Protestants and Divorce and Contraception and Sodomy

[opusAquinas]

How do Protestants justify divorce (for non-adultery) when our Lord seems to clearly indicate His opposition?

How do Protestants justify contraception?

What about sodomy as a form of contraception?

 

[House_Harkonnen]

How do Protestants justify divorce (for non-adultery) when our Lord seems to clearly indicate His opposition?

How do Protestants justify contraception?

What about sodomy as a form of contraception?

How do Protestants justify divorce (for non-adultery) when our Lord seems to clearly indicate His opposition?

I don’t understand the question. I have never heard a Protestant justify divorce for another reason besides adultery or desertion. I have heard a few say that divorce is justified in the cause of extreme violent unrepentant spousal abuse.

How do Protestants justify contraception?

Scripture is silent on non abortive contraception so our confessions are silent on it as well.

What about sodomy as a form of contraception?

Honestly I have never heard about this taught in my Protestant church.

 

[Adamski]

Here is seattle protestants teach divorce is ok for any reason

Also mark Driscoll at Mars hill promotes sodamy as birth control
I can’t find the sodamy clip but here is his rationale for masterbation

Check out this video on YouTube:

youtu.be/E2xkJfGnxBI

 

[Jon_S_1]

How do Protestants justify divorce (for non-adultery) when our Lord seems to clearly indicate His opposition?

How do Protestants justify contraception?

What about sodomy as a form of contraception?

This is one of the most comprehensive looks at it I have seen.

This is a sermon by Gene Appel. A divorced and remarried pastor of a large church in Southern California.

I heard him as a Protestant and used his sermons as I divorced my wife.

Tragically he is very wrong about it, but I think he nails the predominant Protestant perspective.

sermoncentral.com/sermons/dealing-with-divorce-part-i-timothy-smith-sermon-on-divorce-70876.asp?Page=1

 

[Jon_S_1]

Here is seattle protestants teach divorce is ok for any reason

Also mark Driscoll at Mars hill promotes sodamy as birth control
I can’t find the sodamy clip but here is his rationale for masterbation

Check out this video on YouTube:

youtu.be/E2xkJfGnxBI

As much as I really really dislike Marc Driscoll, I am in no way surprised by this clip. It is not original to him and is a widespread belief in evangelical Protestantism. I read this in Dr Dobsons book from focus on the family as a teenager. He promotes the same position. Although I actually like that Driscoll takes it deeper than Dobson. He explains about how hard it is to remove lust from masturbation, that it is habit forming and that it is a conscience issue.

These guys need to realize though that the story of Onan would be a strike against masturbation as would the sin of pride/selfish ambition and vanity. All of those are at the root of masturbation.

 

[ltwin]

Here is seattle protestants teach divorce is ok for any reason

Do they really teach that divorce is ok for any reason?

Or do they teach that divorce for reasons other than adultery or authentic abandonment is sin, yet sin that can be forgiven and that one can move forward with one’s life, not being bound to a former spouse, depending on the specific circumstances?

Those two positions are very different.

Here is seattle protestants teach divorce is ok for any reason

Could you perhaps offer up a teaching document or something?

Also mark Driscoll at Mars hill promotes sodamy as birth control

Evangelical Protestant churches typically don’t rule on the sexual activities of their members as long as said activities are in the confines of marriage between one man and one woman. Obviously, homosexuality and bestiality in addition to orgies would be out of the question. But intimate activities between a husband and wife are generally left to their own discretion.

I can’t find the sodamy clip but here is his rationale for masterbation

Check out this video on YouTube:

youtu.be/E2xkJfGnxBI

Yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Evangelical Protestants don’t usually interpret Onan’s sin as the sin of masturbation but rather of refusing to honor his obligations to his deceased brother’s wife.

The manual act of masturbation is not inherently sinful, but it is nearly impossible to separate that act from lust, which is sinful.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Here is seattle protestants teach divorce is ok for any reason

Also mark Driscoll at Mars hill promotes sodamy as birth control
I can’t find the sodamy clip but here is his rationale for masterbation

Check out this video on YouTube:

youtu.be/E2xkJfGnxBI

As much as I really really dislike Marc Driscoll, I am in no way surprised by this clip. It is not original to him and is a widespread belief in evangelical Protestantism. I read this in Dr Dobsons book from focus on the family as a teenager. He promotes the same position. Although I actually like that Driscoll takes it deeper than Dobson. He explains about how hard it is to remove lust from masturbation, that it is habit forming and that it is a conscience issue.

These guys need to realize though that the story of Onan would be a strike against masturbation as would the sin of pride/selfish ambition and vanity. All of those are at the root of masturbation.

Do they really teach that divorce is ok for any reason?

Or do they teach that divorce for reasons other than adultery or authentic abandonment is sin, yet sin that can be forgiven and that one can move forward with one’s life, not being bound to a former spouse, depending on the specific circumstances?

Those two positions are very different.

Could you perhaps offer up a teaching document or something?

Evangelical Protestant churches typically don’t rule on the sexual activities of their members as long as said activities are in the confines of marriage between one man and one woman. Obviously, homosexuality and bestiality in addition to orgies would be out of the question. But intimate activities between a husband and wife are generally left to their own discretion.

Yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Evangelical Protestants don’t usually interpret Onan’s sin as the sin of masturbation but rather of refusing to honor his obligations to his deceased brother’s wife.

The manual act of masturbation is not inherently sinful, but it is nearly impossible to separate that act from lust, which is sinful.

Adamski and Jon—In that video Driscoll very clearly says that we don’t know masturbation is a sin by Divine revelation in the Bible, but we do know lust is a sin by Divine revelation, so therefore we can know masturbation is a sin because in involves lust in any humanly normal case.

So I’m puzzled, Adamski. You say the video gives Driscoll’s rationale for masturbation. Huh? In reality, it gives Driscoll’s reasoning for why masturbation is a sin. I’m not sure how it is that you’re misunderstanding the video.

 

[MJJean]

How do Protestants justify divorce (for non-adultery) when our Lord seems to clearly indicate His opposition?

How do Protestants justify contraception?

What about sodomy as a form of contraception?

I was raised Protestant.

Never heard a word from the pulpit about divorce. People got divorced, remarried, divorced again…no one batted an eye or said a word about it other than to give comfort to a divorcing person and celebrate when said person remarried.

I never heard a word against contraception nor any justification for that position. Contraception was seen as a matter between a woman and her doctor.

Never heard of sodomy as a form of contraception, either. Probably because people were using actual contraception. Sexual practices among couples were seen as a private matter.

Heck, I heard very little about pre-marital sex, too. Growing up it was acceptable to have sex out of wedlock, but much less acceptable to have a baby out of wedlock. If unmarrieds were having sex people turned a blind eye. If they got pregnant there would be a flurry of gossip usually starting off with "Don’t they know what causes that? How could that happen? Weren’t they “being careful?” I live in Wayne County, MI where literally 70% of all babies born every year are born to unmarried parents.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Heck, I heard very little about pre-marital sex, too. Growing up it was acceptable to have sex out of wedlock, but much less acceptable to have a baby out of wedlock. If unmarrieds were having sex people turned a blind eye. If they got pregnant there would be a flurry of gossip usually starting off with "Don’t they know what causes that? How could that happen? Weren’t they “being careful?” I live in Wayne County, MI where literally 70% of all babies born every year are born to unmarried parents.

I live in Wayne County, too. I assure you, my wife and I are having the other 30%.

 

[MJJean]

I live in Wayne County, too. I assure you, my wife and I are having the other 30%.

:tiphat: @ your wife then!

Also, since it was brought up earlier, masturbation was seen as normal, natural, and children were taught it was ok to masturbate as long as they were doing it in private.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Adamski and Jon—In that video Driscoll very clearly says that we don’t know masturbation is a sin by Divine revelation in the Bible, but we do know lust is a sin by Divine revelation, so therefore we can know masturbation is a sin because in involves lust in any humanly normal case.

So I’m puzzled, Adamski. You say the video gives Driscoll’s rationale for masturbation. Huh? In reality, it gives Driscoll’s reasoning for why masturbation is a sin. I’m not sure how it is that you’re misunderstanding the video.

Well, I agree he takes a conservative stance, but he flat out says “masturbation is not a sin”. It is a sin though even if you are thinking of tractors like he used in his example.

 

[DAML72]

There is NO cohesive Protestant teaching on divorce. That’s partly how I ended up in the Catholic church.

 

[Protestor]

I love how he ruffles peoples feathers. Normally they are not really listening to him which is hilarious.

There is no general teaching in protestantism on divorce, contraception.

Most of the types of protestants I have come in contact with do not talk about these subjects because they are thought to be personal except for divorce. Most of the people within the church I have seen get a divorce had some form of cheating involved at it’s core reasoning, and the others usually are not currently attending and after either one or both of the people change churches or stop going to church all together.

 

[Robyn_p]

Scripture is silent on non abortive contraception so our confessions are silent on it as well.

I’m confused. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Lutheranism (as well as all protestant churches) opposed to contraception just 85 years ago? And wasn’t Martin Luther himself pretty outspoken against it? Scripture was just as silent on the issue back then as it is now, but Martin Luther didn’t seem to have a problem condemning it or think he should therefore be silent on it.

I guess I’m just confused what changed.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

The Protestants I know have nothing in common with what I’m reading here. They marry for life and don’t consider divorce an option. In fact, many of them refuse to use contraception.

I recommend people not take the worst examples they’ve seen and project them onto all Protestants. We don’t like when people take the worst examples of Catholics, and paint us all that color.

 

[DAML72]

The Protestants I know have nothing in common with what I’m reading here. They marry for life and don’t consider divorce an option. In fact, many of them refuse to use contraception.

I recommend people not take the worst examples they’ve seen and project them onto all Protestants. We don’t like when people take the worst examples of Catholics, and paint us all that color.

Amen!

 

[Protestor]

Robyn_p:

guess I’m just confused what changed.

Nothing changed within the protestant view as far as I know, but I would be surprised if those leaders claimed to know for certain that contraception was immoral.

Does the CC claim that any sexual act that is not vaginal intercourse is immoral? Maybe I just don’t know the history of the Prot church well enough. Did certain groups ever claim to have divine truth on subjects like this or any subject for that matter? Just general questions.

 

[ltwin]

Heck, I heard very little about pre-marital sex, too. Growing up it was acceptable to have sex out of wedlock, but much less acceptable to have a baby out of wedlock. If unmarrieds were having sex people turned a blind eye. If they got pregnant there would be a flurry of gossip usually starting off with "Don’t they know what causes that? How could that happen? Weren’t they “being careful?” I live in Wayne County, MI where literally 70% of all babies born every year are born to unmarried parents.

Also, since it was brought up earlier, masturbation was seen as normal, natural, and children were taught it was ok to masturbate as long as they were doing it in private.

I’m not sure what kind of Protestants you guys were raised as, but it seems like yall were raised as country club Protestants.

I can assure you that there are vasts parts of Protestantism where pre-marital sex is taught to be sin (and not just when someone gets caught pregnant). In fact, there are a lot of Protestants who get a bad rap for being too strict on their children when it comes to dating.

And when it comes to masturbation, as a guy growing up in an evangelical church I can assure you that it is taught to be sinful. Yes, I think most people realize that it is “natural” for people to start doing that at a certain age. However, just because something is “natural” does not make it righteous. Violence is natural within our world, but it is not God’s desire for his creation.

Also, the subject of lust, masturbation, and pornography is most often brought into the larger context of spiritual bondage and strongholds. Just as Mark Driscoll brings up in the linked video, Christians are not supposed to be mastered by anything other than Christ. So, the addictive/compulsive dimension to all of this is another reason why Protestants would preach that people need to stay away from it altogether.