The bible does not say that contraception is ok!

[mark_a]

My thread title was inspired by the “the bible does not say to pray to saints” thread.

 

[Grace_Angel]

My thread title was inspired by the “the bible does not say to pray to saints” thread.

Of course the Bible cannot say that contraception is OK. Because it isnt. The Bible is the Word of God and therefore Truth and Love and Life, contraception is the antithesis of all of this.
Contraception forces the body to speak the language of lies instead of the language which is inscribed into its being.
Contraception is the anti sacrament of all sacraments. Contraception changes the ethos of the “one flesh union” from one of holiness and in the image of God, that is life giving , to one of sterility and death.
The Bible could not possibly speak of contraception and indeed the only place where there is a hint of contraception (Gen 38:9)
Yahweh showed His displeasure.
Grace Angel.

 

[mark_a]

Of course the Bible cannot say that contraception is OK. Because it isnt. The Bible is the Word of God and therefore Truth and Love and Life, contraception is the antithesis of all of this.
Contraception forces the body to speak the language of lies instead of the language which is inscribed into its being.
Contraception is the anti sacrament of all sacraments. Contraception changes the ethos of the “one flesh union” from one of holiness and in the image of God, that is life giving , to one of sterility and death.
The Bible could not possibly speak of contraception and indeed the only place where there is a hint of contraception (Gen 38:9)
Yahweh showed His displeasure.
Grace Angel.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I’m looking for some Protestant points of view on this too.

Any takers?

 

[Kay_Cee]

I have a similar situation with a Protestant friend.

He frowns upon priestly celibacy because, as he says, “It’s not natural.”

However, he thinks contraception is okay.

 

[NotWorthy]

I have a similar situation with a Protestant friend.

He frowns upon priestly celibacy because, as he says, “It’s not natural.”

Not natural?!? How can you say Jesus was not natural???

 

[Kay_Cee]

Not natural?!? How can you say Jesus was not natural???

Actually, I think he’s right. In the natural, biological course of things, adults have sexual desire for the opposite sex and mate.

But I should be quick to point out there are two ways a thing can be “not natural.”

One way is by being unnatural. And I agree with you–this would make Jesus (and St. Paul) unnatural.

The second way a thing is “not natural” is by being supernatural. I would say this is how priestly celibacy is “not natural.” Jesus did say some would be eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom. The giving up of sexual relations for something better is supernatural–that is, greater than nature.

Does that make sense?

 

[Cari]

I wish someone would explain this to my sister-in-law, AND her pastor’s wife, who both contend that chemical birth control is evil (due to the possibility of causing an abortion), yet have no problem with non-chemical forms. In fact, the pastor’s wife had her tubes not simply “tied”, but actually BURNED to make sure she was rendered barren.

It literally makes my stomach feel sick to hear people talk so blithely about the things they do to their body, the temple of the Holy Spirit, to avoid children, the blessing of the Lord.

 

[KarenNC]

The Bible could not possibly speak of contraception and indeed the only place where there is a hint of contraception (Gen 38:9)
Yahweh showed His displeasure.
Grace Angel.

Gen. 38:8-9 (my emphasis added)

8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so he put him to death also.

Would you advocate requiring a man to have sex with his brother-in-law’s widow so that his brother can posthumously have a child, which is what this passage is about? Context is important. I can see it as an argument for the approval of sperm donation for widows without children, perhaps, but as one against contraception between married couples who are trying to space pregnancies or avoid them for health reasons seems a bit of a stretch.

I find it interesting that Onan’s name was used as a term for masturbation, when it sounds much more like coitus interruptus.

 

[mark_a]

8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so he put him to death also.

Would you advocate requiring a man to have sex with his brother-in-law’s widow so that his brother can posthumously have a child, which is what this passage is about? Context is important.

I don’t think the context escapes anyone here. But things were very, very different back then. As different as things were though, verse 10 above shows what the Lord thought of it at that time.

Did the changing of this law change the command to “be fruitful and multiply”? Was Protestant tradition wrong for the first 300 years?

I can see it as an argument for the approval of sperm donation for widows without children, perhaps, but as one against contraception between married couples who are trying to space pregnancies or avoid them for health reasons seems a bit of a stretch.

I agree that this one passage is a bit of a stretch, perhaps this is why bible only Christians have a problem with it, although as stated above, Protestant tradition agreed with the Catholic one for more than 300 years.

I find it interesting that Onan’s name was used as a term for masturbation, when it sounds much more like coitus interruptus.

Its almost like it ain’t real sex if the seed is spilled on the ground.

My signature links to an article written by a Protestant that shows what the original reformers thought of contraception.

What has changed besides the teaching of these Protestant Churches?

 

[leonie]

How many times is being barren considered a great suffering whereas is fertility is considered a great blessing.

Sarah, Hannah, Rachel, Elizabeth all suffered from infertility and greatly lamented it.