Father Malachi Martin
-
"Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8–10).
The biblical penalty for not giving your brother’s widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7–10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law, as Jewish and Christian commentators have always understood. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism," after the man who practiced it, just as homosexuality has historically been known as "Sodomy," after the men of Sodom, who practiced that vice (cf. Gen. 19). ( Cathollic Answers)
So the argument God killed him for using Contraception stands.
Contraception is wrong because itÂ’s a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race, often referred to as "natural law." The natural law purpose of sex is procreation. The pleasure that sexual intercourse provides is an additional blessing from God, intended to offer the possibility of new life while strengthening the bond of intimacy, respect, and love between husband and wife. The loving environment this bond creates is the perfect setting for nurturing children.
But sexual pleasure within marriage becomes unnatural, and even harmful to the spouses, when it is used in a way that deliberately excludes the basic purpose of sex, which is procreation. God’s gift of the sex act, along with its pleasure and intimacy, must not be abused by deliberately frustrating its natural end—procreation. -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
God killed Onan for wanting to have free sex indefinitly with his brother's wife. Essentially commiting adultery over and over again. God looks at the heart and the intention, not the act of contraception. This is a very clear cut substance over form issue.
"Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8–10).
The biblical penalty for not giving your brother’s widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7–10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law, as Jewish and Christian commentators have always understood. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism," after the man who practiced it, just as homosexuality has historically been known as "Sodomy," after the men of Sodom, who practiced that vice (cf. Gen. 19). ( Cathollic Answers)
So the argument God killed him for using Contraception stands.
Contraception is wrong because itÂ’s a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race, often referred to as "natural law." The natural law purpose of sex is procreation. The pleasure that sexual intercourse provides is an additional blessing from God, intended to offer the possibility of new life while strengthening the bond of intimacy, respect, and love between husband and wife. The loving environment this bond creates is the perfect setting for nurturing children.
But sexual pleasure within marriage becomes unnatural, and even harmful to the spouses, when it is used in a way that deliberately excludes the basic purpose of sex, which is procreation. God’s gift of the sex act, along with its pleasure and intimacy, must not be abused by deliberately frustrating its natural end—procreation. -
'But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brotherÂ’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother'Originally posted by Skibi:God killed Onan for wanting to have free sex indefinitly with his brother's wife. Essentially commiting adultery over and over again. God looks at the heart and the intention, not the act of contraception. This is a very clear cut substance over form issue.
Contraceptives or sex indefinitely....... -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
Which bible are you using?
'But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brotherÂ’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother'
Contraceptives or sex indefinitely.......Genesis 38:9 NIV
Very clear that he did it over and over again - he just wanted free sex. Contraception was just a means to achieve his goal of using his brother's wife as a sex buddy. i.e if she got pregnant, no more sex for Onan.
But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother's wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. -
He was supposed to have sex with her but he refused to spill his seed in her as he ddint want a child.Originally posted by Skibi:Very clear that he did it over and over again - he just wanted free sex. Contraception was just a means to achieve his goal of using his brother's wife as a sex buddy. i.e if she got pregnant, no more sex for Onan.
Genesis 38:9 NIV
But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother's wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother.
He didnt want children..classic case of contraception. -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
Actually, He just don't want to have children with his sister-in-law, cause that child wouldn't be his.
He was supposed to have sex with her but he refused to spill his seed in her as he ddint want a child.
Genesis 38:9 NIV
But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother's wife, [b]he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother.
He didnt want children..classic case of contraception.[/b]
He could have married another woman and have children through her, which would be his to keep (but he was struck dead before he could do this) -
Originally posted by vince69:
Precisely he didnt want to have children. So he had sex but with the intention of not procretating. He uses contraceptives to prevent that scenario and was struck down. God has never condoned contraceptives and neither did any Christian till 1930s.
Actually, He just don't want to have children with his sister-in-law, cause that child wouldn't be his.
b]
Look at ur Protestant Church Fathers
The apostolic traditionÂ’s condemnation of contraception is so great that it was followed by Protestants until 1930 and was upheld by all key Protestant Reformers. [b]Martin Luther said, "[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him."
John Calvin said, "The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse between man and woman 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."
John Wesley warned, "Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord—and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls." (These passages are quoted in Charles D. Provan, The Bible and Birth Control, which contains many quotes by historic Protestant figures who recognize contraception’s evils.)
How has Satan succeeded...Man rationalise sins. -
How come Pope Nich keeps on turning topics to contraception?
-
Correction: he turns every topic into anti-protestant tirade.Originally posted by sillyme:How come Pope Nich keeps on turning topics to contraception? -
getting sianz about the round about liao...Originally posted by Icemoon:Correction: he turns every topic into anti-protestant tirade. -
bear with it a little longer .. now is end of month liao.Originally posted by vince69:getting sianz about the round about liao...
-
ok loh... you go ahead, me sianz... will cut down liao...Originally posted by Icemoon:bear with it a little longer .. now is end of month liao. -
I also need to cut down .. have been surfing too much while at work.Originally posted by vince69:ok loh... you go ahead, me sianz... will cut down liao...
-
I wonder which bible Skibi uses also....Originally posted by Skibi:Which bible are you using?
He seems to have many theories of his own -
The topic already is anti-catholic. About the Church falling to Satan. Im merely highlighting how can the Catholic Church ( which is supposedly to have fallen away) be the only church advocating the Truth abt contraception.Originally posted by Icemoon:Correction: he turns every topic into anti-protestant tirade. -
What is the truth of Contraception?Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:The topic already is anti-catholic. About the Church falling to Satan. Im merely highlighting how can the Catholic Church ( which is supposedly to have fallen away) be the only church advocating the Truth abt contraception.
By whose interpretation did the Catholic church follow?
By the apostles? -
By the Apostles. Many Church Fathers wrote against contraception.Originally posted by M©+square:What is the truth of Contraception?
By whose interpretation did the Catholic church follow?
By the apostles?
Remember every Christian even Protestants held this view till 1930. -
I find the problem of this issue is that the Church tries to send the message of Contraception is Evil and is not of God. Which is not wrong, in fact i think it is right.
I've asked one NS mate (he happen to be some leader in his youth Catholic church) few years ago regarding about intercourse before marriage.
He thought for awhile and said, 'By right, no....then again....yes.'
Then Contraception? Again...'By right, cannot use. Then again......'
I think you really need to ask, who are the ones truly abandoning the teachings.
Personally, the need to teach people about God's intended purpose of marriage and intercourse is far more important than condemning some principles which people would nod in agreement but still live in values they deem fit.
It is more important to teach about being responsible about the relationships they hold.
My view on why Protestant church not standing with Catholic church - is because there wasn't any commandment opposing contraception. Period.
However there are teachings of godly living, marriage and abstaining body and mind from defilements.
Again, the deferring means of interpreting scripture.
____
Interestingly, there is no offical charge against Homosexualism and Child Sex abuse.
Wadever -
There is sufficient biblical evidence. The Protestant Reformers who defered every teachings and doctrines to Scripture found Contraception to be a sin worthy of death. God striking down Onan for his usage of contraceptive is sufficeint proof.Originally posted by M©+square:I find the problem of this issue is that the Church tries to send the message of Contraception is Evil and is not of God. Which is not wrong, in fact i think it is right.
I've asked one NS mate (he happen to be some leader in his youth Catholic church) few years ago regarding about intercourse before marriage.
He thought for awhile and said, 'By right, no....then again....yes.'
Then Contraception? Again...'By right, cannot use. Then again......'
I think you really need to ask, who are the ones truly abandoning the teachings.
Personally, the need to teach people about God's intended purpose of marriage and intercourse is far more important than condemning some principles which people would nod in agreement but still live in values they deem fit.
It is more important to teach about being responsible about the relationships they hold.
My view on why Protestant church not standing with Catholic church - is because there wasn't any commandment opposing contraception. Period.
However there are teachings of godly living, marriage and abstaining body and mind from defilements.
Again, the deferring means of interpreting scripture.
____
Interestingly, there is no offical charge against Homosexualism and Child Sex abuse.
Wadever
The Church alone teaches that contraception is wrong. There is many Judases in the Church who follows what is easy and abandon what is hard. We call them Cafeteria Catholics.
The question hence linking back to the thread with Skibi has yet to answer satisfactorially, is why then is the Catholic Church (whom God is supposedly against) being the last bastion of Truth against sexual immorality? Shouldnt it be the other way round??? Seems my example used against him had spurned another debate.
Interestingly, this is the same Church that has defrocked priest and condemned homosexuality and campaigned for Family Rights and not same-sex marriage. Priest abusing children is hardly an argument for proving the downfall of the Church. -
I'd happy to be educated by the quotation of scriptures you have.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:There is sufficient biblical evidence. The Protestant Reformers who defered every teachings and doctrines to Scripture found Contraception to be a sin worthy of death. God striking down Onan for his usage of contraceptive is sufficeint proof.
The Church alone teaches that contraception is wrong. There is many Judases in the Church who follows what is easy and abandon what is hard. We call them Cafeteria Catholics.
The question hence linking back to the thread with Skibi has yet to answer satisfactorially, is why then is the Catholic Church (whom God is supposedly against) being the last bastion of Truth against sexual immorality? Shouldnt it be the other way round??? Seems my example used against him had spurned another debate.
Interestingly, this is the same Church that has defrocked priest and condemned homosexuality and campaigned for Family Rights and not same-sex marriage. Priest abusing children is hardly an argument for proving the downfall of the Church.
Biblical scriptures please. -
The Bible mentions at least one form of contraception specifically and condemns it. Coitus interruptus, was used by Onan to avoid fulfilling his duty according to the ancient Jewish law of fathering children for one’s dead brother.Originally posted by M©+square:I'd happy to be educated by the quotation of scriptures you have.
Biblical scriptures please.
"Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8–10).
The biblical penalty for not giving your brother’s widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7–10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism".
Every Christian such as Popes, Doctors, Church fathers and even the Reformers held this view. As a non-catholic, u might be interested to hear what Martin Luther had to say regarding this verse.
Martin Luther said, "[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him." -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
Your count of scriptural quote is : 2
The Bible mentions at least one form of contraception specifically and condemns it. Coitus interruptus, was used by Onan to avoid fulfilling his duty according to the ancient Jewish law of fathering children for one’s dead brother.
"Judah said to Onan, Go in to your brothers wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But[b] Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brothers wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8 11;10).
The biblical penalty for not giving your brothers widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7&10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism".
Every Christian such as Popes, Doctors, Church fathers and even the Reformers held this view. As a non-catholic, u might be interested to hear what Martin Luther had to say regarding this verse.
Martin Luther said, "[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him."
[/b]
How i would have read the scripture.
Genesis 38:2-10 (Amplified Bible)
Amplified Bible (AMP)
2There Judah saw and met a daughter of Shuah, a Canaanite; he took her as wife and lived with her.
3And she became pregnant and bore a son, and he called him Er.
4And she conceived again and bore a son and named him Onan.
5Again she conceived and bore a son and named him Shelah. [They were living] at Chezib when she bore him.
6Now Judah took a wife for Er, his firstborn; her name was Tamar.
7And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord slew him.
8Then Judah told Onan, Marry your brother's widow; live with her and raise offspring for your brother.
9But Onan knew that the family would not be his, so when he cohabited with his brother's widow, he prevented conception, lest he should raise up a child for his brother.
10And the thing which he did displeased the Lord; therefore He slew him also.
This is my take on the scripture without representing any denominations.
He(Onan) doesn't object intercourse with his brother's wife Tamar, He knows the child will not be his. He does not want her to bear a child/he does not want her to bear a child. SO he prevented conception. And that act displeases God.
Basically, Onan's disobedience was what costed his life.
But if you're going to use this passage as the anchor verse for contraception. I have no problem with that. Because there is no way we could side step the issue and deny that the act was why God killed Onan.
But was spilling the semens the only reason why Onan was slewed? No.
Like i've mentioned earlier, interpretations and emphasis varies.
Like i've mentioned about this Catholic NS mate.
The church says NO to contraception. And the followers/members says NO as well.
Their actions differs......what gives?