Preventing Pregnancy Displeases Thee Lord

Status
Not open for further replies.
ASUK said:
So if he would have simply abstained he would have met the same fate?

I'm having a problem seeing the difference in contraception and planned abstinence.

If you have the urge to have sex but don't want a child you can use protection or abstain. Both have the same result, no child.
Click to expand...

I don't know if he would have the same fate. I said disobedience would result in punishment -- and wouldn't you agree with that? Keep in mind that NFP isn't a means to abstain totally in order to avoid pregnancy. In fact, it's quite different from the "rhythm method" because even that discards the notion of giving entirely to the vocation of marriage.

Onan's sin was disobedience to God via lust and selfishness. When something like NFP is practices, it is a means of devoting entirely to the sanctity of marriage, accepting the spouse entirely as she is, not separating her from her from the procreative. Contraception, however, is intended to directly do those things.

But let's say, just for argument's sake, that I am indeed wrong when practicing NFP with my wife. If I am wrong for it, does my behavior dictate what is right and wrong? Wouldn't contraception still be 100% evil in its nature regardless?
 
Last edited:
I don't think using contraceptives is a sin. I think disobeying God when he tells you to do something is. I think that Onan simply disobeyed God and it had nothing to do with spilling his seed.

I certainly don't have a problem if the Catholics choose this lifestyle but to say it's a sin is wrong in my opinion.

There is nothing that says it is a sin. There is only a correlation of events at that time.
 
ASUK said:
I don't think using contraceptives is a sin. I think disobeying God when he tells you to do something is. I think that Onan simply disobeyed God and it had nothing to do with spilling his seed.

I certainly don't have a problem if the Catholics choose this lifestyle but to say it's a sin is wrong in my opinion.

There is nothing that says it is a sin. There is only a correlation of events at that time.
Click to expand...

ASUK, I agree that disobeying God is a sin. However, disobeying God is infused when using contraceptives because it's a means to reject God. It is permeated with disobedience. I've noticed the same tactics to justify contraception as I see when people justify abortion: "Where does the Bible say not to abort?" "Did God tell us to be irresponsible when procreating?" There is much wrong with these statements. Scriptural teaching backs the principles as to why contraception and abortion are sinful.

This is why it was extremely self-evident for 2000 years up until about the 1960s or 70s when Christian groups began to embrace contraception. I guarantee you, just as it was predicted in the mid-century, the more Christian groups embrace contraception as OK, we'll begin to see a surge of groups embracing abortion...and we're already seeing that too.

Is it just a matter of feeling or a matter of fact that contraception is OK? Because these are two different reasons.
 
LysanderShapiro said:
ASUK, I agree that disobeying God is a sin. However, disobeying God is infused when using contraceptives because it's a means to reject God. It is permeated with disobedience. .
Click to expand...
Do you believe a wife has the right to refuse sex with her husband? And because she does not wish to conceive another child?
 
Scripture Bird said:
Do you believe a wife has the right to refuse sex with her husband? And because she does not wish to conceive another child?
Click to expand...
Well I'm not ASUK, but as the resident buttinski...........
I don't think a wife has the right to refuse sex (with her husband) to the same degree as a husband has the right to demand sex with his wife.
Neither demanding nor refusing is something that has a place in marriage.
Where there is love, there will be understanding.
Where there is love there will be compromise.
Where there is love, there will be agreement.


Where there is lust, there is no love.


Where there is no love, there is no marriage.
 
calvin said:
Well I'm not ASUK, but as the resident buttinski...........
I don't think a wife has the right to refuse sex (with her husband) to the same degree as a husband has the right to demand sex with his wife.
Neither demanding nor refusing is something that has a place in marriage.
Where there is love, there will be understanding.
Where there is love there will be compromise.
Where there is love, there will be agreement.


Where there is lust, there is no love.


Where there is no love, there is no marriage.
Click to expand...
Calvin, this was beautifly put!
 
LysanderShapiro said:
ASUK, I agree that disobeying God is a sin. However, disobeying God is infused when using contraceptives because it's a means to reject God. It is permeated with disobedience. I've noticed the same tactics to justify contraception as I see when people justify abortion: "Where does the Bible say not to abort?" "Did God tell us to be irresponsible when procreating?" There is much wrong with these statements. Scriptural teaching backs the principles as to why contraception and abortion are sinful.

This is why it was extremely self-evident for 2000 years up until about the 1960s or 70s when Christian groups began to embrace contraception. I guarantee you, just as it was predicted in the mid-century, the more Christian groups embrace contraception as OK, we'll begin to see a surge of groups embracing abortion...and we're already seeing that too.

Is it just a matter of feeling or a matter of fact that contraception is OK? Because these are two different reasons.
Click to expand...

The part about abortion is a strawman argument. And actually the bible says to not murder so it is covered in that regard.

I still don't see how using contraception is rejecting God.
 
CCW95A said:
Contraception is preventing a life
Abortion is taking a life.
Which is better?
Click to expand...

The question isn't which is better, it is which is worse. Abortion is clearly worse. I made the distinction and everyone who understands what they each are know it.

However, just because one is worse than the other doesn't make the second option OK.
 
LysanderShapiro said:
The question isn't which is better, it is which is worse. Abortion is clearly worse. I made the distinction and everyone who understands what they each are know it.

However, just because one is worse than the other doesn't make the second option OK.
Click to expand...

Contraception is not allowing the seed of man to conect to the egg of woman. How about the menstrual cycle that nature automatically uses to dispose of the egg. Would that be considered contraception?
 
calvin said:
Well I'm not ASUK, but as the resident buttinski...........
I don't think a wife has the right to refuse sex (with her husband) to the same degree as a husband has the right to demand sex with his wife.
Neither demanding nor refusing is something that has a place in marriage.
Where there is love, there will be understanding.
Where there is love there will be compromise.
Where there is love, there will be agreement.


Where there is lust, there is no love.


Where there is no love, there is no marriage.
Click to expand...
I think that what you wrote is wonderful, until . . . .

"Where there is lust, there is no love."

Well, I guess I am a bit surprised. Is this seriously thought among believers? Is it really in the Bible? I don't recall reading that, and for me, it is disturbing.

Okay, I will keep this . . . uh . . . "covered" -- ???

But what is wrong with me lusting after my husband? I can't believe this is serious, but I am willing to be taught.

Well, I had better not write what I am thinking . . . .
 
ASUK said:
The part about abortion is a strawman argument. And actually the bible says to not murder so it is covered in that regard.

I still don't see how using contraception is rejecting God.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with leaving abortion aside. I mentioned it because contraception has indeed changed the narrative of even abortion amongst Christians.

But you made the right assessment when you said "The bible says to not murder so it is covered in that regard." Indeed. Abortion is a specific form of murder. That is where the scriptures back up the notion that abortion is wrong.

Likewise with contraception, 1 Timothy 2:15 where Paul is talking about the instruction of women, he mentions a strong role of their responsibilities as a wife. Likewise, the husband's responsibility is to embrace this and accept her entirely, not partly. And explicitly the verses we touched on, Genesis 38:8-10 are indeed a subject of the repercussions of birth control. Just as abortion is murder fused by selfishness, birth control is ignorance of marital sanctity fused by selfishness and lust.

When a couples use birth control, whether they realize or not, they are 1) deciding over God's judgment and making it their own, and 2) not accepting their partners 100% as their spouse. This is why when birth control became much more common in the 60s, an increase of infidelity and divorce took place, and continues to grow. It's not a coincidence. And this is why Christians universally knew it to be self-evident that birth control is wrong.

I have to ask you again, ASUK...did the Christians up until the 1970s get it wrong on birth control?
 
Thought I'd add in a little thought. God's view of marriage is very sacred with very specific instructions which if practiced correctly, are designed to avoid issues and problems by obeying his word. Each aspect has a responsibility of each parter, for example wife submit and husbands love, the more the husband loves the more the wife submits and the more this continues it births true love, compromise and matual affection. The woman is not to deny the husband, the hisband is not to deny the wife this way, both have a responsibility to give to their spouse in all that they have. These practices may seem foreign at first but when we trust God fully in what he says and actually carry it out, you will experience what God truly means by marriage....hope this helps the conversation...
 
ASUK said:
The part about abortion is a strawman argument. And actually the bible says to not murder so it is covered in that regard.

I still don't see how using contraception is rejecting God.
Click to expand...

I'd have to go with you on that one. Techincally by not having sexual relations over a month period of a women's cycle is preventing life too is it not?
 
CCW95A said:
Contraception is not allowing the seed of man to conect to the egg of woman. How about the menstrual cycle that nature automatically uses to dispose of the egg. Would that be considered contraception?
Click to expand...

That's a great question -- someone else already asked this actually. The short answer is no. Contraception involves the deliberate frustration of the marriage act. NFP does not.
 
christianbacktobasics said:
I'd have to go with you on that one. Techincally by not having sexual relations over a month period of a women's cycle is preventing life too is it not?
Click to expand...

Abstaining for that long isn't what I'm talking about at all. But beyond that, it's the nature of sex that is also to be addressed, not strictly the biological aspects of it.

Some people do make the argument that NFP is wrong because they suggest every sexual experience between couples should be had with the only goal to procreate. What NFP suggests is that couples are to respect what sex is, use it as a bonding experience for one another, but also with the openness of life being conceived, especially since it's possible even during more infertile days. There is a responsibility with sex, but it must be done with a Christian heart, not a lustful heart.

When a couple marries, the idea is to 1) give entirely to one another, and 2) give
entirely their marriage to God. Contraception interjects the openness to life and
what God may have planned. It is a means of dismissing God from the bedroom and putting Christianity aside during sex.
 
LysanderShapiro said:
Abstaining for that long isn't what I'm talking about at all. But beyond that, it's the nature of sex that is also to be addressed, not strictly the biological aspects of it.

Some people do make the argument that NFP is wrong because they suggest every sexual experience between couples should be had with the only goal to procreate. What NFP suggests is that couples are to respect what sex is, use it as a bonding experience for one another, but also with the openness of life being conceived, especially since it's possible even during more infertile days. There is a responsibility with sex, but it must be done with a Christian heart, not a lustful heart.
Click to expand...

I think the main body of debate your leaning toward is, is contraception right or wrong? In the NT Paul said that there is nothing evil within itself only the misuse of it, so there's nothing really evil about using contraception, just the method would be questionable. Paul said all things are lawful unto me, what he was saying was to silience the religious critics asking him many questions about many subjects. Paul basically said, where it doesn not conflict with scripture or you find no express directive from God then use your godly common sense and choice as to what belief you want to hold. There's no directive about preventing life, only taking it, as you and I would both agree, abortion is murder but an unfertilized egg is no life at all requiring both the male and the female to make it so. I must admit, I might disagree to some extent with the 'pill' or the morning after pill bu condoms and what not, I can't see an issue...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top