Contraception

[alexnbethmom]

a blessing is a blessing, PW. and from the amount of facepalms i've done reading this thread, i have a permanent dent in my forehead now. it's abundantly clear that you and bach and whoever else have absolutely ZERO intent of ever understanding where kae or i are coming from - so i will take my apparently heathen self and excuse myself from this thread, for real this time.

 

[filosofer]

I don't state that couples must have children to be a valid marriage. I've stated that the primary purpose of marriage is childbearing and the primary function of marital relations is to produce children.

That does not seem to be Paul's point in Ephesians 5:21–33, rather that the marriage reflects the relationship of Christ to the Church.

But what do I know...

 

[WildStrawberry]

And thinking that Adam and Eve didn't enjoy the blessings of the marriage bed while in the garden is pure speculation.

Duh. Reread what I wrote. I fully showed that it's speculation on my part.

Why would they be denied that while in the garden? What possible logic and what possible justification would there be for that?

Never said they were. In fact, I posited that they might have been lovers along with partners and helpers to one another. We only know that Adam "knew His wife, Eve, and she bore a son" (giggle alert...My autocorrect changed son to sin. A wee bit of irony, eh?) AFTER the fall. Sort of like we don't know if there were children in the Garden, though iirc, Cain was considered the firstborn. We also don't know how much time took place between the end of chapter 2 and the beginning of chapter 3. The Bible doesn't tell us because we have no need to know.

As for justification, who of us knows the mind of God? If you look at sexual desire as being one of the consequences of knowing you're naked, then it can be reasoned that desire wasn't "there" until the fall. Do I believe it? I'm not sure. I'm not a fan of looking into other people's sex lives. It queezes the tum.

 

[bach90]

That does not seem to be Paul's point in Ephesians 5:21–33, rather that the marriage reflects the relationship of Christ to the Church.

But what do I know...

I would agree with that view, Ephesians makes that obvious in 5:25.

Christ did not withhold anything in giving himself to the Church. V. 28 talks about husbands loving their wives as they do their own bodies, and Ephesians then references Gen 1 immediately after tying in the mystery of the family with the mystery of the blessing given to Adam and Eve.

What does all this mean? In contraception, part of the body is withheld from the other spouse. To withhold opart of yourself from your lover is not how Christ loved the Church, to which he gave himself entirely. To treat the body merely as an instrument of pleasure is not to love yourself or your wife in the best possible way. If the marital act is only about pleasure, then you're merely using the other person for your own needs, which is essentially lust not love at that point. I'm not viewing the marital act as something to be frowned upon like a puritan, it is in fact how man and wife share in the activity of divine creation, becoming in fact, creators of new life. When the creation aspect is removed, then the goal of the marital act is merely basal pleasure, removed from the high dignity that God had given to it, as we sinners tend to do to divine ordinances.

Oh, and Baptism, Ephesians 5 is talking about Baptism as a new birth related to creation too, but I think we all agree on that.

 

[DaRev]

That's because the bible doesn't say that God commanded that married couples must have children. I also don't believe anyone remotely has claimed that here either.

Trying to "start" a discussion on a strawman argument doesn't work either.

Really??? Have you even been reading what's been posted here???

 

[DaRev]

Perhaps it *would* be wiser for those people to end their participation in the thread if they're going to continue to ignore parts and read too much into what is being said.

So, you're going to stop posting in this thread?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

a blessing is a blessing, PW. and from the amount of facepalms i've done reading this thread, i have a permanent dent in my forehead now. it's abundantly clear that you and bach and whoever else have absolutely ZERO intent of ever understanding where kae or i are coming from - so i will take my apparently heathen self and excuse myself from this thread, for real this time.

A prime example of reading too much into what is being said. Thanks!

Duh. Reread what I wrote. I fully showed that it's speculation on my part.

Never said they were. In fact, I posited that they might have been lovers along with partners and helpers to one another. We only know that Adam "knew His wife, Eve, and she bore a son" (giggle alert...My autocorrect changed son to sin. A wee bit of irony, eh?) AFTER the fall. Sort of like we don't know if there were children in the Garden, though iirc, Cain was considered the firstborn. We also don't know how much time took place between the end of chapter 2 and the beginning of chapter 3. The Bible doesn't tell us because we have no need to know.

As for justification, who of us knows the mind of God? If you look at sexual desire as being one of the consequences of knowing you're naked, then it can be reasoned that desire wasn't "there" until the fall. Do I believe it? I'm not sure. I'm not a fan of looking into other people's sex lives. It queezes the tum.

So children were a result of the fall??

So, you're going to stop posting in this thread?

I'm not the one reading into things. I've quoted the Fathers, you've ignored it. An article was posted that makes some awesome points, you've ignored that as well. Your wife has gone on thinking suddenly that we're calling her a heathen and a sinner. I've said several times that I don't think married couples MUST have children, nor do I think it's necessarily sinful if a married couple don't have children.

For once, stop letting your bias against me rule your responses and address the ECFs and the article and scriptures that have been posted.

What would you say to Luther if he was around after reading his quote about birth control? How would you argue the points made in the article? Start with that rather than your personal disdain and dislike for me, okay?

 

[WildStrawberry]

So children were a result of the fall?

Did I say that? Nope. Do I believe that? I don't know...it's an interesting thought.

Did children come about because of the fall? Well, we know that one Child came about because of the fall...Christ Jesus. As through one man all have sinned, also through one Man, all are saved. (Kae's translation.)

We don't know when Adam and Eve started to have children and it doesn't really matter, does it? It was a theory that I put forth. Maybe children were a gift God gave mankind because they would lose their face time with Him. Who of us has ever looked into the face of a child and not seen the face of God?

Maybe Eve bore children in the Garden...or maybe they really WERE found under cabbage leaves or delivered by storks...and it was a breeze. We know that God told her that, after the fall, she would bear kids in pain and suffering. I don't know what it's like but I've heard stories. Give me the cabbage leaf! (*wink*) That seems to say that she knew childbirth in a very easy way.

All of this is pure speculation based on what the Bible actually tells us.

1. Adam needed a helper/companion and none was found among the animals so God performed surgery and created Eve. Therefore, Eve was literally created to be Adam's companion.

2. No mention was made of children before chapter 3. God made Adam. God made Eve. And it was very good.

3. As sinful beings, seeing a (reasonably attractive) nude member of the opposite sex leads to desire/lust/whatever. We aren't told that Adam had any heavy breathing moments about Eve before they both ate the fruit or vice versa. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. We. Don't. Know. But one can extrapolate that it's very possible that sex either wasn't a part of their lives OR it was part of their lives given to them for pleasure and to be close to one another.

4. The verse about man and woman coming together to become one flesh comes before any mention of childbirth, Adam knowing Eve, or children. Could this be a type of literary tool? I'm not sure. I've never studied the book of Genesis as a literary manuscript before. I know that there's a lot of literary stuff going on in it, though. Perhaps it's how Moses was telling the story. Perhaps it's exactly what happened. Speculation on our part.

5. I brought it up as a thought, a theory. Do I think children are sinful? Well, yes and no. Children are born sinful. The Bible tells us this. Are they sinful to have? Nope. Are they sinful not to have? Nope.

My whole reasoning is this: God loves each of us equally. He knows each of us intimately. He knows His plans for us. WE DON'T! We can only trust in Him and in His Word. This is what I do. This is what I'm getting spanked for doing. LOL I'm glad to be able to explain myself, but I hope that we can part agreeing to disagree on this one. I know me, I don't know you. I pray that we meet at the gates of heaven one day knowing that we both loved the other as Christian Sisters and Brothers.

Kae

 

[Redhead11]

“Although it is very easy to marry a wife, it is very difficult to support her along with the children and the household. Accordingly, no one notices this faith of Jacob. Indeed, many hate fertility in a wife for the sole reason that the offspring must be supported and brought up. For this is what they commonly say: ‘Why should I marry a wife when I am a pauper and a beggar? I would rather bear the burden of poverty alone and not load myself with misery and want.’ But this blame is unjustly fastened on marriage and fruitfulness. Indeed, you are indicting your unbelief by distrusting God’s goodness, and you are bringing greater misery upon yourself by disparaging God’s blessing. For if you had trust in God’s grace and promises, you would undoubtedly be supported. But because you do not hope in the Lord, you will never prosper.”
― Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, The: 7 Volumes

 

[DaRev]

We don't know when Adam and Eve started to have children...

Actually, we do. And it was after the Fall. It was then that the woman's name was changed to "Life" (Chai'vah). Prior to that she was simply known as the female "Adam" (human being).

 

[WildStrawberry]

Actually, we do. And it was after the Fall. It was then that the woman's name was changed to "Life" (Chai'vah). Prior to that she was simply known as the female "Adam" (human being).

Thanks, Rev! I thought that was when it happened, but I wanted to err on the side of not being sure rather than pure (heh I typed "purr" there..) speculation.

I think it does make an interesting supposition regarding WHY children became. Certainly to propagate the Earth, but could it have also been because we lost that "face time" with God?

Interesting. I must ponder this.

 

[Upper Cut]

All contraception, with the exception of barrier protection is potentially is potentially causing an abortion.