F
Fieryjades
Guest
What was Onan’s sin and why was he put to death for it? How bibical passage support the Church’s teaching on contraception?
God love you,
Fieryjades
God love you,
Fieryjades
- Status
F
Fergal
Guest
The passage about Onan reads as follows:
***Juda, therefore add to Onan his son: Go in to thy brother’s wife and marry her, that thou mayst raise seed to thy brother. 9 He knowing that the children should not be his, when he went in to his brother’s wife, spilled his seed upon the ground, lest children should be born in his brother’s name. 10 And therefore the Lord slew him, be- cause he did a detestable thing.
***It is a passage used to show the sacredness of the procreative act. Spilling one’s seed (through masturbation or coitus interruptus) is going against God’s will and His comand to be fruitful and multiply.
In this vain, any act that puts a lifestyle before the beautiful gift of having children is not in line with our role in the continuing act of God’s creation.
Each and every act of sexual intercourse must be open to the possibility of children. The Church does allow couples to follow Natural Family Planning in order to space out births but not to use it to deny the possibility of children.
May I add, to use NFP with the intention of remaining in good standing with the Church whilst being closed to the idea of children is also not what NFP was intended for.
***Juda, therefore add to Onan his son: Go in to thy brother’s wife and marry her, that thou mayst raise seed to thy brother. 9 He knowing that the children should not be his, when he went in to his brother’s wife, spilled his seed upon the ground, lest children should be born in his brother’s name. 10 And therefore the Lord slew him, be- cause he did a detestable thing.
***It is a passage used to show the sacredness of the procreative act. Spilling one’s seed (through masturbation or coitus interruptus) is going against God’s will and His comand to be fruitful and multiply.
In this vain, any act that puts a lifestyle before the beautiful gift of having children is not in line with our role in the continuing act of God’s creation.
Each and every act of sexual intercourse must be open to the possibility of children. The Church does allow couples to follow Natural Family Planning in order to space out births but not to use it to deny the possibility of children.
May I add, to use NFP with the intention of remaining in good standing with the Church whilst being closed to the idea of children is also not what NFP was intended for.
F
Fieryjades
Guest
Is it possible that he was put to death because he was not married to his brother’s widow?
P
Pious
Guest
Onan’s sin was that every time he had intercourse with his deceased brothers wife, he would spill his seed (ejaculate) on the floor, to prevent impregnating his sister-in-law.
Read Gen. 38, 9-10.
According to Old Testament law the brother had to take the wife of the deceased husband and to have children so that the lineage would not be broken; but Onan did not want to father children and so spilt his seed outside of the woman’s body and this displeased God.
I think the law is in Deuteronomy.
That is as much as I know off hand.
F
Fergal
Guest
Where do you get the idea that he was not married first? Did you not read the quotation from Holy Scripture provided above?
It reads ***"…he went in to his brother’s wife, spilled his seed upon the ground, lest children should be born in his brother’s name. And therefore the Lord slew him…"
***Now I am sure you understand the word ‘therefore’. It means ’for that reason’.
So he was slain, by God, for the reason that he spilled his seed in order to prevent the conception of children that would have his brothers name.
It reads ***"…he went in to his brother’s wife, spilled his seed upon the ground, lest children should be born in his brother’s name. And therefore the Lord slew him…"
***Now I am sure you understand the word ‘therefore’. It means ’for that reason’.
So he was slain, by God, for the reason that he spilled his seed in order to prevent the conception of children that would have his brothers name.
F
Fieryjades
Guest
Btw, I’m Catholic but struggling with the teaching due to the talks I’ve had with Protestants on this issue. Onan couldn’t have been breaking Jewish law because there’s no Jewish law at this time, so they contend that Onan was put to death because: he was not married to Tamar or he opposed God’s plan of Tamar.
What do you think? Are there any other Bible verses that support the Church’s teaching against contraceptives?
What do you think? Are there any other Bible verses that support the Church’s teaching against contraceptives?
F
Fergal
Guest
The following is taken from EWTN site ref : ewtn.org/vexperts/showmessage.asp?Pgnu=1&Pg=Forum7&recnu=3&number=435251
Answer by Fr. John Echert on 04-13-2005: First you may quote from the opening of Genesis, in which God commanded man and woman to be fertile and multiply. Secondly, here is an explicit condemnation of the sin and its punishment, as found in Genesis:
The account of Onan’s refusal to carry out the obligation to raise up children in place of his brother is found in Genesis 38:
38:4 Again she conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. 38:5 Yet again she bore a son, and she called his name Shelah. She was in Chezib when she bore him. 38:6 And Judah took a wife for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar. 38:7 But Er, Judah’s first-born, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. 38:8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” 38:9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. 38:10 And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also.
By the ancient custom–later to become the law of God in the time of Moses–in order that the family name would live on through a man’s descendants, if a brother died leaving a widow and no sons, then it was the duty of his brother to take his widow as his own and produce offspring from the relationship. Onan not only failed to fulfill this command of God, but committed an additional violation of the law of God by spilling his seed on the ground, that is, withdrawal during the act of sexual intercourse. His sin was twofold and showed contempt for God and nature. Incidentally, this biblical account is important to keep in mind in the whole matter of contraception which is against the law of God and nature. Sexual intercourse is intended to be fruitful and one must have at least the openness to the possibility of new life; Onan showed contempt for life and law.
There are some who argue that the severe punishment of God upon Onan was for his failure to fulfill the Levirate law of raising up offspring; however, the punishment for this was specified by God as recorded in the book of Deuteronomy:
25:5 "If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead shall not be married outside the family to a stranger; her husband’s brother shall go in to her, and take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. 25:6 And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his brother who is dead, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. 25:7 And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders, and say, —My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’ 25:8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak to him: and if he persists, saying, —I do not wish to take her,’ 25:9 then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, —So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’ 25:10 And the name of his house shall be called in Israel, The house of him that had his sandal pulled off.
The penalty imposed by Mosaic Law was not a death sentence upon the guilty brother but public humiliation–a far cry from execution. This leads us to conclude that the death punishment upon Onan was not for his failure to raise up posterity for his deceased brother, but for the crime of wasting the seed upon the ground–a primitive and vulgar form of contraception. Incidentally, with regards to contraception, many people today are ignorant of the fact that many forms of contraception actually act as an abortifacient–they kill the newly conceived child in some manner.
And of course I would strongly encourage you to have a deep read of Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI at vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Answer by Fr. John Echert on 04-13-2005: First you may quote from the opening of Genesis, in which God commanded man and woman to be fertile and multiply. Secondly, here is an explicit condemnation of the sin and its punishment, as found in Genesis:
The account of Onan’s refusal to carry out the obligation to raise up children in place of his brother is found in Genesis 38:
38:4 Again she conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. 38:5 Yet again she bore a son, and she called his name Shelah. She was in Chezib when she bore him. 38:6 And Judah took a wife for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar. 38:7 But Er, Judah’s first-born, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. 38:8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” 38:9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. 38:10 And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also.
By the ancient custom–later to become the law of God in the time of Moses–in order that the family name would live on through a man’s descendants, if a brother died leaving a widow and no sons, then it was the duty of his brother to take his widow as his own and produce offspring from the relationship. Onan not only failed to fulfill this command of God, but committed an additional violation of the law of God by spilling his seed on the ground, that is, withdrawal during the act of sexual intercourse. His sin was twofold and showed contempt for God and nature. Incidentally, this biblical account is important to keep in mind in the whole matter of contraception which is against the law of God and nature. Sexual intercourse is intended to be fruitful and one must have at least the openness to the possibility of new life; Onan showed contempt for life and law.
There are some who argue that the severe punishment of God upon Onan was for his failure to fulfill the Levirate law of raising up offspring; however, the punishment for this was specified by God as recorded in the book of Deuteronomy:
25:5 "If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead shall not be married outside the family to a stranger; her husband’s brother shall go in to her, and take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. 25:6 And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his brother who is dead, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. 25:7 And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders, and say, —My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’ 25:8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak to him: and if he persists, saying, —I do not wish to take her,’ 25:9 then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, —So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’ 25:10 And the name of his house shall be called in Israel, The house of him that had his sandal pulled off.
The penalty imposed by Mosaic Law was not a death sentence upon the guilty brother but public humiliation–a far cry from execution. This leads us to conclude that the death punishment upon Onan was not for his failure to raise up posterity for his deceased brother, but for the crime of wasting the seed upon the ground–a primitive and vulgar form of contraception. Incidentally, with regards to contraception, many people today are ignorant of the fact that many forms of contraception actually act as an abortifacient–they kill the newly conceived child in some manner.
And of course I would strongly encourage you to have a deep read of Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI at vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
F
Fergal
Guest
**Scripture References and References from the Early Church Fathers.
**scripturecatholic.com/contraception.html
It is all you need to fully recharge the conscience!!
**scripturecatholic.com/contraception.html
It is all you need to fully recharge the conscience!!
F
Fieryjades
Guest
Another Protestant refutation: Condoms and abstience prevent life so there’s no difference btw ABC and NFP…what do you make of this?
Thank you for the helpful information!
Thank you for the helpful information!
S
Scott_Waddell
Guest
Periodic abstaining from sex is not sinful. Having sex and deliberately attempting to thwart the natural consequences is. Contraception is man’s awful attempts to seize control and pull apart what man has pulled together.
Scott
F
Fieryjades
Guest
Protestant refutation: If God really wanted to have a child, then He’d make sure we’d have one regardless of contraceptives.
Your thoughts…
Your thoughts…
S
Scott_Waddell
Guest
Simple, God CAN indeed override man’s sinful attempts to thwart His will, but attempting to thwart His will is still sinful. It is rebelliona and lack of trust in God.
Scott
F
Fergal
Guest
***Arificial ***Contraception vs ***Natural ***Family Planning
Just look at the first word in each case.
One of the above results because of man’s incapability to deal with lust. Love grips the heart, lust grips the loins.
NFP is using what God has already given us. A woman has a cycle. At times through that cycle the body’s condition is such that conception is highly unlikely. Yet still the chance of new life may exist and the couple are aware of this and are open to this.
With Artificial contraception the end result is a simple momentary pleasure with a very definite ***NO ***to the possibility of new life. Not only a no to the possibility of new life but a sincere ***NO ***to the one with whom you are having intimate relations.
Being open to God’s will is not just a simple matter of having a child. It is an intimate matter of loving each other so deeply and saying ***YES ***to each other. In saying this ***YES ***to each other, husband to wife and wife to husband, we are endorsing the ***YES ***of Mary to God at the moment of the Incarnation. It is so much linked with the desires of God.
If conception occurs becuase the AC ‘failed’ chances are abortion will be an option high an the ‘what am I going to do’ list and this could be seen as one of the fruits of AC."By their fruits ye shall know them."
Just look at the first word in each case.
One of the above results because of man’s incapability to deal with lust. Love grips the heart, lust grips the loins.
NFP is using what God has already given us. A woman has a cycle. At times through that cycle the body’s condition is such that conception is highly unlikely. Yet still the chance of new life may exist and the couple are aware of this and are open to this.
With Artificial contraception the end result is a simple momentary pleasure with a very definite ***NO ***to the possibility of new life. Not only a no to the possibility of new life but a sincere ***NO ***to the one with whom you are having intimate relations.
Being open to God’s will is not just a simple matter of having a child. It is an intimate matter of loving each other so deeply and saying ***YES ***to each other. In saying this ***YES ***to each other, husband to wife and wife to husband, we are endorsing the ***YES ***of Mary to God at the moment of the Incarnation. It is so much linked with the desires of God.
If conception occurs becuase the AC ‘failed’ chances are abortion will be an option high an the ‘what am I going to do’ list and this could be seen as one of the fruits of AC."By their fruits ye shall know them."
L
Lisa4Catholics
Guest
You should not test God
D
DeFide
Guest
Besides all the great responses you’ve gotten so far, you might also point out to your friends that all Protestant churches condemned artificial contraception as intrinsically evil before 1930. Since truth is never the opposite of what it once was, ask them when their denomination was right and when it was teaching heresy.
F
Fidelis
Guest
Soooo…we should purposely put impediments in front of God because he’s going to do what he wants to do anyway?? :whacky:
If my kids did that, I’d call it disobedient and defiant. :tsktsk:
Besides, this argument is a distraction on whether the act is moral or not, which is the real issue.
F
Fieryjades
Guest
Isn’t there a Bible verse that says we shouldn’t test God? I’m talking with “non-denominational” Christians who won’t accept anything unless it’s from the Bible and their intrepretation of it, so I cannot ask them when their denomination began teaching that contraception is ok.
One uses Genesis 3:15 to demonstrate his point that Onan was killed for defying God’s plan: “Abraham was called by God out of Ur. The line of promise that God TOLD Satan would come through Eve was to come through Abraham. Then Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Perez, etc… Maintaining that line of promise was incredibly important. Hence the reason Sarah gave Hagaar to Abraham: to have an heir. That was not God’s plan however. Sarah was to have a son, Isaac. Jacob would have known the story, as Abraham was his grandfather and quite possibly was still alive when Jacob and Esau were born. Onan in turn would have known the story too. So it is certainly reasonable to see a calculating thought process in Onan’s decision. He was hedging his bets. Er was dead, so HE was next in line. Unless, of course, Tamar had a baby. Then that baby would be first in line and not Onan. Onan deliberately chose to defy God’s authority, and God put him to death for it.”
(Isn’t Gen. 3:15 used to show Mary’s role in God’s salvation plan for humanity?)
Furthermore, they bring up the Song of Solomon to refute contraception. HELP!
Your sister in Christ,
FJ
One uses Genesis 3:15 to demonstrate his point that Onan was killed for defying God’s plan: “Abraham was called by God out of Ur. The line of promise that God TOLD Satan would come through Eve was to come through Abraham. Then Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Perez, etc… Maintaining that line of promise was incredibly important. Hence the reason Sarah gave Hagaar to Abraham: to have an heir. That was not God’s plan however. Sarah was to have a son, Isaac. Jacob would have known the story, as Abraham was his grandfather and quite possibly was still alive when Jacob and Esau were born. Onan in turn would have known the story too. So it is certainly reasonable to see a calculating thought process in Onan’s decision. He was hedging his bets. Er was dead, so HE was next in line. Unless, of course, Tamar had a baby. Then that baby would be first in line and not Onan. Onan deliberately chose to defy God’s authority, and God put him to death for it.”
(Isn’t Gen. 3:15 used to show Mary’s role in God’s salvation plan for humanity?)
Furthermore, they bring up the Song of Solomon to refute contraception. HELP!
Your sister in Christ,
FJ
S
Scott_Waddell
Guest
Well, they need to explain why EVERY Christian group got it wrong until 1930.
Scott
Scott
F
Fieryjades
Guest
What do you think of the Protestant’s intrepretation of the Bible verse?
S
slinky1882
Guest
What part of Song of Solomon??? Thanks and God Bless.
- Status