Replies

First of all, the prohibition of contraception is not based on just the one narrative of contraception found in Genesis 38, in which it is condemned.

Keep in mind that NO Christian leader or denomination approved of contraception before 1930, when the Anglicans broke ranks with all of Christendom at their Lambeth conference. According to John Kippley (whose research you really should look up), not a single Christian writing between the 1st and 19th centuries saw Onan's sin as other than perverting sexual intercourse, wasting his seed upon the ground. This is a Christian consensus.

Was that consensus founded ONLY on the fact that contraception is mentioned only once in the Bible, when it is condemned? No, it's also founded on much broader and deeper principles of the Christian understanding of God's holy purpose for marriage.

Fertility is always described Biblically as a blessing and a gift of God. Never once in over 23,000 verses of Scripture is marital fertility described negatively; not once is the impairing of fertility described as a tolerable thing.

Anyone who reads this and does not consider it self-evident, is encouraged to go ahead and use their Biblical concordance and see that it's true.

This lines up perfectly with Natural Law, which sees fertility as a natural sign of health, and therefore the sabotage of fertility as a harm. Thus Natural Law teaches that intentionally impairing fertility via any deviate intercourse included contracepted intercourse, sodomitical intercourse, intentional maiming of sexual competency via sterilization, castration or sex-reassignment surgery, is a wrong. This is acting against the good of normal, healthy sex by impairing its nature.

Natural Law recognizes the good design of sexual intercourse. The Biblical perspective tells us Who was the Designer of this natural good, and for what purpose.

As I said, in the course of 1900 years of Christian reflection on God's purpose and design for sexuality, this has been a constant.

If people can ignore absolute Biblical and Christian consensus on that, lasting several millennia, it would not be surprising for people to approve other deviations from natural sex as well.

Maybe you've noticed.

So, if I understand you correctly, it is a sin to intentionally have a barren marriage?

I'm not arguing against fertility per se, I'm pointing out that Genesis 38 does not necessarily mean what you say it means. If you wanted to argue that contraception violates the general principles that is laid down in scriptures, that is quite a different story.

Besides, if Genesis 38 meant what you think it means, Onan and most boys wouldn't have made it past the age of 14, let alone make it to marriage.

First of all, the prohibition of contraception is not based on just the one narrative of contraception found in Genesis 38, in which it is condemned.

And yet, you only put forth this one passage and it doesn't teach what you claimed...

Keep in mind that NO Christian leader or denomination approved of contraception before 1930

And that doesn't matter.

not a single Christian writing between the 1st and 19th centuries saw Onan's sin as other than perverting sexual intercourse, wasting his seed upon the ground. This is a Christian consensus.

Can't wait for you to prove that truth claim! What do you have to prove that?? Also, all that matters is what God's Word actually teaches, and not what others write about it.

This lines up perfectly with Natural Law, which sees fertility as a natural sign of health, and therefore the sabotage of fertility as a harm.

There is a difference between sabotage and regulation.

Thus Natural Law teaches that intentionally impairing fertility via any deviate intercourse included contracepted intercourse, sodomitical intercourse, intentional maiming of sexual competency via sterilization, castration or sex-reassignment surgery, is a wrong. This is acting against the good of normal, healthy sex by impairing its nature.

I rank God's Words as authoritative and He spent darn little time on the topic. This is why you are turning to "natural law."

Natural Law recognizes the good design of sexual intercourse. The Biblical perspective tells us Who was the Designer of this natural good, and for what purpose.

ALWAYS ignore consensus when it disagrees with God's Word and when it adds to God's Word. If people can ignore absolute Biblical and Christian consensus on that, lasting several millennia, it would not be surprising for people to approve other deviations from natural sex as well.

Deviant sex is condemned in Scripture.