Contraception

The issue isn't having as many children as you can.

The issue is having the mind of Christ and putting God first in every area of life, including money, work, relationships, and procreation.

It appears that the evangelical church jumped ship when eugenics and birth control became popular under Margeret Sanger's advocacy.

Loving God and one's spouse creates a wonderful home environment for God to bless. Practicing God-ordained methods for feeding and caring for children is necessary for those who "trust" God in the area of procreation.

 

That didn't prevent me from having 2 only 15 months apart. Number 2 was less than 6 months old when I KNEW I was pregnant without ever having a cycle and not using any bottles, cereals, pacifiers, etc. </font>[/QUOTE]I should have put a disclaimer on my post. As soon as I share this information anywhere, someone will share how their friend practiced breastfeeding on demand and still got pregant right away!!!!

But when probing, almost always, the mother was scheduding feedings, using a bottle of water, using a pacifier, etc.

Breastfeeding on demand only works when the baby is with mom 24/7 and nursing not just for food but for emotional support as well.

These are averages, folks. Anyone can share "the exception" to the rule! But usually they aren't doing what they claim they are doing.

 

I can read between your lines, Paul33, and know you mean that the baby is in bed and mom and dad aren't as sexually active as they might be if there weren't children in said bed. That's NOT scriptural!

Except for fasting and prayer doesn't include a baby or toddler sleeping in the bed.

 

First off, this isn't personal, since my wife has followed all the same practices you advocate in terms of feeding on demand / emotional support/ and even kids in bed. But I am interested what biblical support you find for the nessisity of breast feeding all the time or for emotional support or etc?

 

I knew 2 couples who each had tribes. One of'em had SIXTEEN kids, 8 of each gender, and BRAGGED about it! Never mind that they stayed in the poorhouse. Never mind that 2 of the older ones became pastors while 2 of the younger ones are in prison for selling dope at the local schools, while 2 others are drunks. Never mind that both parents died before age 60 of overwork.

Same story for the other couple who had 11 kids...1 pastor, 2 jailbirds, several parasites who won't work, both parents dead before age 60. While they were fortunate enough not to have financial probs as their family owned a prosperous business, they, like the first couple, didn't have enough ATTENTION to go around for their respective tribes. AND BOTH COUPLES WERE CHRISTIAN!

 

I can read between your lines, Paul33, and know you mean that the baby is in bed and mom and dad aren't as sexually active as they might be if there weren't children in said bed. That's NOT scriptural!

Except for fasting and prayer doesn't include a baby or toddler sleeping in the bed.

</font>[/QUOTE]Diane, not at all!

Having a baby in bed does not inhibit the marital act between husband and wife.

Read Luke 11:7!

 

Hi Pete,

I simply mean that it is normal in most countries of the world for mom and baby to be together 24/7 early on in life.

Eric Erickson has shown that the first stage of a baby's life is the development of trust vs. mistrust.

The idea, then, is that babies who spend their first year with mom are much more psychologically healthy than those that don't.

It seems that the American model of separating the baby from mommy is not as healthy or normal (in practice) than mom wearing the baby in a caboose!

Did God make mothers to naturally care for their infant children and meet their infant children's emotional and physical needs? I think that God did.

What does that look like?

 

robycop,

Interesting stories.

How do you think trans-generational families might have played a role in rearing children in biblical times or even in the 1800s?

 

Okay, I thought when you said "God-ordained" you were taking that under Biblical authority. I certainly agree with about the infant being as close to the mother as possible.

 

I believe we might be getting close to legalism here. I think if a couple cannot really afford another child, or doesn't really have time to properly care for AND PLAY WITH another child, then there's nothing wrong with taking steps to not have more.

My first child was born when my wife and I were 35, our last one when we were 38. We were married before we were saved, and we'd agreed to only 2 kids then. Five years into our marriage, we were saved...but it was ANOTHER 5 YEARS before we had a child. And we hadn't been using contraceptives.

We believe God gave us our sons in HIS good time, and that He didn't want us to have more. We have done our best to raise them in knowledge of both God and man, to truthfully answer their questions, and to TEACH THEM RIGHT FROM WRONG. That has paid off in that we've never had to worry about their using recreational chemicals or engaging in sinful or illicit activities...but they've each had all the FUN they could stand.

My personal view is that children shouldn't have to wait in line for their parents' attention as they do when a couple has its own football team, but such questions as "How many kids should we have?" don't have any "one size fits all" answers.

 

Roby, Jim and I were married on Oct. 10, 1970 at 7 p.m. Our first child was born July 10th, 1971 at 7 a.m.
8 months, 29 days and 12 hours after we got married. He really was 2 weeks early.

Then I submit someone's doing it wrong.

 

I don't really know what Day 15 refers to, obviously I don't think that it should be done against either party's will, but Paul teaches abstinence only for the reason of a Woman's cycle, and prayer and fasting, and than only for a short time.

My point is not to quibble over what days a spouse can and cannot say no, just that the scriptures that touch on marital abstinence only allow it in those two specific cases, the menstrual cycle (goes back to the Law) and prayer and fasting. So If you want to schedule some prayer and fasting at the proper time, perhaps it would be Biblical for a short time, but all that does is put less lottery balls in the hopper(to use a good Baptist analogy), most people who use that method can be described by the word "pregnant"

 

Then I submit someone's doing it wrong. </font>[/QUOTE]Not at all! You kind of just push the kid out of the way. Sometimes you share secret hiding places! Sometimes, you just have to yank the kid off!

 

I don't really know what Day 15 refers to, obviously I don't think that it should be done against either party's will, but Paul teaches abstinence only for the reason of a Woman's cycle, and prayer and fasting, and than only for a short time.

My point is not to quibble over what days a spouse can and cannot say no, just that the scriptures that touch on marital abstinence only allow it in those two specific cases, the menstrual cycle (goes back to the Law) and prayer and fasting. So If you want to schedule some prayer and fasting at the proper time, perhaps it would be Biblical for a short time, but all that does is put less lottery balls in the hopper(to use a good Baptist analogy), most people who use that method can be described by the word "pregnant" </font>[/QUOTE]The OT law forbid marital intercourse during and immediately after the period, resulting in intercourse taking place at the most fertile time in the woman's cycle.

 

Day 15 is usually the fertile time for most women with normal cycles. I cannot imagine it being sinful to choose to abstain that day.

I was also one who b/fed and still got pregnant while nursing a wee babe. And, I also dont see it as sinful for babies to co-sleep. Its not them being in the bed that inhibits activity. Its the exhaustion from the day.

 

Tatertot,

Right. If the couple chose to be intimate on the first day they were allowed by OT law it would coincide with a normal woman's most fertile time. But the Bible doesn't say they couldn't abstain at that time.

However, the OT views children as a blessing and gift and gives several examples of women longing to become pregnant. Perhaps their cycles were off just enough to keep them from getting pregnant.

I can find no where in the Bible where abstaining from sex during a woman's fertile period is called a sin. We have chosen a barrier method, however, because for some reason we are always interested "around" that time.

 

lol

I just think that this whole discussion is based on "items" and not concept. Of course, no one will say that a woman HAS to consent at all times, and neither does a man (as if that would happen). But its all part of the same concept.

 

Ok, I'm just going to jump in here. My name is Amanda, I am new to this board. I came here looking for answers and advice to something that has been burdening me. I just got married and I am on birth control. I prayed about whether or not it was God's will for me or not and at the time I was being pressured by several people in my life to get on the pill. I had brain surgery in November and they did not think my body is ready to deal with being pregnant. I also asked the advice of two Christians who I respect and often go to for advice. They both told me that they don't think it is wrong for Christians to be on birth control. Well I prayed that the Lord would give them the wisdom to let me know what to do, so I took that advice as comming from Him. I also was not completely convinced so I prayed to the Lord that He would clear my conscience if it is ok for me to be on the pill, and He did for a few months. I just have this feeling that it is wrong now. It is taking a toll on my 3 week old marriage. I am frustrating my husband by going back and forth. He too is worried about my health and our financial situation. A few people have told me to "use the brain that God gave me", and that He wants us to "use our common sense". I just started thinking that He does not always want us to do that, sometimes He wants us to have faith. For example, a friend of mine was date raped and she became pregnant. Well, she was 18, just out of school, unmarried, basically not ready for a baby. Well, the "logical" thing for her to do might have been to abort the pregnancy so as to "not bring a baby into that kind of environment". But she had faith in God and had the baby because she did not believe in abortion (which I think is so awesome, I admire her faith). I just used that example to illustrate that yes God gave us a brain, but in some situations He just wants us to have faith. Back to my question, is it right or wrong to take birth control pills? My husband and I are not ready, we can barely afford to make it as we are now. I am so frustrated because I have prayed and prayed and prayed for an answer and I feel like God is not answering me!!!

 

I'm completely new here, but I wanted to reply because you sound so distressed!

I don't think it is true that God is not listening to you and is simply ignoring your request. I think that it might be that he wants you to work through this on your own and make up your mind based upon what you know about him.

I don't think that methods of contraception designed to prevent conception are wrong because a human life is not taken. Methods such as IUD's are wrong, however, because their sole purpose is to prevent implantation after conception has occurred.

Others think that using contraception is wrong because it means that you don't have faith that God will care for you. I think that God wants us to have faith but also to take steps to care for ourselves as well. After all, when Nehemiah and the people rebuilt the walls, they posted guards and worked with a tool in one hand and a sword in the other! In my opinion preventing conception until you are in the position to safely carry a baby and care for it properly is just being responsible. Not using contraception and relying on God to go against his design and keep you from getting pregnant is like not eating any fruits and vegetables and asking God to prevent you from getting scurvy!

I guess you need to determine what is making you hesitant about using contraception. Are you concerned that it means that you aren't trusting God, or are you worried that it might be taking a life?

With the pill it is true that there is a small chance of ovulation, and once this ovulation occurs there is also a small chance that fertilization may occur. While you are on the pill your uterine lining will be thickened and not as receptive to implantation. It is true then that there is a small chance that the pill may act as an abortifacient by preventing implantation. This risk is greatly lessened by taking the pill every day on time. Personally we've decided that the chances of this happening are so slim that it's probably about as risky as exercising too much or drinking too much coffee.

If you are unwilling to use the pill because of this there are other barrier methods that simply prevent the sperm from reaching the egg, such as condoms, the cervical cap, the cervical sponge, or a diaphragm. Most if not all of these can be used along with spermicide.

If you're unwilling to use any type of contraception, you might research Natural Family Planning (not the rhythym method!) This site talks about it some: http://ccli.org/nfp/basics/effectiveness-p01.php It involves tracking ovulation based upon trends in body temperature and changes in cervical mucus.

Your friend's situation and choice not to have an abortion aren't necessarily related to this, because abortion is definitely wrong, but the situation with contraceptives isn't so clear!

I hope this post is helpful to you.

 

Someone used the example of the Great Depression as evidence birth control was wrong.

I'd like to point out that during that time in our history suicides were astronomical, fathers oftened abandoned familes, children often died in childbirth or from disease and some starved. Mothers often died in childbirth.

In times of the past where large families were encouraged people often "lived off the land," hunting for meat, planting for food. Large families actually "helped" by producing "needed labor."

Economics are different today.

I wanted four children, but I felt a responsiblity, given to me by God, to provide well for the children He had blessed with me. So we have two.

I also felt a duty not to deny my husband out of fear of unwanted children. So I used methods which would prevent fertilization. I feel it was the right thing to do. By doing that I was able to have quality time with my spouse and my children. On the flip side, I know a family with many, many children. Both parents work multiple jobs. The kids are raising themselves or being raised by strangers. The biblical times of "working at home" and of "children following their parents profession" are gone.

I remember when one set of grandparents decided they had enough children the grandmother moved into her own bedroom. Somehow I think denying a spouse for decades is wrong.

God provided a method to live up to both responsiblities.

For those who feel that birth control is wrong - I have to ask you - do you think God is so small and unpowerful that He cannot cause you to conceive a child He desires to live despite your use of birthcontrol?

Also - if you're looking at the Old Testament - keep in mind - men also had hundreds of wives AND concubines. Should we bring back those practices?