Approval of Contraception

Contraception and Christianity, in the Christian Forum contains a viewpoint that avoidance of contraception has scriptual authority.

My question in this thread is why so many Christian denominations do not support that interpretation. We know that some medical contraception is opposed when it is classed as an aborifact, but, in general, all other medication and methods are approved. Why?

Two of the scriptures cited in that thread:

Genesis 1:28. And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it . . . “

and

Genesis 9:1. And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.”

are used as the basis of the argument. Both pertain to a world where there were VERY limited numbers of people (Eden and after the flood), who had to get out there and start multiplying lest the human race vanish from the Earth.
I think most people - regardless of their religion - are bright enough to realise that barring mass extinction the human race is in no immediate danger of vanishing from the earth because people don't continually pump out babies like they used to. Babies that died a lot of the time because there wasn't a long enough interval between births (amongst other reasons.).

lady_lazarus said:

Two of the scriptures cited in that thread:
Genesis 1:28. And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it . . . “and
Genesis 9:1. And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.”
are used as the basis of the argument. Both pertain to a world where there were VERY limited numbers of people (Eden and after the flood), who had to get out there and start multiplying lest the human race vanish from the Earth.
I think most people - regardless of their religion - are bright enough to realise that barring mass extinction the human race is in no immediate danger of vanishing from the earth because people don't continually pump out babies like they used to. Babies that died a lot of the time because there wasn't a long enough interval between births (amongst other reasons.).

Click to expand...

The sad fact is that it seems as if it is those best placed (financially) to 'pump out babies' ( gives me a horrendous image of a woman much like one of those tennis ball 'spouters') are the ones who are slowing down the rate of reproduction.

Where the idea of contraception would be the most sociologically useful (In terms of adapting religious concepts to fit in with changing times) - ie the third world countries ( with the most heart breaking picture of children who are malnourished, sick) is unfortunately (in my mind) the 'pumping out' seems unabated.

Yeah, I think that that's an incredibly vague interpretation. Just because you're using contraceptives doesn't mean you're trying to keep yourself from "being fruitful and multiplying", you just want to do it later.

Also, he/she who choose lives of abstinence are the most at fault then, aren't they?

I never understood how using contraceptives that don't "kill the fetus" is somehow wrong and intervines with God's will.

Is God so powerless that he can't put a few holes in a condom?

Is God so powerless that he can't put a few holes in a condom?

Click to expand...

Yes. ...Wait---AAAHHHHH!

Ceridwen018 said:

Yeah, I think that that's an incredibly vague interpretation. Just because you're using contraceptives doesn't mean you're trying to keep yourself from "being fruitful and multiplying", you just want to do it later.

Also, he/she who choose lives of abstinence are the most at fault then, aren't they?

Click to expand...

Well, logically you're delaying the fruitfulness and multiplying until you're in a position to be able to afford it.

Jensa said:

I never understood how using contraceptives that don't "kill the fetus" is somehow wrong and intervines with God's will.

Is God so powerless that he can't put a few holes in a condom?

Click to expand...

Who knows...maybe the 16.5% infant mortality rate in the 1900's was the will of God.

I think people disapprove of contraception not based on the be fruitful and multiply part as much as the story of Onan, who pulled out, and got a dose of smiting for it, if I remember correctly.

Mister Emu said:

I think people disapprove of contraception not based on the be fruitful and multiply part as much as the story of Onan, who pulled out, and got a dose of smiting for it, if I remember correctly.

Click to expand...

Ah, but it's medical contraception that seems to be the issue...natural forms of contraception - of which I imagine the withdrawal method would be one - are ok under certain circumstances.

That is a good question, Pah, I was wondering that myself. I think the term you're thinking of is pharmekia, which I believe referred to medicines that didn't actually cure, but rather were thought to have some sort of mystical or spiritual power. However I admit I haven't researched it enough to really say. I will try and find something more on it.

This is what I could find, and I couldn't find much else.

"Its root is pharmakon which refers to a druggist, pharmacist, poisoner, magician or sorcerer. God clearly states that Pharmakeia (the use of drugs) is a sin in Galatians 5:19-20a; "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft" (Pharmakeia).... Most Bible scholars have uncritically assumed that this Greek word means "sorcery" or "witchcraft" (as translated in English Bibles). But pharmakeia (from which our word pharmacy comes) originally referred to the use of potions, drugs, and often poisons, generally for evil purposes. Since these concoctions were often thought to have magical properties, the word developed the secondary meaning of "sorcery."

So basically, when the Bible uses the word "pharmekia" it is referring to drugs such as herbs or potions prescribed by Shamans in order to commune with evil spirits. How that word refers to today is hard to tell, because they didn't have the same type of pharmaceutical medicines that we have today. I think common sense would tell you if it was a drug used for healing it would be alright, otherwise, probably not. This would encompass such things as drug abuse as well as the pill and forms of "sorcery" such as ouija boards and the like. That is my personal take on it anyway, but it is still open to interpretation.