
God gave us sex for procreation and unity with our spouse. Every time we have sex, both of these things should be included or we are not being faithful to God's purpose for sex. This is where natural family planning comes in (which, by the way, has a 99.5% success rate and is very different from the rhythm method). You can space your children as your family needs, but you are still open to life during the sexual act since you are not contracepting. This is my belief regarding "be fruitful and multiply".
The New Testament, through Paul, commands husbands to "love [their] wives as Christ loves the Church." You expect the Church to be fruitful and multiply, yet you don't think husbands and wives should act as we expect Christ to act (that is, to make our churches large and fruitful?)? What is the family, except a little Church, with Christ acting as the head through the husband and father?
As the wife of a Christian man, I know that his love for me is an image of Christ's love for me. If he and I sterilize our conjugal act, what does that say about Christ's love for me? And my love for Christ?
God is life! God is love! If the sex act won't bear life, can it bear love? And if God isn't present in our sex act, who is?
I think your conclusion is poor because you have cherry-picked scripture to support the idea you want to support; and you completely ignore centuries of Christian thought to do so. Why not do some reading on what other holy men and women have concluded about this topic? We are part of an eternal Church which means we don't have to reinvent the wheel with every new generation. Seriously, what do other Christian writers have to say on the topic? And don't think for a second that contraception is only a product of the twentieth century. Christians have been rejecting this sin for two thousand years.
No where in these it says to go and get knocked up with 20 kids. I think Michelle Duggar needs to read these more carefully....
I'm Catholic. I'm near getting engaged. I enjoy sex I am not having more than 2 kids. I don't give a you know what if I sinned. I will continue using birth control and I don't care what anyone else says. There's more to my life than raising babies no matter how much I want one.
@MsButterworth311@xanga - You're blind if you think it's only to make babies..... Humans are actually way more complex than that. If you don't see that, you've obviously never had sex before. Don't argue back with me but that's my thought.
@anchoredreams@xanga - You must not have read her comment because that's not what she said.
@anchoredreams@xanga - Did you not read what I said? I said it's for that AND unity. I didn't say it's for purely creating children, or that you have to create children every single time. You should be OPEN to that, since NFP has a 0.5% failure rate, and you should always experience unity when having sex. Those should both be present at all times. If you don't want to get pregnant and it's a fertile day, you abstain and find other ways to be intimate (cuddling, talking, playing a board game, having a movie night, etc.).
Besides, the divorce rate of couples who use NFP is 5%.... the divorce rate of everyone else (including Catholics who don't use NFP) is almost 50%. So the couples following what I believe is God's plan for sex are doing something right!
And yes, I have had sex before. For the past 11 years, actually. I have been with my fiance for about two years. We have recently decided to wait until we get married (getting married in April, made this decision at the beginning of November) because the more we investigated, the more we have come to realize what our belief about sex is. Is it difficult- YES! But we feel that it's worth it. We have our first NFP class this Saturday. We are closer now than we have ever been, and I wish every couple could experience it. I won't try to push my beliefs on others, but I have every right to respond with my viewpoint to this post just like everyone else. I know most people follow society's norms and that's hard to change.
Unfortunately, I take a bit of a different approach to this... while I believe that "be fruitful and multiply" MIGHT have meant "go forth and have lots of kids" back THEN (when there were two... then eight people on the planet) I do NOT believe that it's a command to us NOW.
I think that multiplying partly had to do with bringing forth into the earth, and that now, it's not as important as it was THEN...
I don't like it when ANYONE acts as if I am evil or not "listening to God" for my decision to not currently have children. That's not their business or their place. It is between me, my husband and God and there can be/are MANY reasons for a why a person does NOT wish to bear children, so putting your nose into it is really disgusting in my opinion.
I don't really want to "requote" and entire blog that I wrote about it about a year ago... but, I just think it's selfish and rude now days to be forcing your idea of what "family" is down someone else's throat and acting as if God COMMANDED everyone to have babies... if He did, then that do you tell women who are barren? See what I mean? It's very rude to assume that a woman is not barren or has medical issues, so to imply that they're "evil" "mean" "selfish" or otherwise because she does NOT have children really takes us back to the ridiculous thinking that women are "only" for children and if they have none then they are nothing...
The ONLY reason that women were looked at that way back then (and saw themselves that way) was because of a lack of people on planet earth and the need to carry out the family/family name. They needed workers, care takers, and the name/business to continue.
The bible elevates women's roles a WHOLE heck of a lot more later on, and we see MANY strong women without children. Hence, I do NOT believe it's necessary for women to bare children and I wish that people would not only get this throught their thick skulls, but understand that putting their nose into a woman's business, sexual life with her husband, etc is not only rude but can be VERY hurtful (recall that you do NOT know why a person does NOT have a child or perhaps doesn't want one)...
See PEOPLE not baby makers :P
@MsButterworth311@xanga - Yeah, you don't know my relationship obviously. I'm not using natural family planning. I just can't. I'm a law student and my boyfriend and I decided we need birth control in our plan. Just because that's your plan doesn't mean I don't love my boyfriend as equally. He's been my best friend for a long time and hes' not going anwywhere. I'm not using natural family planning when it's less effective than birth control because I still have 5 years of school and he has 3.... My boyfriend's mom got pregnant at my age and we can't handle that. His mom would be very mad at both of us and she's very Christian and told us both to use birth control.
As a single Christian with no immediate prospects of marriage and childbearing, I'd just point out that there are a LOT of ways to contribute to the next generation without actually getting one's genetic material involved. God calls me to produce fruit as well and He's led me into many places where I've been needed and been able to do that. Sadly, the church sometimes has a tendency to overlook the fruitfulness and contributive possibilities of the single.
I think saying that it's unhealthy for spouses to have "sterile" sex creates all sorts of awkward, slippery arguments that requires Christians to develop special loopholes to bless the sexual activities of infertile or post-menopausal couples. As far as NFP, I'm a huge fan. Though not sexually active, it's helped me pinpoint the sources of some of my 'feminine health problems'. However, the reason for it's high success rate is that because having sex with a woman who is not ovulating (or shortly before) is absolutely sterile sex. Given that you have a better chance of getting pregnant using a condom during a woman's fertile time, I just can't buy the argument that a physical contraceptive is less open to a possible pregnancy than strategically timed abstinence. More logical loops required. Ultimately, I think the best thing a couple can do is pray together and seek the Holy Spirit's guidance regarding their family-making decisions and timing.
@anchoredreams@xanga - I totally agree that I don't know your relationship/situation... But NFP is 99.5% effective when used properly. The birth control pill, if not taken at the same time every day (or an hour before to an hour after the same time each day) is less effective than that. I get that it sounds scary, but I think it's because everyone thinks NFP is the rhythm method (which has a horrible failure rate). Again, I wouldn't try to push my beliefs on someone else, but I do like to be sure people are making an informed decision, and I think most people choose birth control without really understanding the other options (this is what I did for years). The scary parts of hormonal birth control really freaked me out, after finally really researching it once I had been on it for about 8 years. This and a diagnosis of PCOS led me to learn about more natural methods, and in increase of faith led me to NFP, which perfectly fits all those things. And again, my original comment was the Catholic belief (which I adhere to) is that neither procreation nor unity/love should ever be out of the sex act, and NFP is what will help my fiance and I practice that belief. Our families both think we should use birth control too (or have no issue with it if we did want to use it), but it isn't about them in our opinion- it's about us and our faith.
Please don't think I was saying you don't love your boyfriend equally. What I was trying to get at, and is hard to put into words, is when you make the decision to trust each other and God with your fertility, there is a level of closeness that didn't exist before. One thing I love is that my fiance will be involved. It's not just my responsibility like it was when I was on the pill. Instead of me ever having to tell him I'm pregnant (in the future!), he will know because he will be the one charting. This also means he will know when my period is coming, fertile vs infertile days, etc. I love that because if sex is something we are doing together, I don't want my fertility to be all on me. So I'm not saying anything about your relationship whatsoever, just commenting on how much deeper our relationship has gone since we made this decision.
@Rebekka Holman@facebook - People who can't bear children are generally not closed to life. That's the difference. In fact, most of them would love to get pregnant. So when they have sex, they are still open to life, even if it most likely won't happen for them.
I'm not defending Contessima's comment because I don't totally agree with it, just explaining another point of view.
@MsButterworth311@xanga - I believe God put birth control on this earth because he knew the world would be overcrowded. I didn't choose it because I was with my boyfriend. I chose it because I was getting horribly sick from my period every month without it and the doctor tried everything else before putting it on. I was 15. I wasn't even thinking about getting a boyfriend at that age. I was child. So no, birth control isn't bad for me and it's not bad for everyone. It's just not the best option for everyone but it's the best option for everything.
My mom's friend was doing natural family planning btw and she thought she was done 'planning' and having children, but yeah she just had a baby a week ago at 42. I don't trust it at all.