|
BACK |
|
It will probably be asked: "What does Scripture say about contraception ?" The answer is, so far as I am aware, nothing generally. There is the special case of Onan in Genesis 38:8-10, but the point there was that he failed to do his duty to raise up seed to his dead brother. It can hardly be used to proscribe contraception generally. The fact that it was condemned in Onan's special case means that it could be argued that this shows that Scripture does not ban it generally. If you ban it generally then it could be argued that you should ban hysterectomies also (except presumably where it is medically essential) on the ground that they are effectively a form of contraception. Where Scripture is silent the matter should be left to the judgement of the persons |
|
concerned who, if they are walking rightly before the Lord, will seek to do what is right in his sight. Paul gave his opinion on a certain matter where he had no definite commandment from the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:25). The New Testament is not a rule book and there is much left to the spiritual discernment of the Christian. The Church of Rome often goes beyond Scripture in its pronouncements and its teaching on the matter of contraception is a case in point. Things such as masturbation are similarly not pronounced upon in Scripture. |
|
Why are the four things listed above wrong, apart from the fact they are forbidden in Scripture ? Scripture does not forbid things except for good reason. However, if they were not forbidden they would still be wrong. It is just that without the proscription there would be no punishment inflicted if they were violated. Thus we have: "Sin is not put to account when there is no law" (Romans 5:13). Adultery is wrong because it violates the rights of the husband. Paul warns against this in his first letter to the Thessalonians in chapter 4, verse 6: "Not overstepping the rights of and wronging his brother in the matter (that of sexual intercourse)". A man has a right to his wife's body and his wife to his (1 Corinthians 7:1-5). That these rights should not be exercised unreasonably is of course true (1 Peter 3:7). Thus no caring person would seek to have intercourse with someone very ill any more that they would expect them to get out of bed and clean the house. However, to refuse intercourse without such good reason is sin. If persisted in it would deny the other party children which they could well be looking forward to having. If marriage does not give a right to sexual intercourse it is not really marriage. Outside of marriage sexual intercourse is wrong. It can lead to one parent families with the later consequence of juvenile delinquency. |
|
However apart from the question of rights there is the question of purity. We are enjoined to be pure (2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Timothy 4:12). If we are not we may get venereal diseases, AIDS etc. There is also the question of the mental consequences of unnatural behaviour which may not be immediately apparent (Romans 1:28 " a reprobate mind"). The proscriptions in the law of Moses were to protect the Israelites from the diseases of Egypt (Deuteronomy 7:15; 28:60). Today the flouting of the proscriptions of Scripture regarding sexual matters has resulted in AIDS, and going back in history it is generally recognised that it was sexually transmitted diseases that played a large part in the decimation of the natives of the Caribbean area after the Spaniards started to colonise that part of the world. There are plenty of warnings in Scripture about sexual sin - see for instance Romans 1:27; Ephesians 5:5 onwards - and we ignore them at our peril. |
|
The question does arise as to the difference between the words adultery and fornication. The question is important in that Christ gives fornication as ground for putting away, but does not mention adultery as being such a ground. There are are several possibilities:- |
|
|