Preventing Pregnancy Displeases Thee Lord

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's true -- so many Catholics are going directly against Church teaching and are putting judgment on themselves. Many Catholics--even practicing--have abandoned so much and may not make it to heaven. I'm not going by what Catholics practice, but what Christ has taught us and is being delivered to us through His Church. What individuals do vs. what Christianity teaches are two different things.

However, once again, this is not "the rhythm method." I know you think it is, but unless you do the research yourself, I know you'll only see it that way. I honestly don't believe couples who practice contraception intend to dishonor each other, but unbeknownst to them, they do. And since our souls are at stake, we can't afford to go by our own personal judgment -- we have to look toward guidance of the Holy Spirit to what is right and wrong, and He has always spoken to us through Scripture, through the Church, through reason, that contraception is a problem. And one of the biggest problems, even outside of marriage, is that it doesn't combat abortion, but it fuels it. You can't fight lies with half-truths and those who promote contraception as a way to curb abortion are doing just that. You can't claim to be pro-life and still accept contraception. It cannot be done.

We really have come full circle.

I can not agree with you my friend.

My dear brother.....please, please do not scare people by telling them that they are in danger of NOT going to heaven because they practice birth control. Birth control has nothing Biblically to do with one going or not going to heaven. Only faith in Christ is the in question when it come to our heavenly home.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you and I apologize if I have. Marriage is all about ONENESS not whether or not we go to heaven.

You have a lot of Catholic believers who read that birth control is a mortal sin by you and you will scare them to death. The protestant couples just ignore such things because they know that Birth control, is NOT a sin according to the Bible. The Catholic church may say that but Scriptures do not and that is what I think needs to be made clear.
 
I can not agree with you my friend.

My dear brother.....please, please do not scare people by telling them that they are in danger of NOT going to heaven because they practice birth control. Birth control has nothing Biblically to do with one going or not going to heaven. Only faith in Christ is the in question when it come to our heavenly home.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you and I apologize if I have. Marriage is all about ONENESS not whether or not we go to heaven.

You have a lot of Catholic believers who read that birth control is a mortal sin by you and you will scare them to death. The protestant couples just ignore such things because they know that Birth control, is NOT a sin according to the Bible. The Catholic church may say that but Scriptures do not and that is what I think needs to be made clear.

Indeed, we're at an impasse, and it's no surprise. We just won't see eye-to-eye on this one. And you're right that there is still so much that is being misunderstood by what I am saying. I wouldn't scare people into saying they will go to hell if they use birth control, but I will tell them that if they continue to disobey God knowing they are disobeying (I suspect there are many people who honestly have zero idea that they are disobeying God) they are putting judgment on themselves. There's a difference between a Christian who had zero knowledge of this being a sin and no one even proposed it and a Christian who did have knowledge of this, and even a reasonable doubt to believe it is a sin but continues to do it anyway.

We've had many discussions on justification here too, so I do not expect anyone to accept that as valid either. In fact, I suspect many people here believe I am on my way to hell. I don't say that as a divide, but based on discussion and what we've talked about here.

And as I suspect you stand by your position, I stand by mine.
 
That's true about the brother of the deceased husband and his role in carrying on the bloodline, but this was Mosaic law, divine law, especially for the role of populating Israel.

I thought Augustine made it pretty clear. Here's one quote (apologies if this was quoted already--I don't remember):
"I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. Sometimes this lustful cruelty, or cruel lust, comes to this, that they even procure poisons of sterility…Assuredly if both husband and wife are like this, they are not married, and if they were like this from the beginning they come together not joined in matrimony but in seduction. If both are not like this, I dare to say that either the wife is in a fashion the harlot of her husband or he is an adulterer with his own wife."

I wouldn't expect many in here to take Augustine's words with anything but a grain of salt -- his words mean nothing to most people here, but at the very least, it should be looked at as food for thought because he makes a jarring statement that a husband and wife who engage sexually with absolutely no consideration of procreation are not truly husband and wife. He means that in devoted sense of course, not a literal one.

Again, I'm really not arguing that sex isn't a versatile experience. I've been saying that this entire time. Sex isn't only about procreation. It's really not. But every time sex is performed, there must always be an openness to it, not even simply because you want a child every time, but because you honor your wife's or husband's procreative as part of them. Once you block that part of the spouse off, then you've just made it clear that you only want them partially, not entirely. It becomes less giving and more taking (as apposed to accepting).

We may be reaching our limit soon, but I don't want to block off anyone's responding comment if they have one first.
I do think you err in your thinking here Lysander.
Though I am a protestant and not an RCC adherent. I am interested in what Augustine thought and wrote. His (and some others) writings give us an insight into the forces that were shaping the early Church. That does not mean however that I place upon his writings the blanket honour of being divinely inspired. I believe it is incumbent on us all to weigh what these men thought and wrote against the recognized canon of scripture.
For most protestants that canon of course excludes the deuterocanonical books, so with that in mind, I conclude that he is expressing a view which does not appear to have the support of the recorded teachings of Jesus. Indeed it is, or ought to be a point of significance needing consideration and mention that of all the recorded (important) teachings of Jesus touching on marriage, not once are children mentioned as a necessary product of marriage, nor is their avoidance mentioned. It is not as though He never had the opportunity to teach against contraception or of the binding necessity of procreation.
Now this avoidance of conception is that not what you have spoken of in connection with salvation? How is this Lysander that the very person who came to save us never ever once mentioned it?

At this point as a protestant I need to decide which boat I should sail in; SS Jesus or VSS Augustine? SS Jesus has mighty trustworthy life buoys; enough for all passengers who will sail with Jesus.
I know of no such life buoys being supplied on the VSS Augustine. I'll leave it up to you to figure out which ship I have booked passage on.

I note and suggest therefore from reading Augustines words as you have supplied that it would seem perfectly reasonable to understand that he was aware of the practice by some women of practicing some form of contraceptive measure, even way back then. In fact his mention of poison seems to allude to the practice of using certain plant extract that are very anti life. He says in part "they even procure poisons of sterility"
Proof enough for me that contraception is not a new practice.
So Lysander, I for one have weighed what Augustine has said in your quoted material about the evils contraception within a marriage against the teachings of Jesus on this matter.
I do however agree that any practice that aborts a pregnancy it wrong...absolutely. Murder for convenience can never be right. That said, any method that is contraceptive (against conception, against fertilization) is not instructed against in Scripture. No, not even Onan, but you or anyone can read my take on that without my restating it.

You closed your post with
He means that in devoted sense of course, not a literal one.
It takes a very long stretch to make that conclusion from Augustine's words. Where he wrote ..."I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. ..." colour and underline emphasis added
It is clear that no amount of 'white wash' can cover the intent of his words He clearly discounts any degree of respectability for a couple who practice purposeful and deliberate contraception.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, we're at an impasse, and it's no surprise. We just won't see eye-to-eye on this one. And you're right that there is still so much that is being misunderstood by what I am saying. I wouldn't scare people into saying they will go to hell if they use birth control, but I will tell them that if they continue to disobey God knowing they are disobeying (I suspect there are many people who honestly have zero idea that they are disobeying God) they are putting judgment on themselves. There's a difference between a Christian who had zero knowledge of this being a sin and no one even proposed it and a Christian who did have knowledge of this, and even a reasonable doubt to believe it is a sin but continues to do it anyway.

We've had many discussions on justification here too, so I do not expect anyone to accept that as valid either. In fact, I suspect many people here believe I am on my way to hell. I don't say that as a divide, but based on discussion and what we've talked about here.

And as I suspect you stand by your position, I stand by mine.
Lysander, while I and many others disagree with you on many things, we do not (I at least) believe you are on your way to hell. That sort of judgment is way way beyond our call. Where you are headed is between you and Jesus and no other.
 
Lysander, while I and many others disagree with you on many things, we do not (I at least) believe you are on your way to hell. That sort of judgment is way way beyond our call. Where you are headed is between you and Jesus and no other.

By no means was I referring to you -- I wouldn't know what you think until now. I am referring to two who have told me for themselves.
 
I do think you err in your thinking here Lysander.
Though I am a protestant and not an RCC adherent. I am interested in what Augustine thought and wrote. His (and some others) writings give us an insight into the forces that were shaping the early Church. That does not mean however that I place upon his writings the blanket honour of being divinely inspired. I believe it is incumbent on us all to weigh what these men thought and wrote against the recognized canon of scripture.
For most protestants that canon of course excludes the deuterocanonical books, so with that in mind, I conclude that he is expressing a view which does not appear to have the support of the recorded teachings of Jesus. Indeed it is, or ought to be a point of significance needing consideration and mention that of all the recorded (important) teachings of Jesus touching on marriage, not once are children mentioned as a necessary product of marriage, nor is their avoidance mentioned. It is not as though He never had the opportunity to teach against contraception or of the binding necessity of procreation.
Now this avoidance of conception is that not what you have spoken of in connection with salvation? How is this Lysander that the very person who came to save us never ever once mentioned it?

At this point as a protestant I need to decide which boat I should sail in; SS Jesus or VSS Augustine? SS Jesus has mighty trustworthy life buoys; enough for all passengers who will sail with Jesus.
I know of no such life buoys being supplied on the VSS Augustine. I'll leave it up to you to figure out which ship I have booked passage on.

I note and suggest therefore from reading Augustines words as you have supplied that it would seem perfectly reasonable to understand that he was aware of the practice by some women of practicing some form of contraceptive measure, even way back then. In fact his mention of poison seems to allude to the practice of using certain plant extract that are very anti life. He says in part "they even procure poisons of sterility"
Proof enough for me that contraception is not a new practice.
So Lysander, I for one have weighed what Augustine has said in your quoted material about the evils contraception within a marriage against the teachings of Jesus on this matter.
I do however agree that any practice that aborts a pregnancy it wrong...absolutely. Murder for convenience can never be right. That said, any method that is contraceptive (against conception, against fertilization) is not instructed against in Scripture. No, not even Onan, but you or anyone can read my take on that without my restating it.

You closed your post with It takes a very long stretch to make that conclusion from Augustine's words. Where he wrote ..."I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. ..." colour and underline emphasis added
It is clear that no amount of 'white wash' can cover the intent of his words He clearly discounts any degree of respectability for a couple who practice purposeful and deliberate contraception.
 
Yes.....I would have to disagree with you on this.

I have really enjoyed the banter back and forth thanking God I was not in the middle of the arguments.

However I would like to say that the notion that the bearing of children is the only God-given purpose for marital relations is wrong.

The Bible stresses the true purpose; that God made man and woman to complete one another and to fulfill each other's needs.

I Corinthians 7:2-5 makes this very clear......
"Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence; and likewise, also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud you not one the other, except it be with the consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and in prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you because of you lack of self control." This passage very clearly teaches that the purpose of sexual relations is to fulfill the natural biological urge and thereby avoid fornication.

Thus, the doctrine that the only God-given purpose for marital relations is for the purpose of having children is wrong. Opposition to birth control is based on this false assumption. Many good people who have misunderstood the teaching of the Bible on this point, have mistakenly assumed that Genesis 1:28 applies to Christians today, when it says, "Be you fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it."

This, however, was, obviously, a command given to Adam and Eve, not to all mankind today. Not every command given to every individual in the Bible applies today; we are not to build an ark because Noah did, neither are we to stone adulterers because the Jews did. No Old Testament command applies today, because the Old Testament was fulfilled and replaced by the New Testament at the death of Christ. Study Romans 7:6; Galatians 3:23-25; Hebrews 9:15-17.

I understand that the Catholic view is that contraception is a sin but the Bible does not say that.
Good stuff here...Thank you, Major, for setting me straight again!
 
I do think you err in your thinking here Lysander.
Though I am a protestant and not an RCC adherent. I am interested in what Augustine thought and wrote. His (and some others) writings give us an insight into the forces that were shaping the early Church. That does not mean however that I place upon his writings the blanket honour of being divinely inspired. I believe it is incumbent on us all to weigh what these men thought and wrote against the recognized canon of scripture.
For most protestants that canon of course excludes the deuterocanonical books, so with that in mind, I conclude that he is expressing a view which does not appear to have the support of the recorded teachings of Jesus. Indeed it is, or ought to be a point of significance needing consideration and mention that of all the recorded (important) teachings of Jesus touching on marriage, not once are children mentioned as a necessary product of marriage, nor is their avoidance mentioned. It is not as though He never had the opportunity to teach against contraception or of the binding necessity of procreation.
Now this avoidance of conception is that not what you have spoken of in connection with salvation? How is this Lysander that the very person who came to save us never ever once mentioned it?

At this point as a protestant I need to decide which boat I should sail in; SS Jesus or VSS Augustine? SS Jesus has mighty trustworthy life buoys; enough for all passengers who will sail with Jesus.
I know of no such life buoys being supplied on the VSS Augustine. I'll leave it up to you to figure out which ship I have booked passage on.

I note and suggest therefore from reading Augustines words as you have supplied that it would seem perfectly reasonable to understand that he was aware of the practice by some women of practicing some form of contraceptive measure, even way back then. In fact his mention of poison seems to allude to the practice of using certain plant extract that are very anti life. He says in part "they even procure poisons of sterility"
Proof enough for me that contraception is not a new practice.
So Lysander, I for one have weighed what Augustine has said in your quoted material about the evils contraception within a marriage against the teachings of Jesus on this matter.
I do however agree that any practice that aborts a pregnancy it wrong...absolutely. Murder for convenience can never be right. That said, any method that is contraceptive (against conception, against fertilization) is not instructed against in Scripture. No, not even Onan, but you or anyone can read my take on that without my restating it.

You closed your post with It takes a very long stretch to make that conclusion from Augustine's words. Where he wrote ..."I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. ..." colour and underline emphasis added
It is clear that no amount of 'white wash' can cover the intent of his words He clearly discounts any degree of respectability for a couple who practice purposeful and deliberate contraception.
Augustine came a long time after the Early Church. We have no assurance that Augustine was led by the Holy Spirit any more than the Catholic Church was at that time.

Stop reading about what others believe is right about God.

There is only one way to come to know God/truth.

God is the only one who can teach him or her the truth.

(1 Corinthians 2:10-16) “These are the very things that God has revealed to us through the Spirit, for the Spirit reaches the depts. Of everything, even the depths of God. After all, the depths of a man can only be known by his own spirit, not by any other man, and in the same way the depths of God can only be known by the Spirit of God.-----------“
 
Well, it was a great discussion, but because we have reached full circle, we are closing shop for this thread. Thanks to everyone for participating.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top