Problably going to regret posting this

[AAArose]

Onan was not punished for contraception. He was punished for being disobedient to his duties as a brother. He would have been punished just the same if he had been using NFP to avoid pregnancy with his late brother’s wife.

This is why Catholic Doctrine doesn’t reference the story of Onan anywhere in the argument against contraception.

Onan was punished (killed) for contraception!
the Law of Levirate is if a married man died before he had children, his brother was obliged to marry the widow; their children would be considered the deceased brother’s children. “Onan’s brother died, so Onan married the widow. however he practived contraceptive behavior (withdrawal)” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 326
“When he went in to his brother’s wife, he spilled his seed on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. But what he did was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he slew Him also” (Gen 38:9-10)
“in Genesis 38 it is clear that Onan is only one of three persons who violated the Levirate. His father, Judah, and his younger brother Shelah, also violated the Levirate Law.” p 326 Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley
“When three people are guilty of the same crime but only one of them receives the death penalty from God, common sense requires that we ask if that one did something the others did not do. The answer is obvious: only Onan went through the motions of the convenantal act of intercourse but then defrauded its purpose and meaning; only Onan engaged in contraceptive behavior of withdrawal.” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 327

 

[AAArose]

yes, I did read the link. It didn’t change my thinking though. This has been my one problem with the church and believe me I have tried to understand it. I actually took a 6 month break from converting just because of this problem. The problem is, if a barrier method is wrong, then NFP is too. You can’t focus on the inaction of one method and the action of the other while at the same time pretending the intentions aren’t the same and as an added bonus, attributing negative mindsets to the contracepting couple that are outright not true. Comparing them logically, they are the same morally.

NFP when used to postpone pregnancy is about abstaining during the furtile times of the month. very act is open to life! abstaining means to not have intercourse. read Sex and the Marriage Covenant by John Kippley

 

[CopticChristian]

Onan was punished (killed) for contraception!
the Law of Levirate is if a married man died before he had children, his brother was obliged to marry the widow; their children would be considered the deceased brother’s children. “Onan’s brother died, so Onan married the widow. however he practived contraceptive behavior (withdrawal)” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 326
“When he went in to his brother’s wife, he spilled his seed on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. But what he did was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he slew Him also” (Gen 38:9-10)
“in Genesis 38 it is clear that Onan is only one of three persons who violated the Levirate. His father, Judah, and his younger brother Shelah, also violated the Levirate Law.” p 326 Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley
“When three people are guilty of the same crime but only one of them receives the death penalty from God, common sense requires that we ask if that one did something the others did not do. The answer is obvious: only Onan went through the motions of the convenantal act of intercourse but then defrauded its purpose and meaning; only Onan engaged in contraceptive behavior of withdrawal.” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 327

I could not find the original quote by Debra 123, however, her contention is that Onan is never mentioned in Catholic doctrine. I looked at Humane Vitae and she is correct, however I have not looked up every reference for that document. It is possible that story is in the references and in that case Debra 123 would be correct. If it is there then Debra 123 would be wrong. I may take the time to look. If I find it I will post it.

This discussion is outside the regret of the question asked. I am waiting for the Jew that posted it to respond.

 

[John_oxios]

Onan was punished (killed) for contraception!
the Law of Levirate is if a married man died before he had children, his brother was obliged to marry the widow; their children would be considered the deceased brother’s children. “Onan’s brother died, so Onan married the widow. however he practived contraceptive behavior (withdrawal)” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 326
“When he went in to his brother’s wife, he spilled his seed on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. But what he did was evil in the sight of the Lord, and he slew Him also” (Gen 38:9-10)
“in Genesis 38 it is clear that Onan is only one of three persons who violated the Levirate. His father, Judah, and his younger brother Shelah, also violated the Levirate Law.” p 326 Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley
“When three people are guilty of the same crime but only one of them receives the death penalty from God, common sense requires that we ask if that one did something the others did not do. The answer is obvious: only Onan went through the motions of the convenantal act of intercourse but then defrauded its purpose and meaning; only Onan engaged in contraceptive behavior of withdrawal.” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 327

Shelah was an innocent, he was Just too young, that's not a crime.  Judah worried that Tamar was a 'bad poison'  having lost two sons by her.    Judah made an oath to send Shelah when he was of age.    And Tamar is no innocent in this story either, she played the harlot, deceived her father in-law.

but God took all that deceit and made good out of it. Now concentrating on only half the verse “he spilled his seed,” You lost sight of the reason he did so, ** lest he should give offspring to his brother.** That is the purpose he wasted his seed. And he could have done this simply by refusing to enter not the tent with Tamar, and subject himself to public shame and ridicule. He selfishly prevented an hier in his broters name wiping out his lineage in Israel’s history toward salvation. H took Tamar used her for his own pleasure with no intent to carry out the Law. big difference than just spilling his seed. God knows our hearts, Onan’s heart was deceitful, and that’s why

Gen 38:10 "… what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also.

cause and effect, there are consequences to sin, it was a sin for man to waste his seed , but not a capital offense. it was a sin of refusing to care for his brother’s widow by giving her offspring, and of a selfish use of sex.

The Catholic Study Bible Oxford press, (with a Nil Obstat and Imprimatur)
(NASB)

Commentary Gen 38:8 "Preserve your brother’s:’ literally, "raise up seed for your brother ’ The Ancient Israelites regarded as very important their Law of Leverate , or “brother in-law” marriage, In the present story, it is primarily Onan’s violation of this law, rather than the means he used to circumvent it, that brought God’s displeasure.

Deut 25:5, note: when brothers lived together, when relatives of the same clan, though married, hold their property in common. it was only in this case that the present law was to be observed, since one of the purposes was to keep the property of the deceased within the same clan. Such a marriage of a widow with her brother in-law is known as a ‘leverate’ marriage. from the latin Levir meaning ’ a husbands brother’

(See Ruth 2:20)

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

“When three people are guilty of the same crime but only one of them receives the death penalty from God, common sense requires that we ask if that one did something the others did not do. The answer is obvious: only Onan went through the motions of the convenantal act of intercourse but then defrauded its purpose and meaning; only Onan engaged in contraceptive behavior of withdrawal.” Sex and the Marrige Covenant by John Kippley pg 327

Hello AAArose,
Thanks for the reference; I like what his second point is here… Catholic Teaching is based upon the entire Bible, and we frown on ‘proof-texts’ and the fact that a select group are telling the Church that they could and should Change their teaching to allow contraceptive practice. That’s it in a nutshell… not until the mid 1960’s has this Church teaching been challenged and most probably by the people behind the political zero poulation growth movement who have had nothing to do with the Church anyway.

From Page 325 of that book

The Holy Father did not explicitly call for explanations of particular verses of Sacred Scripture that prove a particular point of moral teaching, and I think he avoided such an approach for two reasons. First, he has to deal with the theological milieu within the Church, and for whatever reasons, the ‘proof-text’ approach has not been in much favor since the mid- 1960’s. Second, I think the Holy Father wanted it recognized that the doctrine of marital non-contraception, is grounded upon the entire biblical teaching about sex and marriage, not just upon isolated text, and I tried to develop such and approach…Nevertheless, the Onan account cannot be ignored. This, of course refers to the account in Gen 38 in which Onan practices ‘coitus interruptus’ and is killed by God for doing so… And onanism was a general term for all forms of contraception. However. During the birth control debate of the mid sixties, the anti-contraceptive interpretation of the Onan account was challenged by some of those who thought the Church could and should change her teaching to allow contraceptive behaviors.

books.google.com/books?id=m_QYRxg9aC4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Gen 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.
So Onan’s sin was the combined action of Lust, deceit, breaking of the Levirite law and the spilling of his seed. not just one or the other… but all inclusive.

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

I could not find the original quote by Debra 123, however, her contention is that Onan is never mentioned in Catholic doctrine. I looked at Humane Vitae and she is correct, however I have not looked up every reference for that document. It is possible that story is in the references and in that case Debra 123 would be correct. If it is there then Debra 123 would be wrong. I may take the time to look. If I find it I will post it.

This discussion is outside the regret of the question asked. I am waiting for the Jew that posted it to respond.

Click on the lil blue arrow in the quote next to her name, it ought to bring it right to the post

Post #9 pg One of this subject.

 

[John_oxios]

Onan was not punished for contraception. He was punished for being disobedient to his duties as a brother. He would have been punished just the same if he had been using NFP to avoid pregnancy with his late brother’s wife.

This is why Catholic Doctrine doesn’t reference the story of Onan anywhere in the argument against contraception.

how’s about this:

The Second Vatican Council, in its Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, openly asserted that the church has experienced a discrepancy "between the message she proclaims and the human weakness of those to whom the gospel has been entrusted" (Gaudium et Spes). It’s the “message” the church proclaims that enjoys a Spirit-given gift of infallibility.

Thanks to the grace of God the essential truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ will always be maintained in the church despite the failures, omissions, or sinfulness of church people. Infallibility means that the church will not be led into complete error about the gospel nor will it lose the essential truth of the gospel entrusted to

 

[CopticChristian]

how’s about this:

The Second Vatican Council, in its Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, openly asserted that the church has experienced a discrepancy "between the message she proclaims and the human weakness of those to whom the gospel has been entrusted" (Gaudium et Spes). It’s the “message” the church proclaims that enjoys a Spirit-given gift of infallibility.

Thanks to the grace of God the essential truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ will always be maintained in the church despite the failures, omissions, or sinfulness of church people. Infallibility means that the church will not be led into complete error about the gospel nor will it lose the essential truth of the gospel entrusted to

what happened to ruthyankees the regrettable?

 

[tomas10]

I’m not an expert, but to meits pretty simple. Procreate and multiply. Not let me decide when and how many.
Tomas10

 

[CopticChristian]

I’m not an expert, but to meits pretty simple. Procreate and multiply. Not let me decide when and how many.
Tomas10

To the Jew first and then the Gentile.

The first mitzvah in the Torah is “to be fruitful and multiply.” As the verse in Genesis1 states: “And G‑d said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth…’” After the Flood, G‑d repeated this commandment to Noah: "And G‑d blessed Noah and his sons, and He said to them2: ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.’"3

This mitzvah is considered a “great mitzvah” and in some cases even overrides certain other laws.4

Furthermore, by having children one is actually hastening the ultimate redemption. In the words of the Talmud,5 “The son of David [Moshiach] will not come until there are no more souls in the [Heavenly storage house called] guf.” In a similar vein, the Midrash6 tells us: "Just like the Jews were redeemed from Egypt in the merit of their having children, so too they will be redeemed in the future in the merit of having children."7

One who intentionally does not fulfill this mitzvah is considered analogous to a murderer – for he, too, has depleted life – and is said to be minimizing the Divine presence in this world.8 From this we understand that one who does fulfill this mitzvah is increasing the Divine presence in this world

The secon Mitzvah is circumcision.

 

[Nate13]

@CopticChristian
Haha interesting they believe in a “storage house” of souls waiting for bodies. I do not believe this is a common belief among Catholics. I have always heard each new soul to be a new act of creation. I would be curious to hear the reasoning behind why we should believe that all the souls that are to be created have already been created and are in a “storage house”

 

[Nate13]

also, the title of this thread couldn’t be more true now.

haha to tell you the truth I’m surprised its still going now, I had stopped paying attention to it. I thought you made it clear you wanted the Biblical reasoning behind our beliefs. There are plenty of other threads that talk about other reasoning.

 

[John_oxios]

@CopticChristian
Haha interesting they believe in a “storage house” of souls waiting for bodies. I do not believe this is a common belief among Catholics. I have always heard each new soul to be a new act of creation. I would be curious to hear the reasoning behind why we should believe that all the souls that are to be created have already been created and are in a “storage house”

Seems like you have the answer to "Where do babies come from?
Well we were all waiting to be born Since ADAM, Nations came from Abraham, Isaac etc…and when God has decided for Christ 2nd coming I imagine the storehouse will be empty… God knows us Before we are knitted in the womb.

To us it is an act of pro- creation, the trinity of the Family. Out of the love of the parents comes forth a child. God is the Creator, in eternity… out of time, his plan, his will

 

[Nate13]

Also here is homework for someone who wants to look at this from a biblical perspective only. Look and find every possible definition for the greek word “pharmakeia” that is translated to “sorcery” in most Bibles. This word is used in Galatians and a couple times in the Book of Revelation. There are a decent chunk of Protestants who after looking into this term and the context in which it is in the Bible have come to believe that Paul and John both deemed contraception to be “sorcery” and the writings of the time from other influential Christians confirm that this was common thought. I think anyone who claims the birth control pill is not included in this is being dishonest and someone who claims a condom is not included in this is walking on a thin line. They condemned using potions and sorcery not only as abortitives but also as being used to cause sterility. Anyways looking into this has convinced some Protestants so I thought it might be of interest to Ruthyankees

 

[Ceil-1]

Wow. The capacity for **denial and rationalization **on the part of some of these posters is astounding.

When my husband and I came to know the teaching of the Church, having been raised in ignorance and catchetical neglect, there was no question whatsoever as to what was right and wrong.

**It is simply an extension of “Thou shalt not kill”. **It is the duty of one who belongs to God, who has been given a vocation of marriage, to co-create citizens for the Kingdom of God. No one even told us that, and we figured that one out. Hello.

Unfortunately, for many of us, it came too late, but, just the same…It’s so stinking obvious, one has to be literally blind not to see it. Many “Biblebelieving” Baptists and other Protestants have no difficulty with discerning this.

These posters are simply rationalizing their positions, as if we were the ones to judge their hearts. What they don’t realize is that God will judge us based on the presence or absence of love. Well, I’m not judging, but… Brrrrr…I’m getting cold. :snowing:

 

[CopticChristian]

Wow. The capacity for **denial and rationalization **on the part of some of these posters is astounding.

When my husband and I came to know the teaching of the Church, having been raised in ignorance and catchetical neglect, there was no question whatsoever as to what was right and wrong.

**It is simply an extension of “Thou shalt not kill”. **It is the duty of one who belongs to God, who has been given a vocation of marriage, to co-create citizens for the Kingdom of God. No one even told us that, and we figured that one out. Hello.

Unfortunately, for many of us, it came too late, but, just the same…It’s so stinking obvious, one has to be literally blind not to see it. Many “Biblebelieving” Baptists and other Protestants have no difficulty with discerning this.

These posters are simply rationalizing their positions, as if we were the ones to judge their hearts. What they don’t realize is that God will judge us based on the presence or absence of love. Well, I’m not judging, but… Brrrrr…I’m getting cold. :snowing:

What you say is true. The question was not to determine if birth control was right or wrong rather are there bible verses to support it. At any rate for the Protestant there is the Scripture, infallible/inerrant word of God interpreted by fallble men. For the Catholic there is the teaching of the Church based on Scripture/Tradition.

The question did go in many directions indicative of many thoughts by many people. What I want to know is where is this guy who started this thread?