Fellas, I know that all of you value God's word and believe that it should be treated with care and applied with caution. This is why I propose that we talk more about the controversial topic of birth control and the Bible.
Most of you disagree with me on this topic, so I want to shift the focus off of me and onto a legitimate and real debate that is transpiring the Evangelical world today. Maybe if we sift through the arguments, we can come to agreement on this topic. I know that you all want harmony and peace between us, both interpersonally and in terms of our Biblical interpretation. Perhaps through some hard thinking and honest discussion, we can come to agreement, even if it means my changing my mind. First, I want to propose that this is a topic worthy of our interest. Very good Biblical commentators agree with the position that birth control is not okay according to the Bible. It's not just Catholics, but also well known -- indeed, famous -- Protestant reformers interpret Genesis 38:8-10 this way. And as we'll see from the Bayly sermon below, there are actually three scriptural lines of argument against Birth Control, although the following is the most notorius for "proving" the point: "Then 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 whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also." Says John Calvin: "I will content myself with briefly mentioning this, as far as the sense of shame allows to discuss it. It is a horrible thing to pour out seed besides the intercourse of man and woman. Deliberately avoiding the intercourse, so that the seed drops on the ground, is doubly horrible. For this means that one quenches the hope of his family, and kills the son, which could be expected, before he is born. This wickedness is now as severely as is possible condemned by the Spirit, through Moses, that Onan, as it were, through a violent and untimely birth, tore away the seed of his brother out the womb, and as cruel as shamefully was thrown on the earth. Moreover he thus has, as much as was in his power, tried to destroy a part of the human race. When a woman in some way drives away the seed out the womb, through aids, then this is rightly seen as an unforgivable crime. Onan was guilty of a similar crime, by defiling the earth with his seed, so that Tamar would not receive a future inheritor" (Commentary on Genesis). How good and careful was John Calvin in interpreting Scripture? Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius, after whom the anti-Calvinistic movement Arminianism was named, says with regard to the value of Calvin's writings: "Next to the study of the Scriptures which I earnestly inculcate, I exhort my pupils to peruse Calvin’s Commentaries, which I extol in loftier terms than Helmich himself (a Dutch divine, 1551–1608); for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the interpretation of Scripture, and that his commentaries ought to be more highly valued than all that is handed down to us by the library of the fathers; so that I acknowledge him to have possessed above most others, or rather above all other men, what may be called an eminent spirit of prophecy. His Institutes ought to be studied after the (Heidelberg) Catechism, as containing a fuller explanation, but with discrimination, like the writings of all men." I like it that Arminius included the last part, "but with discrimination, like the writings of all men." We shouldn't take Calvin's word as the last word on this topic, but just whose word should we take? Our own? An authority on Scripture in today's world? One theologian I trust who disagrees with me is John Piper. Here is his stance on the issue: http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/AskPastorJohn/ByTopic/45/1440_Does_the_Bible_permit_birth_control. His writings on this topic are definitely worth reading, and I will read them. But the deal I want to make with you all is this: If I read Piper's stance on this issue with care and take it seriously, I ask you to take the Calvinist stance on this issue seriously too. Is that a deal? So participating further in this discussion means that we will engage each other after "seeing it from the other person's point of view." I will carefully read the Piper selection. And whomever wants to engage this issue further can read the Bayly sermon below: For more on the "Bayly line" see http://www.christtheword.com/Genesis%2038-1-11%20The%20Sin%20of%20Onan.pdf. Is this fair terms for further discussion? Isn't it important that we know the ins and outs of this controversial topic? Shouldn't we as thinking, intellectual, Christians know both sides of the Birth Control and the Bible issue? If you answers to these questions is yes, I look forward to discussing this topic with you! Your Brother In Christ, Bobby --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crosspointe Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/crosspointe-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
