Is contraception sinful according to Genesis 38?

dqhall · Dec 14, 2019

Kilk1 said:
Hello! In Genesis 38, Er had a wife named Tamar. Because he was wicked, God killed him (v. 7). According to the customs of the time, Er's brother, Onan, should enter a levirate marriage with her to produce offspring continuing his brother's line (v. 8). He knew the offspring wouldn't be his, though, so when he had relations with Tamar, Onan performed the contraceptive practice of withdrawal, emitting on the ground (v. 9). God wasn't pleased and killed him for what he did (v. 10).

Being someone who hasn't grown up hearing that contraception is wrong, this passage confuses me. While apparently not as prevalent an interpretation in the past, many today say that Onan's sin was not contraception, just violating the levirate custom. However, I came across John F. Kippley, who lists a number of reasons supporting the contraceptive interpretation in the essay "The Sin of Onan: Is It Relevant To Contraception?" starting at page 3. One is the argument that Judah and Shelah also violated the levirate custom but didn't die (vv. 13-18, 24-26).

Does Genesis 38 condemn contraception? While I'd appreciate it if you'd glance over pages 3-4 of the essay before replying, such isn't mandatory. Thanks!

The world population is growing 82 million people per year. This is more than the population of England added every year. Many are living in shacks without indoor plumbing. Some are thin, ragged, hungry and wanting. Having large families might increase poverty. Haiti is an example. It is an island with limited arable land. Some fish species were over fished to near extinction. Lust is growing faster than productivity. I abstain from sex, but others can not. Sex for pleasure is a major problem when more children are created than can be adequately supported and educated. I allow contraception.

ViaCrucis · Dec 14, 2019

Kilk1 said:
Hello! In Genesis 38, Er had a wife named Tamar. Because he was wicked, God killed him (v. 7). According to the customs of the time, Er's brother, Onan, should enter a levirate marriage with her to produce offspring continuing his brother's line (v. 8). He knew the offspring wouldn't be his, though, so when he had relations with Tamar, Onan performed the contraceptive practice of withdrawal, emitting on the ground (v. 9). God wasn't pleased and killed him for what he did (v. 10).

Being someone who hasn't grown up hearing that contraception is wrong, this passage confuses me. While apparently not as prevalent an interpretation in the past, many today say that Onan's sin was not contraception, just violating the levirate custom. However, I came across John F. Kippley, who lists a number of reasons supporting the contraceptive interpretation in the essay "The Sin of Onan: Is It Relevant To Contraception?" starting at page 3. One is the argument that Judah and Shelah also violated the levirate custom but didn't die (vv. 13-18, 24-26).

Does Genesis 38 condemn contraception? While I'd appreciate it if you'd glance over pages 3-4 of the essay before replying, such isn't mandatory. Thanks!

Onan's sin wasn't in using a method of contraception. But that he was putting an end to his brother's lineage deliberately by refusing to sire children after he had sworn to do so by accepting the levirate marriage.

Having committed himself to his deceased brother's wife to sire children for her and to perpetuate the brother's lineage, he reneged on his obligation and promise--that was his sin.

-CryptoLutheran

nolidad · Dec 14, 2019

JackRT said:
But at what cost? We are already pushing the earth's resources to the limit while at the same time polluting our environment and you wish to add to the problem.

Well I agree with you on pollution! At least America has been heading in the right direction and reducing pollution through clean coal technology, increased use of natural gas, and renewables.

But we are not even close to pushing the resources of the earth to its limits.

We have known fossil energy reserves of at least 4 centuries.

If we took all the earths population and gave them a 10'X10' room, we could fit the entire earths population in Texas with room to spare!

The US alone produces enough food to feed the earth with a subsistence diet.

The problem is politics not population.

chevyontheriver · Dec 14, 2019

ViaCrucis said:
Onan's sin wasn't in using a method of contraception. But that he was putting an end to his brother's lineage deliberately by refusing to sire children after he had sworn to do so by accepting the levirate marriage.

Having committed himself to his deceased brother's wife to sire children for her and to perpetuate the brother's lineage, he reneged on his obligation and promise--that was his sin.

-CryptoLutheran

And yet he could have simply declined the levirate marriage without God killing him. So it is more complex. Only once he accepted the marriage and then contracepted was he in trouble. What we CAN say is this one act of contraception was enough in God's eyes to kill him. Not even a second chance to do his duty the next night or some time in the future. Onan's one isolated act was sinful. Yes, it was done with evil intent to defraud his brother's wife, but it was one act.

nolidad · Dec 14, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
And yet he could have simply declined the levirate marriage without God killing him. So it is more complex. Only once he accepted the marriage and then contracepted was he in trouble. What we CAN say is this one act of contraception was enough in God's eyes to kill him. Not even a second chance to do his duty the next night or some time in the future. Onan's one isolated act was sinful. Yes, it was done with evil intent to defraud his brother's wife, but it was one act.

God has the right to act. It is His creation and we are His creatures. One act can bring the death penalty. God is absolutely sovereign and anything He chooses to do is within His sovereign right to do so!

S.O.J.I.A. · Dec 14, 2019

onan's act was engaging in intercourse and refusing to follow through with the reason he was permitted to have it with the woman he had it with.

Cis.jd · Dec 14, 2019

In most instances, yes but this also depends on the circumstance.
In a first world sense, i can understand why many would see contraception as a sin because of the lack of control and freedom of lust that happens.

However, in 3rd world countries - countries that have massive corruption and poverty, forbidding Contraception can be looked to as a sin because it is hard to believe that their governments and their church (who normally sticks their nose in the politics of these countries) is banning it other than corruption. The more the poor, the higher the chance of certain officials to remain in power and pass it to their line.

I used to work at a bank in the Philippines and I there was this young girl (below 18 if I recall) who is married and already has more than 4 kids. The only thing she can do to support them is go in these banks/office to sell snacks and barely makes 5$ a week.

Cis.jd · Dec 14, 2019

Celticroots said:
So I am a terrible sinful person because I don’t want children? Wonderful. I have a hard enough time taking care of myself. Why on earth would I want to add children to this mix?

Don't mind them. Many of them have 0 regard or respect for critical thinking. They give christianity a bad name, not just making it look silly but show it to be a negative religious ideology. Instead of "my chains are taken off" it's "you better not screw up". They are more controlled by satan because their only selling point about God is "you're going to hell".

Kilk1 · Dec 14, 2019

nolidad said:
Genesis 1 the command to our original parents was to be fruitful and multiply!
this was passed on from generation to generation.

I see no problem with contraception. I am convinced it is neither evil or good. It is motive that places a good or evil connotation to it. Couples wishing to wait for children- once again on the surface- I see no biblical issues with it.
those things are between teh couple and god. But to reject children altogether? that goes against th ecommand of God making 2 one flesh.

I can see it the way you're saying, that as long as you're fruitful and multiply, contraception is okay. It's still hard for me to know for sure, though, because I don't know of any Scriptures giving this balanced approached. For example, I know of Genesis 1 as well as Psalm 127:3-5, which compares children to arrows and says it's blessed to have a quiver full of children; these passages promote the principle that people should have children. But I don't know of any passages endorsing family planning.

Do you know of passages that support family planning? If this concept can be Scripturally (rather than assumptively) pegged in combination with the Scriptural principle of having children, then the case for contraception would be better, in my view. Thanks!

Kilk1 · Dec 14, 2019

As I see it, here's a summary of the case against contraception from Genesis 38:

First, if the essay I referenced is correct, Genesis 38:9 suggests Onan sinned in relation to the earth, not his brother. The New King James Version says that Onan "emitted on the ground," which accurately describes what happened. However, the word translated "emitted" doesn't literally mean "emit" or "spill"; rather, it means "destory" or "act corruptly." Young's Literal Translation says Onan "hath destroyed it to the earth." The essay I referenced says this:

The Hebrew verb shichet never means “to spill” or “waste.” Rather, it means to act perversely. The text also makes it clear that his perverse action was related toward the ground, not against his brother.

Second, while Onan's intentions definitely should be considered, verse 10 says that it was "the thing which he did," not merely his intentions, that "displeased the LORD" and led to his death.

Thirdly, Judah and Shelah also violated the levirate custom after this event, apparently, but didn't die (vv. 11-18, 24-26). The essay argues it thusly: "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 what that one did that the others did not do."

Considering these things, does Genesis 38 teach 1) that emitting on the ground was itself corrupt, 2) that the action of Onan was what "displeased the LORD," and 3) that Shelah's non-sexual avoidance of the levirate custom wasn't sinful, but Onan's sexual avoidance was?

Blade · Dec 15, 2019

Its a personal one for sure many will have to answer to God for. Not talking about "the LAW"

we were told not asked by God to be fruitful and multiply. Now God does not make us do anything. Adam and Eve were told don't eat of that tree and they did anyway.

God is a just God. He says what He means and means what He says. No "loop holes" what so ever. WE made those things. We say whats ok and not ok. We did it here

Were no ones God. So what a man and a woman want to do.. what ever it is. They alone will answer to God. Answering to God.. is in no way to be taking as a BAD thing

nolidad · Dec 15, 2019

Kilk1 said:
I can see it the way you're saying, that as long as you're fruitful and multiply, contraception is okay. It's still hard for me to know for sure, though, because I don't know of any Scriptures giving this balanced approached. For example, I know of Genesis 1 as well as Psalm 127:3-5, which compares children to arrows and says it's blessed to have a quiver full of children; these passages promote the principle that people should have children. But I don't know of any passages endorsing family planning.

Do you know of passages that support family planning? If this concept can be Scripturally (rather than assumptively) pegged in combination with the Scriptural principle of having children, then the case for contraception would be better, in my view. Thanks!

Well these arguments are very amorphous. There is no clear biblical mandate that says every time you have sex should be for procreation only. Nor is there a verse that says family planning is perfectly fine.
But even the rhythm method is a form of contraception. Once again because there is no clear mandate either way- we can only offer opinions based on the rest of Scripture.

God gives man great authority over the earth and his life in many areas. He also gave man the ability to discover things.The rhythm method of contraception has been around for a very long time. I am convinced that this decision when to have children (not if but when) is something that a couple should prayerfully consider and seek gods face on. There are so many variables to this kind of decision and the scriptures which show evidence for both sides. This is why I believe it is a decision god has left to us to seek Him on.

concretecamper · Dec 15, 2019

JackRT said:
But at what cost? We are already pushing the earth's resources to the limit while at the same time polluting our environment and you wish to add to the problem.

if the entire world attended a rock concert and assembled in one place, they would occupy a space less than the State of Delaware in the US. So please stop spreading such nonsense.

Kilk1 · Dec 16, 2019

nolidad said:
Well these arguments are very amorphous. There is no clear biblical mandate that says every time you have sex should be for procreation only. Nor is there a verse that says family planning is perfectly fine.
But even the rhythm method is a form of contraception. Once again because there is no clear mandate either way- we can only offer opinions based on the rest of Scripture.

God gives man great authority over the earth and his life in many areas. He also gave man the ability to discover things.The rhythm method of contraception has been around for a very long time. I am convinced that this decision when to have children (not if but when) is something that a couple should prayerfully consider and seek gods face on. There are so many variables to this kind of decision and the scriptures which show evidence for both sides. This is why I believe it is a decision god has left to us to seek Him on.

My main fear with contraception is if it goes against God's design for nature. Since homosexuality is against God's design for sexuality, what if contraception is the same? I suppose the rhythm method is harder to call an act against nature, though I haven't given much thought to it.

The Bible doesn't seem sympathetic to marital abstinence (1 Cor. 7:3-6), so if there are verses supporting family planning, contraception's likelihood of being permitted increases drastically. If family planning is a principle we believe today but not necessarily rooted in the Scriptures, however, it's possible that God wants couples to have sex regularly in a non-planned way, leading to a "quiver full of" children (Psalm 127:3-5). It doesn't seem such would be the case, but what "seems" to be right is insufficient evidence (Prov. 14:12; 16:25).

Therefore, do you know of any Bible verses in support of the concept of family planning? I don't know of any, but seeing some would help me. Thanks!

createdtoworship · Dec 17, 2019

nolidad said:
Not according to the Bible. One purpose for sex is to reproduce the population. the whens and hows are between the couple and God. But other than for some physical reasons- to not have children is disobedience to God.

I don't think sex is this unpleasurable thing, only for procreation. There is a reason God made it pleasurable. He could have made it like consuming food, either do it or die. But no, He made it pleasurable. So I think there is a mystery of Christ and His church here, there is a special fellowship that happens in the marriage bed.

nolidad · Dec 17, 2019

Kilk1 said:
My main fear with contraception is if it goes against God's design for nature. Since homosexuality is against God's design for sexuality, what if contraception is the same? I suppose the rhythm method is harder to call an act against nature, though I haven't given much thought to it.

The Bible doesn't seem sympathetic to marital abstinence (1 Cor. 7:3-6), so if there are verses supporting family planning, contraception's likelihood of being permitted increases drastically. If family planning is a principle we believe today but not necessarily rooted in the Scriptures, however, it's possible that God wants couples to have sex regularly in a non-planned way, leading to a "quiver full of" children (Psalm 127:3-5). It doesn't seem such would be the case, but what "seems" to be right is insufficient evidence (Prov. 14:12; 16:25).

Therefore, do you know of any Bible verses in support of the concept of family planning? I don't know of any, but seeing some would help me. Thanks!

Once again the bible gives no distinct absolute command of how and when to have have sex and how many children one should have! So in my opinion, it is one of those things that God has given people liberty on guided by the Holy Spirit.

nolidad · Dec 17, 2019

createdtoworship said:
I don't think sex is this unpleasurable thing, only for procreation. There is a reason God made it pleasurable. He could have made it like consuming food, either do it or die. But no, He made it pleasurable. So I think there is a mystery of Christ and His church here, there is a special fellowship that happens in the marriage bed.

I totally agree. And I don't believe sex is unpleasurable. It is the second highest desire in man after survival. But like everything else God made perfect, we as mankind have found ways to distort and cloud Gods' purposes for it. It is not for procreation only!

Kilk1 · Dec 17, 2019

nolidad said:
Once again the bible gives no distinct absolute command of how and when to have have sex and how many children one should have! So in my opinion, it is one of those things that God has given people liberty on guided by the Holy Spirit.

Thanks for the info!

nolidad · Dec 18, 2019

Kilk1 said:
Thanks for the info!

YOu're Welcome

Is contraception sinful according to Genesis 38?

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Dynamic UNO

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Member of His Church

Well-Known Member

In the grip of grace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads