# Does the bible permit birth control?



## VanVos

I have recently read two interesting articles on birth control:

One by John Piper, permitting birth control 
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/theological_qa/marraige_family/bc.html

And an another By Tony Warren codemning birth control http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/articles/birth_control.html

I'm not sure what conclusion I should come to on this issue so I would like to hear other people's opinions on this. I've also started a poll so feel free to vote. 

VanVos


----------



## humble_soul

Well, I wasn't really sure on this, so I asked the OPC. Here is what they said:

http://www.opc.org/cce/QandA/48.html#2

----------------

Q: What does the bible say about birth control? What does OPC believe? 

A: The Bible says nothing about artificial methods for the reason that there were no artificial methods of birth control in biblical times. "Birth control" could apply to early abortion. Both the Bible and the OPC are dead opposed to abortion.

One form of birth control that should be rejected by Christians is the intra-uterine devices which dislodge a fertilized ovum. In other words, a mere ovum or sperm is not a person. But once conception has taken place, then there exists a living person created in the image of God. It is the OPC view that the life of an unborn child requires the same protections as a child or an adult! So that the use of any device or drug that destroys a living embryo violates the sixth Commandment.

Scripture forbidding abortion is not explicitly given, but murder is forbidden; and unborn children are real people. For these, read Psalm 139:12-16, and Luke 1:39-44.

As to artificial means of preventing conception, we have no help from Scripture. Genesis 38:6-10 is cited as avoiding conception, but the reason that God struck down Onan was for his refusal to raise up seed to his brother who died without an heir. The OPC does not have a declared position on conception prevention (other than abstinence). That doesn't mean that there is no concern over the issue, but, as I said, the Bible doesn't address artificial means of conception prevention because there were none in Bible times. I trust this answers your question. Please feel free to pursue the matter if I've been less than clear. (LE)

----------------

Their answer is good enough for me, until Pastor Way posts a message that makes me re-consider...


----------



## Scot

I'll probably side with Mr. Warren on this one. I agree with alot of his articles. I haven't read the one by Piper but I will tonight (when the kids are in bed). I can't really think of any biblical warrant for birth control.


----------



## john

Only as long as no-one is harmed, If no fertilization results from the union. Action taken to prevent unwanted children must be a good thing.
Paul speaks on the subject of sex in 1 Cor 7. He warns that most of us have sexual needs that need fulfilling, unfulfilled those needs become a weapon against us.
So abstinence is out for most of us!

I could put up with loads of kids so it was my wifes decision to stick to three. That's alright as well, there is always too many people in our house as it is.

A population explosion results in falling standards of health and law and order.

I see that Tony Warren might not agree with me, I shall try to read up on his article tomorrow, it looks facinating.

I agree with this statement:
It is the OPC view that the life of an unborn child requires the same protections as a child or an adult! So that the use of any device or drug that destroys a living embryo violates the sixth Commandment.


----------



## VanVos

Thanks for the replies, keep them coming, another question, does anyone know of a recorded debate within reformed circles on this issue?

VanVos


P.S. Was anyone else surprised to read what Luther and Clavin had said on this issue? 

Martin Luther 
"People who do not like children are swine, dunces, and blockheads, not worthy to be called men and women, because they despise the blessing of God, the Creator and Author of marriage" 

John Calvin 
"The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous. For this is to extinguish the hope of the race and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring." 
"..birth control is the murder of future persons."


----------



## JWJ

[quote:d5aa2742d1="VanVos"]P.S. Was anyone else surprised to read what Luther and Clavin had said on this issue? 

Martin Luther 
"People who do not like children are swine, dunces, and blockheads, not worthy to be called men and women, because they despise the blessing of God, the Creator and Author of marriage" 

John Calvin 
"The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous. For this is to extinguish the hope of the race and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring." 
"..birth control is the murder of future persons."[/quote:d5aa2742d1]

Just as suprised as I am when I read the writings on many Puritians calling card playing and dancing the evil.

Jim


----------



## john

I knew the Calvin one, I read that last night.
Is Luther talking about birth control? I'm always grateful to God when I see great teachers err! The idea that we should look at other sinners and judge them worthless for any reason is foreign to me. But I have other problems. We are all sinners.

"..birth control is the murder of future persons."
Murder is the wrong word.
This really makes no sense to me. Looks like Calvin had a day off when he penned this.


----------



## Scot

The Lord has told us to "be fruitful and multiply." When/where has this command been rescinded? The Lord also tells us that children are a blessing. What believer wants to try and prevent God from blessing them? 

I certainly wouldn't go as far as to say that it's "murder." I think it's a matter of not trusting God. Is God sovereign? Isn't he the one that creates the babe in the womb? I think it's sad that now children are somehow looked at like a disease that needs to be prevented or gotten rid of. We see this in the secular world with abortion. We also see it in the church to a lesser degree with the use of birth control.


----------



## Ianterrell

The whole God is sovereign argument against conception preventive means of contraception is really just not satisfying at all. Sovereign over what? Sovereign over providing for a family with many children?

OF course God is sovereign, the question is: Isn't man responsible? We have options available to us that weren't available in Moses' day. We are responsible to be stewards over the options we have. 

The principle of the creation mandate should be upheld. Children are a blessing. A married couple should not be centered on their own pleasures alone, but should if possible work towards the creation mandate. This does not mean that they should at some points in their family avoid conception. The "God is Sovereign" people I feel are belitlling stewardship responsibiltiy and promoting Christian risk taking. We are not called to let go and let God. We are called to be wise. Further the whole "God is Sovereign" argument for limitless conceptions is lacking in biblical support, with no clear argument from scripture against forms of contraception that prevent conception they are forced to resort to the accusation that the man who chooses the option has weak faith. While the let go and let God argument may have a warm place in Calvinistically inclined fundamentalism it does not have a place in a consistently biblical world view. We are called to be wise, upholding the principles of scripture concerning our money and our seed to the glory of God.

Certainly these measures of contraception should not be used as a license towards freedom from having kids. But when a man and wife have trouble with their finances in an economy and culture like our own, it would be intellectually rude I feel to assert one could be slighting God's sovereignty by holding off for a period from having children. Our covenant children are a gift from God, they're souls and bodies are knit in our mother's wombs. They must be cared for with a clear headed mind, something that a let go and let God theology endagers in many cases.


----------



## VanVos

Good thoughts Ian I think I'm leaning more towards John Piper's position but the are still a few verse yet to be looked at. What are we to make of Paul's words in 1 Timothy when he exhorts the woman to bear children 1Ti 2:15,1Ti 5:14, do you think that these verses favor Tony Warren's position? 

VanVos


----------



## sastark

Ian,

I must respectfully disagree.

I agree that we are to be good stewards of God's creation, and that includes our own finances; however, not having the financial resources to raise children in no way trumps God's command to be fruitful and multiply. I liken this to the man who has just enough gas to get to work on Monday, so he decides not to drive to Church on Sunday. He is trying to be a good steward of his money, but he is disobeying God's command to keep the Lord's Day.

You are right that man is responsible, but what is he responsible for? He is responsible to obey God. All issues relating to "how are we to obey God?" are secondary to actual obedience.

Another, not so theological point is this: If you are waiting until you are financially stable to have kids, let me tell you: you will never be financially stable enough. So, in one sense, you must trust God. He will provide for you and your family. This doesn't mean you sit on your rear all day, watching TV waiting for the checks to roll in. It does mean that you don't wait for God to give you a raise before obeying Him.

I suppose it can be summarized as this: Our obedience is not dependent upon God's blessings. God's blessings our dependent on our obedience (and of course, His mercy).


----------



## Puritan Sailor

[quote:1f8b2b681a="Ianterrell"]The whole God is sovereign argument against conception preventive means of contraception is really just not satisfying at all. Sovereign over what? Sovereign over providing for a family with many children?

OF course God is sovereign, the question is: Isn't man responsible? We have options available to us that weren't available in Moses' day. We are responsible to be stewards over the options we have. 

The principle of the creation mandate should be upheld. Children are a blessing. A married couple should not be centered on their own pleasures alone, but should if possible work towards the creation mandate. This does not mean that they should at some points in their family avoid conception. The "God is Sovereign" people I feel are belitlling stewardship responsibiltiy and promoting Christian risk taking. We are not called to let go and let God. We are called to be wise. Further the whole "God is Sovereign" argument for limitless conceptions is lacking in biblical support, with no clear argument from scripture against forms of contraception that prevent conception they are forced to resort to the accusation that the man who chooses the option has weak faith. While the let go and let God argument may have a warm place in Calvinistically inclined fundamentalism it does not have a place in a consistently biblical world view. We are called to be wise, upholding the principles of scripture concerning our money and our seed to the glory of God.

Certainly these measures of contraception should not be used as a license towards freedom from having kids. But when a man and wife have trouble with their finances in an economy and culture like our own, it would be intellectually rude I feel to assert one could be slighting God's sovereignty by holding off for a period from having children. Our covenant children are a gift from God, they're souls and bodies are knit in our mother's wombs. They must be cared for with a clear headed mind, something that a let go and let God theology endagers in many cases.[/quote:1f8b2b681a]
I think your picture here of the two sides of the debate is grossly over simplified. People who object to birth control do not simply "let go and let God." We are to be good stewards absolutely. But we are to be good stewards over all that God gives us, not just what we think we should be good stewards of. Children are something determined in God's secret will. When he gives them, and how many he gives us, should have no bearing on whether we will be good stewards. If you end up having multiple children and can't make ends meet but still desire to pursue other dreams, well then, guess what God has called you to be? He has called you to be a godly parent first. All other callings must submit to that. If God blesses you with tons of kids, then he has called you to parent those tons of kids first. We do the best we have with all that God gives us. Having lots of kids, no matter what the financial circumstances is not irresponsible so long as the parents are obeying and trusting God in all they do. Children are a blessing no matter what the circumstances. My :wr50:


----------



## ReformedWretch

I have no idea what God thinks of BC.

But I must say, my wife and I have been married for 15 years and have never used any type of birth control. We have only an ADOPTED daughter.


----------



## humble_soul

Can it not be argued that people have in fact been fruitful and multiplied? 

The last time I checked the world population was still going up.


----------



## sastark

[quote:bdd695894b="humble_soul"]Can it not be argued that people have in fact been fruitful and multiplied? 

The last time I checked the world population was still going up.[/quote:bdd695894b]

Yes, the world population continues to increase; however, God has not abridged his command.

And there is certainly still plently of room for more people!


----------



## humble_soul

The question is, how does this command actually apply? Are we supposed to try as hard as possible to have as many children as we possibly can without regard?

What about those who can not have children? Are they guilty of not multiplying? Is it the effort that counts?

I'm interested in hearing thoughts regarding the application of the command to be fruitful and multiply.


----------



## Jie-Huli

As to the original question of the thread, it surely should be admitted by everyone that the Bible does not actually "permit" birth control; there may be a question of whether it is prohibited or not, but it is surely not permitted or approved in any sense.

At any rate, I believe that the marital union and the conception of children are such profound and sacred matters that the proper question is not "Does the Bible forbit birth control?" but "Does the Bible anywhere affirmatively allow for birth control?" Without any Biblical warrant for proceeding with artificial birth control, I believe it should not be used by Christians. 

In other words, the "default" position, absent clear Biblical texts about birth control, should surely be to not do that which is not explicitly authorised in so sacred a sphere.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

I have always wondered what Chinese Catholics do if they are only allowed one child...


----------



## Breadloaf

*Babies*

Seems to me that children are the only blessing from God that people attempt to avoid . . . 

Yours,
Bread


----------



## john

I've always gone along witht the idea of trusting God and keeping my powder dry.
It is not in keeping with our status to avoid decision making. Reason is a gift.

On the application, if we take this command literally, then we should bear in mind that Adam and Eve recieved this command. They should have complied with it. They failed.
In this sense the command 'fill the earth' is illogical and unreasonable when given to Adam and Eve.

Have we failed?
Is it to do with numbers or occupancy of the world?
Who decides that?

The strange thing is, is this a group law or are every married couple expected to fill the earth? If it is a group thing and some don't pull their weight then the group must sin. Strange idea but Israel did suffer this.


----------



## twogunfighter

Piper nailed this one. Fertility should be stewarded just like any other gift.


----------



## dkicklig

[quote:dd89844d01="twogunfighter"]Piper nailed this one. Fertility should be stewarded just like any other gift.[/quote:dd89844d01]
 

It's not about the money, and if you have the resources to care for X number of children, it is about good stewardship.
The analogy of the farmer in understanding what he could "subdue" rather than trying to farm more than he could handle, and the other point regarding the size of a man's quiver are what nailed it for me.

My wife and I; after much prayer, counsel, self examination, and examination of the Scriptures truly believe that we have a 3 arrow quiver. 3 children are what we can "subdue" based on what we know about ourselves. It's not about money for us, it's about stewardship of time, gifts, talents and everything else that God has given us.

For example which is easier A.) taking a family of 5 to a foreign mission field, or B.) taking a family of 8? Some can handle traveling, teaching, and funderaising for 8, but not me. I would not be a good steward of the other things that God has given me if we had 6 kids.


----------



## luvroftheWord

Marriage is a blessing as well, but are all people required to get married? The creation mandate requires marriage. So is it immoral to refrain from marriage, which keeps us from producing offspring? Or could it be that the creation mandate was a specific command for Adam and Eve that is not so rigidly applied now that the earth is populated?


----------



## fredtgreco

*Re: Babies*

[quote:524a6a8aab="Breadloaf"]Seems to me that children are the only blessing from God that people attempt to avoid . . . 

Yours,
Bread[/quote:524a6a8aab]

Actually no. People avoid God's gift to the church, shepherds; the gift of His word preached; the gift of His law; the gift of the Lord's Day, etc.

I could go on and on.


----------



## Scot

Another article about birth control:

http://home.att.net/~nathan.wilson/brthcntl.htm

Does anyone have any thoughts on this:

I'm sure others of you have noticed this to but I find it kind of interesting that in the beginning of the Old Testament, when people lived to be alot older than we do now, the child bearing age seems to be the same. I mean people lived to be like 900 years old but they didn't have 400 kids. It seems that the women went through "the change" about the same age as they do today. I don't know if this has any bearing on the birth control topic, I just find it interesting.


----------



## Ianterrell

[quote:d6257ef857="Jie-Huli"]As to the original question of the thread, it surely should be admitted by everyone that the Bible does not actually "permit" birth control; there may be a question of whether it is prohibited or not, but it is surely not permitted or approved in any sense.

At any rate, I believe that the marital union and the conception of children are such profound and sacred matters that the proper question is not "Does the Bible forbit birth control?" but "Does the Bible anywhere affirmatively allow for birth control?" Without any Biblical warrant for proceeding with artificial birth control, I believe it should not be used by Christians. 

In other words, the "default" position, absent clear Biblical texts about birth control, should surely be to not do that which is not explicitly authorised in so sacred a sphere.[/quote:d6257ef857]


You're applying the Regulative Principle to a matter of regular christian living. It shouldn't be used that way.


----------



## Ianterrell

[quote:0490da3b67="sastark"]Ian,

I must respectfully disagree.

I agree that we are to be good stewards of God's creation, and that includes our own finances; however, not having the financial resources to raise children in no way trumps God's command to be fruitful and multiply. I liken this to the man who has just enough gas to get to work on Monday, so he decides not to drive to Church on Sunday. He is trying to be a good steward of his money, but he is disobeying God's command to keep the Lord's Day.

You are right that man is responsible, but what is he responsible for? He is responsible to obey God. All issues relating to "how are we to obey God?" are secondary to actual obedience.

[/quote:0490da3b67]

This is another problem with this position that I see. We aren't commanded to have kids until the well runs dry. Nothing in scripture attests to this.


----------



## Ianterrell

[quote:f9699957a5="puritansailor"] 
If you end up having multiple children and can't make ends meet but still desire to pursue other dreams, well then, guess what God has called you to be? He has called you to be a godly parent first. All other callings must submit to that. If God blesses you with tons of kids, then he has called you to parent those tons of kids first. We do the best we have with all that God gives us. Having lots of kids, no matter what the financial circumstances is not irresponsible so long as the parents are obeying and trusting God in all they do. Children are a blessing no matter what the circumstances. My :wr50:[/quote:f9699957a5]

Why does a couple that decides to stop having kids at no. 4-5 automatically have to be viewed as selfish or "baby-haters". I think this is an overreaction against liberal views of family. It is wrong to be self centered in family planning. It is awful that so many people view kids as a curse! But being a steward is a reality, it has real practical implications that have to be worked out. A wise steward will not simply roll with the punches, he will plan and attempt to really establish his family, and their families.


----------



## pastorway

My comments and exegesis can be found here:

Birth Control I and Birth Control II and Birth Control III (on another forum)

The Scriptures prove without question that God causes conception and delivery. Only He can do this. If it is going to happen it is because He causes it. There are no accidents. So birth control is trying to prevent God from acting to bless us! WOW. We think we can or even should stop God from doing what only He can do? Really now, if trying to stop something that only God brings to pass is walking by faith, then perhaps the Arminians are right after all....we can tie God's hands behind His back! :no: 

Phillip


----------



## kceaster

I hope that my wife would not mind me sharing this, but in the beginning we did use birth control for the 1st year or so. Do I believe she could have become pregnant? Only if God wanted it to be so. We started to believe that it was unneccessary and would welcome children when God blessed. Three years later, He did. 19 months later than that, He did again. But, because of the difficulty of her last pregnancy, she had a tubal ligation. Are we kid haters? No. We made the decision then, that another pregnancy would be too risky. On top of that decision, we found out that because of my wife's physiology, it was nigh on impossible for her to have children. Well, God made it possible twice, and through wisdom, sovereignly saw to it that we did not have more than two.

I know that some would say that we made the decision, and we did. But God is sovereign. If He would have planned for us to have more children, we would have not performed the procedure. Besides, God has other ways of letting us have more children. If He wills, we'll have grandchildren. If He wills, we could certainly adopt children.

All that to say this: God makes babies, we do not. Whether birth control or no, if God wants babies, He'll work it out. Birth control is not impervious to His plan. So, my wife and I would say, place your children in God's hands and His timing. Changing your mind to believe that will bring you peace.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## twogunfighter

I recently found out that my wife and I would be blessed with Twogun #4 in January. 

I am convinced that this one will make all she can handle given her physical condition, talents, my frequent absences, our frequent moves, etc. I see no sense in giving her more than she can handle. I believe that it is my [u:cfe85c26e2]duty[/u:cfe85c26e2] as her head and leader to ensure as much as in my power that she is able to live a Godly life and be "Saved through childbearing." I further believe that God has allowed me to understand her frame, her abilities, and her situation so that it is clear to me that four is all she can handle and still bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. I believe that God in His sovereign will gave me to her to make this decision because He has plans for her/us that are to our benefit. I believe that if I did not make this decision I could possibly be putting my wife in spiritual danger and my children as well. 

Every decision we make is tainted by sin, seen through a dark glass, and poorly motivated. We can only say that certain decisions governed by clear commands or deductions of scripture are 100% right or 100% wrong. The decision to use or not use non-abortive birth control is not at all clearly regulated by scripture and as such we must govern the decision by the whole counsel of God applied to the situation which is then bathed in prayer trusting God to guide us despite our deceitful heart.


----------



## Ranger

I don't know what to think about birth control, although I do feel that it is a much harder ground to defend it theologically than it is to refrain from using it. All I know is that my wife and I have been married for 3 1/2 years and have no kids, and I really wish we did!


----------



## VanVos

Great thoughts being shared here, I've been edified from reading them all. I do though have another thought. Paul said in 1 Corithians 7 that we should marry because of fornication 1 Cor 7:2. In other words it is better to marry then to burn 1 Cor 7:9. Therefore could this mean that the main reason for marriage is for emotional satisfaction in fulfillment of bonding in the marriage relationship, rather than procreation? If so, does this have any bearing on this issue? i.e. does this or could this help form an argument for the use birth control since procreation is not the mean reason for marriage.? 

VanVos


----------



## Saiph

Sex is for recreation as well as procreation.

Birth control is fine. This is like asking if the Bible permits the use of asprin or sleeping pills. I guess if I have insomnia God must want me to be sleep deprived right ? ? Of course not.

John says Christ was not born by "the will of men" . . but by the will of God. Man has a will in procreation to attempt to reproduce, or not. And I am with Paul above. . no contraceptive will prevent God's will.


----------



## fredtgreco

An additional complication is that most forms of birth contol are really abortificants, including the "pill" (a dirty little secret that the medical community will not advertise).

You must be VERY careful in choosing the method of birth control if you decide to go that route.


----------



## Craig

I have nothing to add either "yay" or "nay" to contraceptives.

But, my mother in law is pro life...works in healthcare, and the "pill" my wife was on wasn't abortive...in fact I am not sure if many really are. My wife described the pill as preventing her body from dropping an egg to be fertilized...so it is never even had the possibility of being fertilized. 

There are some arguments that even so, that this pill, if it doesn't prevent the egg from dropping, it would then act as an abortive...from what I've gathered, there is no study to really support this. 

Even when not using contraception, it is a proven fact that there are times the egg IS fertilized, but the woman's BODY rejects it, and the baby dies and is passed through.

I am pro life in EVERY situation...but I am having trouble with saying contraceptives are alright, or wrong. I think using them basically indefinitely is selfish...I do believe God wants His people to bear children, I am ready and willing to a dad if God so chooses. But we aren't going out of our way to have them now.

Also: there is a danger in using "the pill" in regards to the hormones involved. There is a possible side effect of having a propensity for blod clots...well, my wife knew it (I didn't), and my wife did get a blood clot. It was incredibly scary, but God is providential. My wife had a condition where there was a vein being "crushed" in her leg and it was preventing any bit of clot from traveling up to her heart or brain (ironically that also contributed to her getting the clot). Two attemps at angioplasty and two stints later, my wife is fine. We do not use the pill or any hormonal type of prevention any longer.

Health-wise, I recommend avoiding using the pill. There could also be long-term fertility issues also if one stays on it for a long period of time.


----------



## Augusta

[color=darkblue:72888fe49d][b:72888fe49d]I was looking at the texts with the word "multiply" and aside from the "be fruitful and multiply" that God commanded to Adam and Eve and then again to Noah and his family after the flood, God says over and over in the old testament "I will multiply your seed...", Deut 28:63"And it shall come to pass, that as the LORD rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you..., Ezekiel 37:26 "Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore." I got so many hits with my search and it was "I will multiply" over and over. Clearly it is God's domain to do the multiplying and we are but vessels of his sovereign will as usual. We cannot thwart his will.[/b:72888fe49d][/color:72888fe49d]


----------



## pastorway

I will make this brief. Answer these questions according to the Scriptures:

1. Is God Sovereign? Yes.

2. Can His will be thwarted by men? No.

3. Is God actively involved in the conception and birth of every child (Does He knit them in the womb and even cause delivery)? Yes.

4. Is Birth Control then, at its root, an attempt by men and women to stop what only God can do? Yes.

5. Since we cannot stop God from giving blessings in the form of children, then is it acting in faith to try to stop conception? ?????

Let's face it, a child cannot and will not be conceived unless God so desires it. So what are you trying to prevent (no matter the method) if you use birth control? You are trying (whether consciously or not) to stop God! What a waste of energy, time, money, emotions, etc etc etc. Walk by faith. God is ever faithful, always full of mercy, and He can be trusted!

Phillip


----------



## Saiph

Thanks pastorway . . my wife and I are extremely fertile . . so we will stop using birth control and have more than our current four children.

Can we count on financial support from your church since I barely make ends meet now and will not know what to do when five more children arrive ? ? ?? 

Also, will you provide life insurance in the case that she dies from complications in delivery ? ? Since the last child we had almost killed her ? ?

God wants us to use common sense and the scriptures. We know more about the body now. Using non-abortive, or hormone compromising birth control is sometimes prudent, and a blessing from God as well.

Should Christian couples have children if possible ? ? yes.

Should we risk our lives and be fooloish about the level of support we can provide our family ? ? no.

Has God given us a certain responsibility and freedom in when to have children and how many ? ? yes.


----------



## pastorway

Ah, so we will take the control away from God because we know better! Okay, now I understand. God is not sovereign, He cannot provide for all my needs, He surely is wreckless with the health of my wife, He cannot be trusted to know what is best, I on the other hand know what is best and will therefore do what I can to prevent God from knitting a child in my wife's womb because that would be an irresponsble disaster........

Is that the logic of faith?

Just think, if Joseph had know that Rachel might die giving birth to Benjamin, he could have worked to prevent the pregnancy. Then there would have been no death for Rachel and no second son for her either. Then the tribe of Benjamin would have been non-existant and then Paul, a Benjamite, would not have been born and then we would have a very small New Testament.

Sounds logical to me. [i:633eb5fcf9]NOT[/i:633eb5fcf9]

I am not saying that these things are not HARD. But faith sees us through the hard things. Are you really approaching this from the perspective of trusting God to do what is best? Or is there fear, doubt, and maybe even selfishness and pride in this line of thought that we know better than God?

Phillip


----------



## fredtgreco

Doesn't God sometimes provide through the use of means?

Should I walk off my roof, knowing that God is sovereign?


----------



## pastorway

If you walk off your roof thinking God is sovereign then you can be sure He wanted you to break a leg.

Seriously, if only God can form a child in the womb, then what are we trying to prevent by attempting to stop conception?

Bottom line - we either trust God and enjoy each other as husband and wife. Or we trust our own judgment and work to try to stop God from forming a babe in the womb. 

If we know that only God can make a baby and that when He does it is a blessing, then what are we trying to prevent? What is it we are afraid of?

Means or not, a baby is not conceived without the hand of God. So there is no accidental conception, no out of place baby, no baby that pushes us out of having our needs met, no baby that places on us more than we can bear, no baby that is a mistake, no baby that was the result of poor stewardship and bad planning.

Babies are blessings from the hand of God, but we rarely think of them as such. Instead we believe tat pregnancy is a medical condition to be avoided like cancer instead of a sign that God Himself has BLESSED us. 

Phillip


----------



## fredtgreco

Ok, but Phillip, explain to me how deciding not to have sex on a given day is different? If God is sovereign, wouldn't we have sex every day? Isn't the failure to do so an "avoidance" of blessing?


----------



## pastorway

According to 1 Cor 7 a husband and wife are to render the affection due one another unless they agree to abstain for a period of time for prayer and fasting. Simply put, the Bible says not to deny your spouse sex when they want it!

Not having sex is a sure way to not get pregnant, but there are guidelines for this given right in this text. It is not just about making babies, but whatever the case (pleasure or procreation) we are not to put our wants and interests above that of our spouse! 

Phillip


----------



## Ianterrell

[quote:fdcff7c9d1="Paul manata"][quote:fdcff7c9d1="pastorway"]My comments and exegesis can be found here:

Birth Control I and Birth Control II and Birth Control III (on another forum)

The Scriptures prove without question that God causes conception and delivery. Only He can do this. If it is going to happen it is because He causes it. There are no accidents. So birth control is trying to prevent God from acting to bless us! WOW. We think we can or even should stop God from doing what only He can do? Really now, if trying to stop something that only God brings to pass is walking by faith, then perhaps the Arminians are right after all....we can tie God's hands behind His back! :no: 

Phillip[/quote:fdcff7c9d1]

but if God planned for couple X to have a child then even birth control could not stop Him, right?

So, the child will still be born regardless.

Not saying you are wrong theologically, regarding birth control, just saying that it cannot thwart God's plans.

Paul[/quote:fdcff7c9d1]

Exactly this argument against using non-abortive contraception forms is invalid. God's will cannot be overthrown.


----------



## Ianterrell

[quote:e714a8e440="fredtgreco"]An additional complication is that most forms of birth contol are really abortificants, including the "pill" (a dirty little secret that the medical community will not advertise).

You must be VERY careful in choosing the method of birth control if you decide to go that route.[/quote:e714a8e440]

Indeed.


----------



## Craig

Excellent points, Mark.

That helped me tremendously in regards to birth control. One must be sober minded about not using birth control. To use it could be mere selfishness...but in the other sense it is truly the most responsible approach...this is where the rubber meets the road. Maybe I should have phrased that differently.


----------



## johnny_redeemed

i voted yes.


----------



## a mere housewife

I don't have much to add, but examples: I know several mothers who have had a child every one or two years until in one case her health was broken, and she spent months too sick to take care of her family-- and in another, she was told that the next baby would take her life, leaving all the other children motherless. At least one of them would not have considered birth control in the past, but both decided to use the means available to help them be good stewards of their health and mothers to their children, taking the natural situation into account, and knowing that God often uses our earthly "wisdom" as a means to accomplish His will-- knowing also that God can abridge our methods if they are not going to bring about His will (my littlest sister is living proof). In both cases, God has not given them more children, and their health has improved. I don't see that they have any less faith in God than when they weren't using birth control-- or that they had any less faith then. 

The family I know with the most children, and the healthiest mom, practices natural birth control between each child, until the mother gets back to her pre-pregnancy weight. This way they are able to have more children, and she is able to care for them all. 

Another family was told not to get pregnant again as the mother's life might be endangered, but decided not to practice birth control, and the mother is now pregnant with the second since then (though this may be the last, as the pregnancy is very problematic). In both cases, healthy and unhealthy mom, lots of children, their approach has been the means God has used to bring about His will (it can be God's will for people to have lots of children and health problems): even the fact that some people will read this thread and think "I wouldn't want my wife to get in that condition" can be a means of preserving your wife's good health whereas it may be God's will for someone else to be sick. (I'm not equating birth control with good health and lack of it with bad-- though I have to say that it often works out that way when women are very fertile.)

Conventional birth control can react very badly with some people, though. People are all different, and what doesn't affect someone else might affect you (though all of you appear to be men), or vice-versa. I would be very careful taking the regular form of it-- read all the information about ingredients and interactions, do a websearch and see if other women have had problems, call a fertility doctor and see if that kind of birth control can mess up your hormones, etc, as some can take away fertility long after you stop taking it-- this from a fertility doctor. Of course God is control of that, too-- but we ought to be wise stewards.

I would be interested to know if those who advocate not using any form of birth control would also disagree with attempts to become more fertile? We can't make God give us a child, certainly, any more than we can make Him not give us one.


----------



## pastorway

Pursuing fertility usually involves correcting physical problems that are preventing pregnancy, ie. preventing the body from functioning normally. So pursuing the medical means to be able to have children is fine, as long as the couple does understand that only God gives children and they are pursing this by faith that He will provide a child if it is His will. 

Here is where I see the difference between fertility treatment and birth control - using medicine/surgery to correct a problem is not the same as using medicine/surgery to prevent the body from functioning normally.

Phillip


----------



## twogunfighter

Phillip

 It was a double standard in all those previous threads and it is a double standard now. You cannot have it both ways. If you are going to use trust in God as your hammer it strikes both birth control and fertility enhancement treatments. I mean I guess what you are saying is: God couldn't get past the physical problems Himself and so we must help Him through scientific means...... Conception is either something that we are to steward or it is something that we are to completely leave hands off. If we are to steward it then we may do so either positively or negatively as God leads while attempting to maintain Godly motives. By the way is there any other gift of God that he has told us to leave completely alone and not steward? I am trying to think of one and have not been able to..... 

Chuck


----------



## pastorway

so we should never use medicine at all to correct physical problems? Inability to get pregnant is often the symptom of a more serious problem. 

I would not want a couple to try to be more fertile - ie. they can have children but want 5 at a time instead of just 1! But if there are health issues that prevent pregnancy what is wrong with correcting them? Even then, if it is not God's will, they will not get pregnant!

I must ask, is it an act of faith to use medicine to correct a problem? Yes it can be. Is it an act of faith to use medicine to disrupt normal function of the body? THAT is the question!!

Phillip


----------



## Scot

[quote:c49960687a]I must ask, is it an act of faith to use medicine to correct a problem? Yes it can be. Is it an act of faith to use medicine to disrupt normal function of the body? THAT is the question!! [/quote:c49960687a]

Pastorway,

I'm pretty much in favor of your view concerning this discussion. One thing I'd like to point out is that all synthetic pharmaceutical medicine disrupts the normal function of the body in some way or another. For example, cholesterol medicine is given to help control cholesterol levels but it does so by stopping the liver from making it. Eventually, it will destroy the liver. This is why they keep checking the liver every month or so. I'm not in favor of drugs at all except in emergency situations so I'm really not in favor of using them to mess up a woman's hormones so she can't conceive.


----------



## twogunfighter

[quote:a598abfd9d]Is it an act of faith to use medicine to disrupt normal function of the body?[/quote:a598abfd9d]

Yes it can be! 

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, 26 that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, 27 that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. 28 So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. 30 For we are members of His body, F15 of His flesh and of His bones. 31 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." F16 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. 

By faith we can attempt to nourish and cherish our wives physically and mentally by allowing them to be on birth control. 

1 Pet 3:7 Husbands, likewise, dwell with them [wives] with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered. 

By faith we can obey God and understand our wives abilities and limitations, which may lead to a decision to use birth control. 

Eph 6:4 And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.

By faith we may realize that continuing to have children will impinge upon our abilities to bring up our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and decide to use birth control for that reason.

Which commandment does the use of birth control break?

Chuck


----------



## pastorway

How can your having children be a bad thing since only God can give them to you in the first place? Are any of His gifts BAD?

And why do you need a "commandment?" Is it not enough to understand that whatever is not of faith is sin (Rom 14:23) and that to try to tell God that you know better than He what is best for you and your wife is not an act of faith? We could of course site "Thou shalt not kill" for the use of chemical agents which prevent the attachment of a fertilized egg (which according to our doctor, they ALL do as a back up in the event of fertilization). In the event of conception, they abort the baby, murdering an unborn child. Is this even to be thought of as an act of faithful stewardship? 

Stewards do not tell their master what is and is not good. They manage faithfully what He has given them. They do not decide what they are stewards over, the amount of the talents, so to speak. They take what He gives and use it to His glory.

If a child is a blessing and gift from the hand of God, is it ever too much to handle or a bad thing that He has given you? Every gift that comes from His hand is a good gift (James 1:17).

To use birth control seems to me to be an attempt to tell God that you know better than He, that you do not consider every child He gives a blessing and gift from His hand, and that you would rather trust medicine/science over His Word. 

For anyone unsure of their stance on this matter - take it to the Word! And walk by faith, not sight. 

All for now, 
Phillip


----------



## Ex Nihilo

It doesn't seem like the act of engaging in non-abortive birth control is a sin. The Bible doesn't seem to explicitly forbid actions that could prevent pregnancy (after all, staying single should definitely prevent pregnancy, but we aren't urged to get married as soon as possible.) What could be a sin is the attitude that prompts birth control. However, so long as a couple recognizes that another child would be a gift and is prepared to be blessed in that matter, it doesn't seem (to my very limited wisdom) that it would necessarily be a sin to engage in barrier/rhythm methods of birth control.

God's will cannot be thwarted, and if that is clearly understood and appreciated, then we are free to act in a way that seems to be good stewardship, good health management, etc., so long as it does not, under any circumstances, involve abortive techniques or any other sin. A couple that isn't sinning in their attitudes doesn't need to be plagued with guilt about whether or not they are thwarting God's will, because that is absolutely impossible. God can use human means to accomplish His will of not giving a couple more children, but He can always give them more, anyway, and if that is His will, He will do it. If the couple knows that would be a blessing and is prepared to be thankful, there doesn't seem to be any clear command against some types of birth control.

You have really good points, Pastor Way. In the past year or so, I have been convinced from a very sinful position of not wanting children at all to feeling quite certain that if I get married, I have no desire to do anything (sinful or not) to try to prevent such a blessing. Thanks for your affirmation of God's value on children. It is very helpful to me. HeidiZ, your thoughts are very interesting. I find myself agreeing with you.


----------



## Galahad

I realize that this subject has been well debated, but I had come here to ask this very question. <smiles> I appreciate the links to the articles by Piper and others. I will read them.

I received an interesting email from my sister having to do with the Pill. While I won't go into all the details, apparently there are some common serious side-effects. But, the medical community (specifically her doctor) was convinced that the Pill wasn't the source. Anywho, she began researching the Pill and its effects. What she found disturbing is that, for the most part, Protestant theologians have little or no comment about birth control. But, the same arguments that can be used in support of abortion can also be used in support of birth control. As a simplification, abortion is birth control after the pregnancy. 

The Protestant argues that they are "Pro-life" - that they do not support the killing of unborn children. And yet, consistantly taken, they are not "pro-life" with regards to conception. Only after conception has happened is it deemed valuable. The Catholic theologians have argued that a culture that accepts and supports birth control is a culture that is "Pro-death" in that it is aggressively pursuing avoiding life.

----------------------------------------------
From our church library I checked out a book by George
Grant called Grand Illusions: the Legacy of Planned
Parenthood. It's a fascinating book, and he claims to
have left out some of the more incendiary information
to protect himself from lawsuits. What he includes is
sufficiently shocking on its own. In addition to
sketching a brief biography of Margaret Sanger, he
explains the social forces, the media and legal
manipulations, and the outright duplicity that led to
Planned Parenthood's success in promoting abortion and
its little sister, artificial birth control. One of
the more interesting facts I learned from the book is
that Ms. Sanger used $2 million of her second
husband's money to fund research into the Pill. She
then lobbied aggressively to have it approved by the
FDA in a shorter time even than normal drug trials. 
As you know, attempts to question the safety of the
Pill are stifled at birth or else the results of the
studies are downplayed. One of the curious things I
have discovered in the last few months is how few
women actually have a good experience with hormonal
birth control, either the Pill or the progesterone
shot. Yet the drug companies (and Planned Parenthood)
persist in portraying the Pill as the best possible
way for women to take charge of their bodies and their
fertility. As George Grant writes, the Pill is not a
medical, but rather a recreational drug. I hadn't
thought of it that way before. I've been doing a lot
of reading on fertility, etc. recently and most of
what's out there that doesn't promote the use of the
Pill is from the Catholics. Of course, most of those
critiques come from people who hold to the Church's
official position that all artificial contraception is
wrong. I have been searching for writings from
Protestant theologians and teachers addressing this
issue, but there seems to be very little material. 
Interestingly, the most extensive treatment I have yet
found on the subject of the morality of birth control
from a Protestant perspective is in a book published
in 1970 by Norman Geisler about ethics. 
Unfortunately, he argues that abortion can be morally
permissible under certain circumstances, when the
destruction of a potential human life is weighed
against harm to an actual human life (the mother's). 
I was deeply disturbed by that phrasing (potential vs.
actual) and by his reasoning that seemed to introduce
a certain level of situational ethics into his
argument. Although he was careful to emphasize that
taking even a potential human life is grave and ought
not be done for any less than the most compelling
circumstances, I thought he was providing ammunition
for the pro-abortion camp by saying that there are
cases when abortion would be justifiable, although
only to the point of viability. (He was not
discussing what to do in the case of an ectopic
pregnancy, which obviously cannot be carried to term
and which will kill the mother if the embryo is not
removed. He was discussing cases of rape, incest, the
life of the mother, etc.). The discoveries about
fetal development which have come over the past 35
years indicate that although we don't know when a
fetus becomes "alive" in a strict sense, we know that
if the fetus is allowed to develop normally, he or she
will be born as a living human being. I have gotten
off on a rabbit track. Sorry about that. Anyway, the
Catholic position is that abortion is a great evil but
a culture that sanctions birth control is already a
culture of death. It is only a small step (according
to these commentators) from using artificial
contraception to prevent pregnancy to using abortion
as an after-the-fact birth control. After reading
Grant's book and some pro-abortion writings too, I'm
not sure I find that such a foreign assertion now. 
But that leads to the question of family planning. 
Are Christians really called to have a lot of
children? Or is there, as some Protestant authors I
have read believe, a responsibility to consider the
cost of a family and have the number of children that
a couple can afford. There is no clear consensus and
there are compelling arguments on both sides. This is
an issue with which Protestant pastors and teachers
seem reluctant to deal, probalby because of the
societal expectations that birth control is part of
life.

That was a long and rambling dissertation, although I
hope it was reasonably coherent. I apologize for the
length. These are the issues with which I'm wrestling
right now. Before I got involved in thinking about
this, the matter seemed simple, but the farther I get
into it, the less clearly defined the boundaries are
and the more I see that a couple's private decision
regarding their family planning can have wide
implications for society at large. There are pro-life
activists who believe you cannot really consider
yourself pro-life and support the use of any
artificial means of contraception. Yet there are
people on the other side who point out that the
ability to limit the size of our families allows us to
treasure and provide for the children we do have. 
Perhaps that is simply a Western, consumer-driven
attitude. I haven't decided yet.

In my research on the Pill, I learned that the
pharmaceutical companies and Planned Parenthood have
powerful motivations for marketing the Pill
aggressively and for downplaying its side effects. 
The most powerful reason is money, of course, since
the market for birth control runs into the billions. 
What I find frustrating is that my doctors didn't warn
me about side effects and would not believe that my
symptoms might have been due to the synthetic
hormones. It is difficult to find a list of side
effects in plain English. The listed side effects in
the product insert that comes with the Pill are so
hidden in medical jargon that I had no idea what most
of them were. The insert also made a point of calling
the side effects "rare," "unusual," and "uncommon." 
But as I have talked with other women who have used
it, I have learned that most of them have suffered
some sort of adverse effects. Some of them opt to
remain on the Pill because they like the convenience
or they believe other forms of contraception are too
difficult to practice or they are convinced they are
receiving health benefits from taking the Pill.

George Grant calls the Pill a "recreational drug" and
he does so because he claims that there are no medical
reasons for most of us to take it. Its only purpose
is to enable women to be sexually active without the
risk of pregnancy. Unfortunately, there are many
other risks to the drug that are not well known.

The Catholic Church and some Protestant pro-lifers
(such as Randy Alcorn) believe that the decision to
use contraception in itself comes from an attitude of
death. It divorces sex from procreation, rendering it
sterile rather than life-giving. They say that
engaging in sex without being open to the possibility
of conceiving a child is to render the act
purposeless. This is why the Catholic Church calls
such sexual activity lust, even if it is between a
married couple. I don't think I agree with that
assertion--it is too restrictive and does not have
Scriptural basis. But I think that the advocates of
this view have a very valid point, one often
overlooked by most Protestants--namely that a culture
that will not embrace children and that will not
accept responsibility for the consequences of sexual
activity is a culture that embraces death. We want
all the physical pleasure of sex without any of the
responsibility that comes with it. As Grant says, we
have redefined responsibility to mean using birth
control rather than being ready for the consequence of
conception.

--------------------------------------------- 

Is the Pill a "recreational drug"?


----------



## twogunfighter

Phillip

[quote:b2277b091b]And why do you need a "commandment?" Is it not enough to understand that whatever is not of faith is sin (Rom 14:23) and that to try to tell God that you know better than He what is best for you and your wife is not an act of faith?[/quote:b2277b091b]

I am saying that all sin breaks one of the ten commandments. Which of the ten commandments does using birth control break? 

I have already demonstrated that one can use birth control in faith as well as not use birth control in faith. BTW one can also faithlessly use or not use it as well. 

Chuck


----------



## fredtgreco

Chuck,

While I agree with you on the birth control issue, it is not true that all sin "breaks" the 10 commandments in a strict sense (although this is true in the broad sense, as follows).

Sin is of two sorts: 
violating (breaking) God's law, transgressions of God's law - "doing what He forbids" and for any want of conformity to God's law - "not doing what God requires"


----------



## twogunfighter

Fred

I aggree. I expected a reasoned extrapolation of a commandment not specific verbage.

Chuck


----------



## fredtgreco

[quote:e0654d45b8="twogunfighter"]Fred

I aggree. I expected a reasoned extrapolation of a commandment not specific verbage.

Chuck[/quote:e0654d45b8]

Understood. Just keeping things clear.


----------



## puritanpilgrim

[quote:76af7e4686]The Lord has told us to "be fruitful and multiply." When/where has this command been rescinded? The Lord also tells us that children are a blessing. What believer wants to try and prevent God from blessing them?
[/quote:76af7e4686]


No I don't think we were ever told be fruitful and multiply. God told Adam and Eve.


----------



## voided user1

The Luther quote does not rule out birth control, although the Calvin does. Family planning as we know it was unheard of in that day, but at the same time most Americans aren't mature enough to get married at the ages that were customary historically.


----------



## Ranger

My wife's finally pregnant! WOOHOO!


----------



## VanVos

[quote:26a556cb6f="Ranger"]My wife's finally pregnant! WOOHOO![/quote:26a556cb6f]

Congratulations Ranger, regardless on where one stands on the birth control issue, it is always good to hear that another life has been created. Psa 127:3-5

God Bless VanVos


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

I think we can get an indication of how Scripture views birth control by studying the sin of Onan found in Genesis 38.8-10. The comments of both Calvin and Luther on this passage indicate that they believed Onan's sin to be a violation of the Sixth Commandment.


----------



## puritanpilgrim

Onan was wrong based upon the laws of leverite marriage. It is tough to take Onan into the modern sense of birth control, since as Christians we find it in appropriate to have our wives passed off to our brothers and/or father in law, in the case of Judah and Tamar.


----------

