Contraception
- Thread starter DD2008
- Start date
- Apr 5, 2007
- 140,184
- 25,220
- 55
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Married
It depends on what you mean by contraception. I am sure that you don't mean using abortion to control birth. But from what I have read/heard, sometimes 'the pill' will prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb, which basically causes abortion at an early stage.
But using other reasonable means to prevent conception would be okay, in my view. We use contraception (we are both 'fixed') due to the fact that another pregnancy could kill my wife. Could we just trust God to get her through another pregnancy? Sure. We could also quit using our seatbelts, run with scissors, let our kids play in the street, etc.
We have been fruitful and multiplied. So I think that we have been faithful to God in that aspect.
It may be more than you asked, but there you go.
Upvote
0
- Sep 5, 2005
- 20,808
- 10,316
- 67
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
Upvote
0
mlqurgw
Well-Known Member
- Aug 19, 2005
- 5,828
- 540
- 69
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I don't question anyone who decides either way. That is between them and God. I think it is more a matter of liberty. If someone doesn't use it out of a legalist stance it is wrong but not because it is a sin in and of itself.
Upvote
0
I haven't seen anything in the bible about it. Onan was simply trying not to get the girl pregnent because he didn't want his kid to be called his brother's. I think that was his sin.
However, I'm not 100% on that.
The tradition of the Church held that it was a sin until the Anglicans first allowed it in the early 20th century. They are also the first to allow divorce and the first to allow an openly gay bishop.
However, I'm not 100% on that.
The tradition of the Church held that it was a sin until the Anglicans first allowed it in the early 20th century. They are also the first to allow divorce and the first to allow an openly gay bishop.
Upvote
0
mlqurgw
Well-Known Member
- Aug 19, 2005
- 5,828
- 540
- 69
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
The tradition of the Church was in order to control the lives of people. It was about power not truth. Kind of reminds me of politicians today. The Anglicans went too far the other way.
Upvote
0
True. Contraception isn't mentioned in scripture and Paul does tell us not to go beyond the letter. And that all scripture is inspired by God to equip us for every good work. So, if it was important it would be in there I guess.
Roman Catholics are pretty stern about it though. They say that Onan's sin was the sin of contraception not the sin of avoiding his duty to his brother. I think his sin was avoiding his duty to his brother. What do you think?
Anyone think Onan's sin was contraception?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Knight
Knight of the Cross
- Apr 11, 2002
- 3,395
- 117
- 50
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Depends on the method involved...
Some methods basically destroy the fertilized egg. This is, as has already been said, an early form of abortion. Scripture definitely condemns that.
Other methods simply delay ovulation thus preventing conception from taking place. No abortion there.
No method is 100% (apart from abstinence). If God wants you to have a child then you will.
Some methods basically destroy the fertilized egg. This is, as has already been said, an early form of abortion. Scripture definitely condemns that.
Other methods simply delay ovulation thus preventing conception from taking place. No abortion there.
No method is 100% (apart from abstinence). If God wants you to have a child then you will.
Upvote
0
- Sep 13, 2005
- 3,978
- 226
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Constitution
In my family studies class (a stupid gen-ed), a question was asked about what you would do if you were divorced and your 14 year old daughter wanted to take birth control pills--would you ask your spouse? To a lot of people, this sounded completely normal and they all agreed that yes, they would ask. I just piped up that NO 14 year old child of mine would EVER be taking birth control . . .
Between a man and his wife, I believe that it is alright, but our society has taken to an extreme and has made pre-marital sex not only acceptable but it has also glorified and enabled it. From my time working in a pharmacy, I was completely grieved at the number of young girls and unmarried women who were on the pill. While I understand that some need it for other health reasons, I highly doubt that these all of females were taking it to assist merely with PMS or some other medical reason.
Between a man and his wife, I believe that it is alright, but our society has taken to an extreme and has made pre-marital sex not only acceptable but it has also glorified and enabled it. From my time working in a pharmacy, I was completely grieved at the number of young girls and unmarried women who were on the pill. While I understand that some need it for other health reasons, I highly doubt that these all of females were taking it to assist merely with PMS or some other medical reason.
Upvote
0
McWilliams
Senior Veteran
I too was aware of those issues as my DH was a pharmacist. Because he knew and understood the issues involved he said that I was never to take birth control pills.
The 15 yr old daughter of friends of mine now takes Cialis for pulmonary hypertension. Now I think they should have and could have called it something else rather than for her to know what else her Rx was mostly used for.
The whole medical field over prescribes drugs and so many doctors seem to think if a patient comes to them they must be given Rxs! This was not the case years ago as doctors were true humanitarians and listened and counseled and taught their patients. That is far fetched today in medicine.
The 15 yr old daughter of friends of mine now takes Cialis for pulmonary hypertension. Now I think they should have and could have called it something else rather than for her to know what else her Rx was mostly used for.
The whole medical field over prescribes drugs and so many doctors seem to think if a patient comes to them they must be given Rxs! This was not the case years ago as doctors were true humanitarians and listened and counseled and taught their patients. That is far fetched today in medicine.
Upvote
0
Calvinist Dark Lord
Regular Member
- Apr 8, 2003
- 1,589
- 468
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
i don't know about that these days. Physicians are aware of the problem of over prescription of antibiotics, and how it has resulted in resistant strains of various bacteria (MRSA comes to mind).
A female friend once told me that in those days, if a man had a complaint he was given a complete physical. If a woman had a complaint, she was given a prescription for valium, or some other 'mother's little helper'...remember the TV commercials for Cope, which was available without prescription?
Upvote
0
Calvinist Dark Lord
Regular Member
- Apr 8, 2003
- 1,589
- 468
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
i've heard that prevention of implantation of the fertilised ova is a secondary mechanism of the pill. That may be so, and it is also irrelevant.
The primary mechanism of the pill is to prevent conception, and in that it works well.
As for the other, what is not mentioned by critics of contraception is the fact that using NO BIRTH CONTROL AT ALL will result in the woman spontaneously aborting over half of the conceptions that she carries.
Unless the critics can show a correlation between that and a woman using the pill, there is no real argument.
It has been argued that even the so-called 'morning after pill' does not use the failure of implantation mechanism as it's primary one, but i find that straining at the bounds of credibility.
The bottom line is that the whole issue of contraception, and the more general topic of the sex life of married couples is nobody's business, and the church should stay out of the matter except in very limited circumstances.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Calvinist Dark Lord
Regular Member
- Apr 8, 2003
- 1,589
- 468
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Ah, yes, the diaprax. You have learned well young one, reject the premise of the question.
Of course i'm surprised that you didn't reject the divorced part of the premise, which was of course the real issue that you were being conditioned to accept.
i can remember a time in my own Presbyterian tradition when a divorced man would never have been allowed to become an elder. Now in my previous congregation, we had a pastor who was twice divorced, and remarried to a third wife. He was actually moderator of our General Assembly a few years back.
How the mighty have fallen.
Upvote
0
JCFantasy23
In a Kingdom by the Sea.
- Jul 1, 2008
- 46,723
- 6,386
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
I remember following a thread closely, and contributing to it, back when I started on CF forums. It was a thread that discussed just this scripture, with a Catholic giving their backing and people who disagreed with the interpretation theirs. Of course the thread turned heated, as you can imagine. There's no reason for that to happen here.
I studied the scripture presented, read both sides, and really came to believe it is not forbidding contraception. You may be able to dig the old post up if you are curious about it. PM me if you can't find it, I'm sure I can dig it up since I commented on it, but I just found the arguments much more conclusive with it being more of a sin for him just to not want to get her pregnant for stubbornness sake and to shun his responsibility (not against birth control in general)
What I believe is our wonderful Lord wishes for us to take care of our bodies and ourselves. For some women - and men - this means not having children, either for psychological or physical reasons. He has different plans for all of us.
Upvote
0
Atlantians
Student of Theology and History.
- Mar 28, 2006
- 5,233
- 309
- 34
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
