Protestants: defend your use of artificial contraception

[Irish_Polock]

One way to he seeks for the kingdom is by bringing children into the world…Since when does our salvation depend on bringing children into the world? What about a woman who cannot have children because she was born in a way that prevents it. Does she lose her salvation? Where in the Bible or in Scripture is that written?

Abortion and contraception are different, one kills and the other prevents. Yes God has planned for us. Nothing happens that God don’t know about.

You are putting words in my mouth Kevin, salvation is not dependent on bringing children into the world. One way we will be judged is by the sacrifices that we have made, and a parent with 20 children (my family has had 10+ children for generations) has without a doubt sacrificed their life in order to raise their children in a good Christian home. This is tradition.

Yes, abortion and contraception are different - although they both they are the means to an end, which goes against the will of God.

This would be in line with the topic of free will.

 

[rev_kevin]

I think you took my questions out of the context of this thread. I was saying that if God knows someone even before they are formed in the womb, He knows this person as a zygote. Now is it right to interfere with God’s will for this zygote? I think its a legitimate question. Life begins at conception, not implantation, and just in case there is any gray area there, abortion is always evil.

I presume you are talking about a justifiable killing of a human being.

My answer is yes, for example: I could kill in defense of my family or myself or even another innocent person. I hope the need never arises.

Can a zygote live or form into a human if it don’t implant?

 

[rev_kevin]

You are putting words in my mouth Kevin, salvation is not dependent on bringing children into the world. One way we will be judged is by the sacrifices that we have made, and a parent with 20 children (my family has had 10+ children for generations) has without a doubt sacrificed their life in order to raise their children in a good Christian home. This is tradition.

Yes, abortion and contraception are different - although they both they are the means to an end, which goes against the will of God.

This would be in line with the topic of free will.

No I don’t think so. You said, “The Christian must seek first for the kingdom of God. One way he seeks for the kingdom is by bringing children into this world.” In order to seek the kingdom of God one must seek salvation first if you don’t bring children into the world you are not seeking the kingdom of God nor salvation.

So your saying if a married couple only has one child they don’t sacrifice their life for that one child? According to you in order for it to be a secrifice one must have a bunch of children or its no sacrifice.

Catholics use a certian method which does the same thing, The intent is not to have a child. If the intent is not to have a child, no matter what method you use, you are not bringing children into the world you are limiting how many children you want and preventing a child being born, The end result is the same NO CHILD.

HMMM how many children did Mary have. According to the CC only one and she remained a virgin. She limited the amount of children she had by remaining a virgin and by using your logic she did not make a sacrifce because she only had one child.

 

[rev_kevin]

If they have not been born yet, how can they perish?

And helllooo, your ABC is preventing them from being born so therefore thwarting God’s will for them.

Now I get it, you are doing ABC so that you can thwart God’s effort at creating people so that the end of the world will be delayed.

**For the simple reason that He gave one command regarding this: Go forth and multiply and the one who tried to contracept, He struck dead. Just so everyone is clear at to how exactly He feels about this wicked thing.

He’s being very clear about this: Only He and He alone can decide who will be WILLED into existence.**

I suggest that you read post 470 and 472 so you’ll know what and who you are laughting at. It was not my statement.

Man you found out our plan. Its to delay the end of the world. You are smatter then I thought you were.:tiphat::

Oh now here we go again with the repeating from you. :tsktsk::tsktsk: Its the “be fruitful and multiply” arguement and the “Onan” arguement thing again. Can you please come up with something else.

 

[benedictus2]

Oh now here we go again with the repeating from you. :tsktsk::tsktsk: Its the “be fruitful and multiply” arguement and the “Onan” arguement thing again. Can you please come up with something else.

When you come up with a rebuttal, then I will come up with a new one.

But since you have not refuted it yet, I am still waiting.

In you’re last attempt at rebuttal, you ended up rebutting YOUR OWN position so instead you confirmed mine.

So, have you done more research and finally come up with a real refutation of Onan other than quoting from a distorted Bible?

 

[benedictus2]

Oh now here we go again with the repeating from you. :tsktsk::tsktsk: Its the “be fruitful and multiply” arguement and the “Onan” arguement thing again. Can you please come up with something else.

You know why Onan is a very strong case against contraception ? Because God struck Him dead right there and then after He commited it. …

You see, if it was just about giving sons to his brother, well, God could have let him live, lay with his brother’s wife again and all would have been tickety boo.

But no. He just struck him dead. Just like that.

That shows you how great his displeasure is with regard contraception.

 

[Irish_Polock]

No I don’t think so. You said, “The Christian must seek first for the kingdom of God. One way he seeks for the kingdom is by bringing children into this world.” In order to seek the kingdom of God one must seek salvation first if you don’t bring children into the world you are not seeking the kingdom of God nor salvation.

So your saying if a married couple only has one child they don’t sacrifice their life for that one child? According to you in order for it to be a secrifice one must have a bunch of children or its no sacrifice.

Catholics use a certian method which does the same thing, The intent is not to have a child. If the intent is not to have a child, no matter what method you use, you are not bringing children into the world you are limiting how many children you want and preventing a child being born, The end result is the same NO CHILD.

HMMM how many children did Mary have. According to the CC only one and she remained a virgin. She limited the amount of children she had by remaining a virgin and by using your logic she did not make a sacrifce because she only had one child.

You’re projecting Kevin.

If a married couple has only one child, and that is the will of God, they have done all they can do and God will bless them for their sacrifice. This would be Gods will. If they have one child and then take up the practice of ABC, then this is certainly not Gods will, but their own selfish will.

As for the subject of NFP, I am not of the opinion that it is much different then ABC, although I do recognize the fact that Gods will CAN be achieved through it unlike most ABC’s.

 

[mark_a]

Can a zygote live or form into a human if it don’t implant?

Rev,
To be honest, I have about as much medical training as I have astronaut training. I can only repeat the information I’ve read, much of it from the drug companies that produce BC pills.

But for the sake answering this question, I’ll say no.

Now I’ll ask you a question, is it right for a person to interfere with God’s plan for a zygote?

 

[mark_a]

I see what you are saying. I think the distinction needs to be made, between contraception and actually terminating a preganacy. They can be two different things, but I don’t see the CC teaching it that way. Contraception prevents conception. I do think this is where the CC’s teaching about an Onanism comes in however, where the CC teaches the very act of spilling the seed to be evil. John Wesley also believed as the CC does and claimed not to engage in masterbation for such reasons.

It’s not just “spilling the seed” that’s disordered, the teaching includes women and comes from the Jewish teaching about misusing the sex organs.

Non Catholics will respond that what was wicked in God’s sight with Onan was the failure to keep the law,

I would say Protestants instead of non-Catholics. Many Orthodox Christians and Orthodox Jews have the same teaching.

not the spilling of the seed in itself-his act was evil because he did not keep the law.

But in deuteronomy, there is a punishment (public humiliation) prescribed for refusing to raise up an heir for one’s brother. Onan misused his sex organs while not fulfilling his obligation. And depending on the translation, may have done it multiple times.

This link , however unconvincing you may find it, does an excellent job of explaining the Jewish roots of the Catholic, Orthodox, Muslim, and pre-1930 reformed Christian teachings.

 

[Vanny]

Great post! Thanks for jumping in and sharing your valuable experience.

Thanks.
A couple of years ago Christianity Today had an article featuring
evangelicals who opposed artificial contraception, including a new book out
called “Open Embrace, a Protestant rethinks contraception.” the article was actually quite fair and balanced-so some Protestant’s have seen the light.
Me I see a line starting from the embrace of artificial contraception in the 1960’s straight through to the end of the family with genetic engineering/manipulation and transhumanism.
Too much to go into here, right now-but There are things that seem right but in the end lead to death to paraphrase the bible verse.
I think Human vitae speaks of sex being for both unitive and procreation not JUST for procreation.

 

[Curious_Hobbit]

I suggest that you read post 470 and 472 so you’ll know what and who you are laughting at. It was not my statement.

Man you found out our plan. Its to delay the end of the world. You are smatter then I thought you were.:tiphat::

Oh now here we go again with the repeating from you. :tsktsk::tsktsk: Its the “be fruitful and multiply” arguement and the “Onan” arguement thing again. Can you please come up with something else.

Rev Kev,
Can you please explain why it doesn’t matter to you that your interpretation of the Onan passage is at odds with almost 2,000 years of Christianity (catholic and protestant) and Many more years of Judaism? I’m sure the Jews have a much better understanding of the Hebrew context than we do. There are places in scripture where protestants and catholics disagree, for instance the “upon this rock I will build my church” in Matthew. Jews don’t believe Christ was the savior and there are many things Christians disagree with them on. Out of all the things there are to disagree about, why is it that Jews and Christians have ALWAYS interpreted Onan’s “wicked deed” as condemning contraception? Why is it that it has ALWAYS been understood that Onan was killed for spilling his seed and not for disobeying God? Much earlier in the thread you said something like " I don’t care about the history of protestantism or contraception, I have my own beliefs". How can you disregard thousands of years of Jewish and Christian tradition on this issue?

 

[mark_a]

Me I see a line starting from the embrace of artificial contraception in the 1960’s straight through to the end of the family with genetic engineering/manipulation and transhumanism.

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head!!

Best wishes!!

 

[larkin31]

…Out of all the things there are to disagree about, why is it that Jews and Christians have ALWAYS interpreted Onan’s “wicked deed” as condemning contraception?

I know that you asked Rev Kev, but I already gave an answer to this question: western religions (including Islam) all share an extreme form of body/soul dualism and an emphasis on the impurity of flesh and purity of spirit. Around sexuality, this dualism is further polarized to the point that this very deeply physical and pleasurable act is morally permissible ONLY in service of God. It should be no surprise that Christianity continues this same Jewish philosophical approach, since Christianity was born as a movement within Judaism. Islam, too, was quite familiar with both Jewish and Christian doctrine, and shares their body/soul dualism and emphasis on purity law.

 

[rev_kevin]

Rev Kev,
Can you please explain why it doesn’t matter to you that your interpretation of the Onan passage is at odds with almost 2,000 years of Christianity (catholic and protestant) and Many more years of Judaism? I’m sure the Jews have a much better understanding of the Hebrew context than we do. There are places in scripture where protestants and catholics disagree, for instance the “upon this rock I will build my church” in Matthew. Jews don’t believe Christ was the savior and there are many things Christians disagree with them on. Out of all the things there are to disagree about, why is it that Jews and Christians have ALWAYS interpreted Onan’s “wicked deed” as condemning contraception? Why is it that it has ALWAYS been understood that Onan was killed for spilling his seed and not for disobeying God? Much earlier in the thread you said something like " I don’t care about the history of protestantism or contraception, I have my own beliefs". How can you disregard thousands of years of Jewish and Christian tradition on this issue?

How can I disregard 2000 years of interpretation by the Jewish and Christian Protestant. Because for one I can. God gave me as mind to use and I see it as it is written. God killed Onan because he disobeyed the command to give his brother a child, not because he spilled his seed. See tradition has a way of getting mixed up. It can be added to and embilished. Its like you telling someone something and by time it gets around to you it has totally changed from the original wording and in 2000 years things can really be emblished and added to. 2000 years is a long time for something to stay in its original wording. So I don’t put too much into tradition. You say Jews don’t believe Christ is the savior and its clear from Scripture that he is. If they can be wrong about that they can be wrong about Onan. Catholics claim that the Pope in infallible when it comes to thing of morals and spiritual things. I find that hard to believe since all men are fallible. To me if someone wants their possition on certain things believed all they say is it was inspired by the HS so therefore people will believe them. How do you know for a fact that is true. Some say Mary stayed a virgin after Jesus was born but Scripture says she remained a virgin until her first child, a son, was born. There is even mention of Jesus’ brothers and sisters but people want to believe they were cousins. Now I’m not claiming to be a authority on everything but I see it how it is written and not how someone or some religion wants me to see it.

 

[rev_kevin]

When you come up with a rebuttal, then I will come up with a new one.

But since you have not refuted it yet, I am still waiting.

In you’re last attempt at rebuttal, you ended up rebutting YOUR OWN position so instead you confirmed mine.

So, have you done more research and finally come up with a real refutation of Onan other than quoting from a distorted Bible?

Here we go again. Stop playing games. When you come up with a rebuttal then I will come up with a new one. Sorry but thats what my 10 year old says.
So far you have just repeated this same line in just about every post you have written to me. I stand by what I say about Onan. I don’t and didn’t expect you to believe me just like you probably didn’t and don’t expect me to believe you. Now we can go back and forth on this and get nowhere. If you come up with something new, like you claim you have, then lets hear it. All I get from you is “you didnt come up with a rebuttal.” Yow ended up rebutting your own, and my I add you used capital letters in the attempt to make you look better, position instead you confirmed mine." Oh ya lets not forget the “distorted Bible” one that you seem to always use trying to make your point. If you can’t come up with something new that you claim you can then may I suggest we stop this childish back and forth game that you seem to enjoy. If you want to see this as me being put in a corner or that you have in some way won then by all means believe it but I can assure you you did not.

 

[rev_kevin]

Because God foreknew you even before you existed, since He is the one who brought you into existence.

And yes, God knew us while we were an egg and a sperm and he knew exactly which egg and sperm will bring about a you.

Read Psalm 139.

Could be God didn’t know them because they would never exist. See God knows everything and knowing everything he would know that they would not exist, and knowing that its possible he did not know them because they were not ment to exist. Yes God knew us while we were a egg and a sperm and even before that. Now using your logic he would also know which egg and sperm would not bring a life. There are millions of sperm that don’t make it to the egg so are all those lives lost also since they were ment to be life? Also all the eggs that did not get fertilized by the sperm because of contraception or the way Catholics practice contraception, are they lost lives also since they were ment to be life?

 

[rev_kevin]

You’re projecting Kevin.

If a married couple has only one child, and that is the will of God, they have done all they can do and God will bless them for their sacrifice. This would be Gods will. If they have one child and then take up the practice of ABC, then this is certainly not Gods will, but their own selfish will.

As for the subject of NFP, I am not of the opinion that it is much different then ABC, although I do recognize the fact that Gods will CAN be achieved through it unlike most ABC’s.

I beg to differ with you. It is very possible that God didn’t want them to have other children so the way this could be done is through ABC.

Now as far as the NFP goes, yes if it is God’s will it can be achieved but NFP still has the same intent of contraception and that is not to have children. Now as far as ABC let me tell you if its God will for you to have a child ABC will not get in the way. Believe me my second son is proof of that. So if God wants you to have a child nothing will stand in his way.

 

[rev_kevin]

Rev,
To be honest, I have about as much medical training as I have astronaut training. I can only repeat the information I’ve read, much of it from the drug companies that produce BC pills.

But for the sake answering this question, I’ll say no.

Now I’ll ask you a question, is it right for a person to interfere with God’s plan for a zygote?

Are so sure that its God’s plan for that person to have a child? Are you so sure that that wasn’t the plan for the zygote? If God wants you to have a child then nothing can stand in his way.

 

[agent_grey]

I am no protestent. But my answer is… “take care of the earth”.

If we had 15 children per couple we would destroy this planet inside of 100 years.

What we need to do is look at whether or not a life is put to death by our birth control methods. the Morning after pill, abortion, and the pill all lead to either blatant murder or the possibility of murder.

So long as the couple desires a child from god but looks to keep this commandment of both multiplying and preserving nature than it is all good.

Yes the church at a time said no to any form of birth control. That was a different era. Today we are at the point of hurting the earth with too many children. AT the same time if we have none the Gospel dies.

If 2 people are in love and want to express that love and keep the offspring to a responsible number all the while keeping the 1st 2 commandments to multiply and look after the planet. I do not see a problem. But no murderous plans and expect a few wonderfull babies along the way.

 

[mark_a]

Are so sure that its God’s plan for that person to have a child? Are you so sure that that wasn’t the plan for the zygote? If God wants you to have a child then nothing can stand in his way.

Rev, your logic reminds me of a friend I have who refuses to stop smoking because if God doesn’t want him to die, nothing he does to himself can shorten his own days.

A hundred posts ago, I thought this thread was finished. So I’ll check in on you later to be sure you haven’t changed your mind and decided to revert to Catholic.

Best wishes!!