Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In the Bible, God tells us to have children, but he doesn't tell me how many or when to have them. He tell me to marry, but He doesn't tell me who or when or how to propose. He tells me to work but He doesn't tell me what career. Christians should humbly and prayerfully submit to God for their childbearing - when they feel He wants them to have children, they should do away with the contraception...
Scripture tells us that children are a blessing. Scripture tells we married folks that we are to give ourselves one to another freely (stopping only to devote ourselves to prayer and fasting). Scripture tells us that He opens and closes the womb.
How exactly, in this context, do you feel that you influence when you have children, assuming a healthy sexual relationship between you and your spouse? A coming together of husband and wife is fruitful because of His hand, not because of the biological union of sperm and egg.
I whole-heartedly with your last sentence - but it fundamentally undermines your position. If we will have children when God wills, then no contraception will stand in the way. So what's the harm in using it, unless you believe God's plans can be thwarted?
Children are a blessing - so why does that preclude contraception?
Giving to each other freely sexually is wonderful - but that passage is in reference to sexual gratification, not childbearing.
God does open and close the womb - but can't contraception be the means He uses to open and close it?
I whole-heartedly with your last sentence - but it fundamentally undermines your position. If we will have children when God wills, then no contraception will stand in the way. So what's the harm in using it, unless you believe God's plans can be thwarted?
Children are a blessing - so why does that preclude contraception?
Giving to each other freely sexually is wonderful - but that passage is in reference to sexual gratification, not childbearing.
God does open and close the womb - but can't contraception be the means He uses to open and close it?
God does open and close the womb - but can't contraception be the means He uses to open and close it?
Is that what He used in Scripture? No. It is His hand directly.
God does open and close the womb - but can't contraception be the means He uses to open and close it?
Is that what He used in Scripture? No. It is His hand directly.
God does open and close the womb - but can't contraception be the means He uses to open and close it?
Is that what He used in Scripture? No. It is His hand directly.
When the Bible talks about God as the one who heals all your diseases it does not mention he used Tylenol. Should we avoid it?
Is that what He used in Scripture? No. It is His hand directly.
When the Bible talks about God as the one who heals all your diseases it does not mention he used Tylenol. Should we avoid it?
Is that what He used in Scripture? No. It is His hand directly.
When the Bible talks about God as the one who heals all your diseases it does not mention he used Tylenol. Should we avoid it?
If God heals our diseases, and we use Tylenol, then presumably we are using the means appointed to His desired end.
If God opens the womb, and we use our marriages to fill our quiver, then we are using the means appointed to His desired end.
If God opens the womb, and we are using birth control, then we are not using the means appointed to His desired end.
It appears that your argument refutes itself.
Cheers,
Adam
If God opens the womb, and we are using birth control, then we are not using the means appointed to His desired end.
Either way (and take this with a grain of salt from an unmarried man), I'm not sure that the idea that we are to try to have as many kids as possible isn't itself an over-reaction to the birth control mentality. Are we really supposed to shoot for "lots" as opposed to "few"? Or are we just supposed to have normal marital relations and leave it to our God to decide whether to grant us many or few?
It seems that when we place an emphasis on having as many kids as possible, it creates a feeling of shame or inferiority in those who do not attempt to prevent pregnancy, but simply have normal marital relations, and only a few children "to show for it."
If God opens the womb, and we are using birth control, then we are not using the means appointed to His desired end.
Does an open womb necessitate a full quiver?
You can say so if you want, but for me, it would be arrogance to take a different stand then pretty much all the Reformed churches in the world.
It seems that when we place an emphasis on having as many kids as possible, it creates a feeling of shame or inferiority in those who do not attempt to prevent pregnancy, but simply have normal marital relations, and only a few children "to show for it."
You can say so if you want, but for me, it would be arrogance to take a different stand then pretty much all the Reformed churches in the world.
Can you clarify this for me?
For example, do you believe that if God decrees that my wife and I are not to have children for the next 2 years, that God will have predestined something like my sperm to have motor defects over the next 48 months, or do you believe that there would be no natural explanation for for our inability to become pregnant, but that it is purely outside the realm of the ordinary? Phrases like yours above usually leave me feeling like you believe the latter - can you weigh in?
Is it not more arrogance to reject the well-nigh uniform teaching of fathers, scholastics and reformers for a few thousand years? Not to mention patriarchs, prophets and kings?
When the Bible talks about God as the one who heals all your diseases it does not mention he used Tylenol. Should we avoid it?
Is it not more arrogance to reject the well-nigh uniform teaching of fathers, scholastics and reformers for a few thousand years? Not to mention patriarchs, prophets and kings?
Yes, but with regards to what, specifically? (I'm honestly not trying to be dense; really!)
Is it not more arrogance to reject the well-nigh uniform teaching of fathers, scholastics and reformers for a few thousand years? Not to mention patriarchs, prophets and kings?
Yes, but with regards to what, specifically? (I'm honestly not trying to be dense; really!)
Augustine stated that a man who uses contraception with his wife is committing adultery. Contraception and abortion are virtually the same, according to Calvin and Luther. The desire not to create life and the desire to take life are viewed as the identical desire in the lion's share of theologians throughout time. This used to be the case in America, until the rise of modern eugenics.
Cheers,
Adam
You can say so if you want, but for me, it would be arrogance to take a different stand then pretty much all the Reformed churches in the world.
Can you clarify this for me?
You can say so if you want, but for me, it would be arrogance to take a different stand then pretty much all the Reformed churches in the world.
Can you clarify this for me?
Pretty much all the conservative confessional Reformed churches take strong stands on Justification, the Trinity, Election, Inerrancy etc.. but reading through denominational position papers I'm not sure how you could claim any sort of ecclesiastical authority behind the no birth control for any reason mentality.
Augustine also had some crazy views on sex (not a real good source to go to on this one)...
Part 3: I'm okay with some forms of birth control. However, I am not for NFP (natural family planning) or the Rhythm Method.
Can you clarify this for me?
Pretty much all the conservative confessional Reformed churches take strong stands on Justification, the Trinity, Election, Inerrancy etc.. but reading through denominational position papers I'm not sure how you could claim any sort of ecclesiastical authority behind the no birth control for any reason mentality.
Only the Church of Rome.
Here is Pope Pius VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae that reaffirmed the Vatican's absolute ban on birth control in the turbulent 1960's when many liberal catholics were calling for a change from Rome.
Humanae Vitae - Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Paul VI on the regulation of birth, 25 July 1968
-----Added 11/18/2009 at 04:43:09 EST-----
Augustine also had some crazy views on sex (not a real good source to go to on this one)...
Part 3: I'm okay with some forms of birth control. However, I am not for NFP (natural family planning) or the Rhythm Method.
We agree with Augustine on predestination and election. But there are many things we disagree with him on. He was still a papist in the Church of Rome for instance.
Pretty much all the conservative confessional Reformed churches take strong stands on Justification, the Trinity, Election, Inerrancy etc.. but reading through denominational position papers I'm not sure how you could claim any sort of ecclesiastical authority behind the no birth control for any reason mentality.
Only the Church of Rome.
Here is Pope Pius VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae that reaffirmed the Vatican's absolute ban on birth control in the turbulent 1960's when many liberal catholics were calling for a change from Rome.
Humanae Vitae - Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Paul VI on the regulation of birth, 25 July 1968
-----Added 11/18/2009 at 04:43:09 EST-----
Augustine also had some crazy views on sex (not a real good source to go to on this one)...
Part 3: I'm okay with some forms of birth control. However, I am not for NFP (natural family planning) or the Rhythm Method.
We agree with Augustine on predestination and election. But there are many things we disagree with him on. He was still a papist in the Church of Rome for instance.
He was a papist? I didn't know that.... Where is the proof on that?
1 Corinthians 10:31 Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
But when is it that "closing wombs" is ever described as a blessing? So the God who opens and closes wombs is akin to saying "the God who blesses (opens wombs) and withholds (closes wombs)."
Either way (and take this with a grain of salt from an unmarried man), I'm not sure that the idea that we are to try to have as many kids as possible isn't itself an over-reaction to the birth control mentality. Are we really supposed to shoot for "lots" as opposed to "few"? Or are we just supposed to have normal marital relations and leave it to our God to decide whether to grant us many or few? It seems that when we place an emphasis on having as many kids as possible, it creates a feeling of shame or inferiority in those who do not attempt to prevent pregnancy, but simply have normal marital relations, and have only a few children or no children "to show for it."
Curious, why not NFP or RM, if others?Augustine also had some crazy views on sex (not a real good source to go to on this one)...
Part 3: I'm okay with some forms of birth control. However, I am not for NFP (natural family planning) or the Rhythm Method.