-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The question that must be answered is, What is the purpose of sex? If the only reason for sex is procreation, then condom use would be wrong.
It is hard for me to read the Song of Solomon, and imagine that this is true. God has given us this world, and each other to be happy. He has endowed us with an ability not found in the animals. The ability to enjoy things just for enjoyment's sake. Evolutionists have a hard time explaining art, and music, and poetry, in terms of natural selection. Our ability to enjoy things because of their beauty, and other aesthetic qualities, defies reductionist theories for the origin of life.
Why was the Song of Solomon written? It is about procreation? The intimacy between a man and a woman in the marriage relationship is special. That is why God put parameters around it, so that it would not be misused. Are we like the animals, who act instinctively, or has God endowed us with the free will to make choices based on our ability to enjoy His creation, while at the same time remaining obedient to His will?
So what is the problem here? If the problem is that we are restraining God's will, (as if that were possible), then what of abstinence? If a married couple restrict their sex to only certain times, as has been suggested, is that not the same as using a comdom, in terms of restricting God's will to procreate? Certainly our intentions are the same in each case. And what of singles. If a person remains single past a certain age, are they sinning by restricting God's ability to procreate?
These are the questions that must be asked, and answered by each individual, through careful reading and contemplation of the scriptures, and in solemn prayer to our God and creator. It is a personal choice, and one in which we need to seek His will first.
It is hard for me to read the Song of Solomon, and imagine that this is true. God has given us this world, and each other to be happy. He has endowed us with an ability not found in the animals. The ability to enjoy things just for enjoyment's sake. Evolutionists have a hard time explaining art, and music, and poetry, in terms of natural selection. Our ability to enjoy things because of their beauty, and other aesthetic qualities, defies reductionist theories for the origin of life.
Why was the Song of Solomon written? It is about procreation? The intimacy between a man and a woman in the marriage relationship is special. That is why God put parameters around it, so that it would not be misused. Are we like the animals, who act instinctively, or has God endowed us with the free will to make choices based on our ability to enjoy His creation, while at the same time remaining obedient to His will?
So what is the problem here? If the problem is that we are restraining God's will, (as if that were possible), then what of abstinence? If a married couple restrict their sex to only certain times, as has been suggested, is that not the same as using a comdom, in terms of restricting God's will to procreate? Certainly our intentions are the same in each case. And what of singles. If a person remains single past a certain age, are they sinning by restricting God's ability to procreate?
These are the questions that must be asked, and answered by each individual, through careful reading and contemplation of the scriptures, and in solemn prayer to our God and creator. It is a personal choice, and one in which we need to seek His will first.
-
1
- Show all
S
I think it's irresponsible to have more children than you can provide for. So condoms or other forms of birth control are totally okay to me. However, if you feel in your heart that it's wrong, then it IS wrong for you. I think of James 4:17, "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins."
Trust_in_the_Name brought this up before but I'll say it again: Romans 14:22 "So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves." Romans 14 in general has a lot of good verses that talk about making up your own mind about certain doctrines (food, sacred days, etc) and I think this topic would fit in that as well.
Trust_in_the_Name brought this up before but I'll say it again: Romans 14:22 "So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves." Romans 14 in general has a lot of good verses that talk about making up your own mind about certain doctrines (food, sacred days, etc) and I think this topic would fit in that as well.
H
The medical description is break through pregnancy. This occurs when the woman or couple employ any method of birth control, and the women becomes pregnant. There are even percentages that accompany each form of birth control. For example: 0.50% women using birth control pills will become pregnant while using this method. The incidence of break through pregnancy is much higher with condoms.
Also, the " rhythm method " you mentioned has been proven to be totally unpredictable and useless.
So, if God intends for a women to become pregnant, then she will become pregnant.
The Catholic church teaches that condom use is a sin, but this church also teaches many things that are not biblical.
As to the thread question:
I sincerely hope that when asked this question you are also stating that sex outside of marriage is a sin. Married couples are expected to be good stewards, responsible individuals. In this day, age and economy having a large family is not a good idea.
Does the Lord provide, yes He does, but He does so on His terms not ours.
So, condom use is a question that only a married couple should be entertaining. IMO, condom use by a married couple does not constitute a sin.
Also, the " rhythm method " you mentioned has been proven to be totally unpredictable and useless.
So, if God intends for a women to become pregnant, then she will become pregnant.
The Catholic church teaches that condom use is a sin, but this church also teaches many things that are not biblical.
As to the thread question:
I sincerely hope that when asked this question you are also stating that sex outside of marriage is a sin. Married couples are expected to be good stewards, responsible individuals. In this day, age and economy having a large family is not a good idea.
Does the Lord provide, yes He does, but He does so on His terms not ours.
So, condom use is a question that only a married couple should be entertaining. IMO, condom use by a married couple does not constitute a sin.
K
well, im a christian and im not gonna have sex before i get married. im for the "no sex before marriage". so, i think the wrong thing between unmarried folk havin sex, is the fact dat theyre havin and not dat they use condoms. so , yeah, the question is about condom use by married couples cuz actually, 4 us christians, theres no sex before marriage.
"prevent having to open a kindergarten/nursery school" looool
and yes, God will help you my brother
"prevent having to open a kindergarten/nursery school" looool
and yes, God will help you my brother
The Rhythm method is pretty inaccurate. However, the NFP method has shown to be 99% effective when utilized properly, on par with condom use+spermicides.
Also, the Catholic Church does not teach anything that is contrary to Scriptures. It may be contrary to people's personal interpretations, but that doesn't necessarily mean the Catholic Church is the one who's teachings are inaccurate
Also, the Catholic Church does not teach anything that is contrary to Scriptures. It may be contrary to people's personal interpretations, but that doesn't necessarily mean the Catholic Church is the one who's teachings are inaccurate
Just a straw man. He didn't say the Catholic Church teaches contrary to the scriptures, he said they teach many things that are not biblical, which is correct. The Catholic Church teaches all kinds of things that are not found anywhere in scripture (such as, for example, that using birth control is not ok).
S
Arguments built on the absence of something are quite weak. The Bible doesn't directly mention abortion even though it was also performed regularly by the Romans in Jesus' time. Liberal Christians have used the same argument your using to support birth control to support abortion more times than I can count.
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 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).
From here
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).
From here