Saturday, June 25, 2005

Responses to common arguments for birth control

Welcome back. This post will be my response to different arguments that try to rebut my arguments against birth control, as well as a response to commonly heard arguments that birth control should be practiced.

ASSERTION: "Just like God has given us medicine for sickness, God has also given us methods of birth control to be responsible."

RESPONSE: This is comparing apples to oranges. Medicine is for what is unnatural and a result of the Fall: namely, sickness, disease, and death. But children are natural, and a gift from the Lord. It is His intention that we be fruitful and multiply.

ASSERTION: "Birth control does not take away from the natural union of husband and wife."

RESPONSE: Yes, it does. If it is condoms, then it blocks the man's seed, thus preventing the full giving of the husband to the wife. If it is pills, then it prevents the fertilization of the egg, and has a chance for a spontaneous abortion. Also, the so-called Roman Catholic idea of "natural family planning" prevents full union, because there are approximately 10 days a month in which you cannot be joined to your spouse sexually. The only natural family planning there is is to let God plan your family.

ASSERTION: "Yes, God seeks a godly seed--but who's to say it can't be two or three children?"

RESPONSE: God's command is to be fruitful and multiply. He blesses as He sees fit. Our culture hates children. But the Bible describes them as "arrows in the hands of a mighty warrior," that "he who has a quiver-full is blessed." Would we say that an orange tree that has three or four oranges is a fruitful orange tree?

ASSERTION: "Birth control does not undermine the beauty of the sexual act within marriage."

RESPONSE: Yes, it does. The full giving of each spouse to each other is blocked. Sex can then possibly become a selfish act. (Note, I said possibly.) Sex is about pleasing your partner, not just about getting yourself pleased.

ASSERTION: "You do not understand the passage about women being saved through childbearing. Besides, the interpretation has been disputed by many."

RESPONSE: God has created women under the headship and authority of man. As 1 Corinthians 11 says, the head of woman is man, the head of man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God. This does not make women lesser or suppressed. We do not hold to an Islamic view of women. For anyone who thinks this undermines women because the husband is the head, or because creationally man is the head of woman, consider the fact that God the Father is the Head of Christ. Christ is positionally under the Father's authority. But ontologically speaking, all Three Members of the glorious Trinity are co-equal. The same with man and woman. Even though Peter says the wife is the "weaker partner," he certainly does not mean weaker in dignity as a person. Man and woman are equal ontologically, but have different roles economically. Having said all this, the apostle is clear that one of God's roles for women is to bear children to the glory of God. This is her glorious calling. This is fulfilling for her, because this is how God designed her. Even consider the fact that the more children the wife has, and the more she breastfeeds, the lesser her chances of getting breast cancer. Consider the fact that statistics show that women who work out of the home their whole lives die earlier than those who stay at home and take care of their children. Indeed, our feministic culture has brainwashed women--even Christian women have been brainwashed by our culture.

ASSERTION: "But if you have so many children, your wife's body will get worn out like an old dog!"

RESPONSE: The following is a response from my wife herself: God gives grace and strength as He sees fit. Besides, the woman's body is back to normal in a short period of time. It indeed does NOT take years! Also, the whole ideology behind the above objection is a selfish one. We need to be obedient the Lord's commands. It is not about "me." It is about serving the Lord with gladness.

ASSERTION: "How are you going to provide for your family if you have like 20 children?!"

RESPONSE: Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you. The Lord promises to provide as we obey Him. Mark my words on this! This is the Lord's own Word and promise.

ASSERTION: "What are you, a Roman Catholic?!"

RESPONSE: The above comment is usually made in jest by fellow Christians. So, I'll respond in jest as well. Do you believe in some or all of the following?---> The Trinity? The deity of Christ? The hypostatic union? An amillennial eschatology? The return of Christ? Well what are you, a Roman Catholic?!

ASSERTION: "So you don't want to use condoms because you want to fully enjoy your wife? But that sounds selfish!"

RESPONSE: I doubt my wife would think of that as selfish! Remember, our wives love to be cherished. Rejecting birth control is actually a major way we can cherish them.

This concludes my posts on the topic of birth control. In these two posts, I sincerely hope that I have not come off as "holier-than-thou" or as self-righteous. I have my own sins in my own life that I have to deal with. But the good news is that God is sanctifying His church. He promised that the Holy Spirit would lead us into all truth. Let us preserve the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace, and continue to be patient with one another as brothers and sisters in Christ. He promises to lead us into that unity of the faith that Ephesians 4:11-16 promises. May He be glorified in our lives!


B.J. said...

Hi Josh- I recieved the tapes in the mail....thanks...I hope they were very helpful in understanding Hegel and his "System." I found your blog obviously and have read your recent post on birth control. Interestingly enough we never had this debate in a direct way when you were here as I am fully opposed to the notion of birth control being "totally" sinful. I too have created a blog at so check it out. I have not posted anything yet due to my busy work, school, and marital responsibilites (in no particular order). Oh by the rebuttal of birth control being sinful is forthcoming so give me sometime to construct it as fallicious free as possible. Peace out homie....Hunter

Randy said...

Hello Josh! Hope all is well..Read your posts on birth control, you know how I feel on the matter. Isn't it interesting to note that the only recorded instance of birth control in the Bible ends with the man's death? Just a thought..Yes. I,too, have a blog, visit WayfaringStrangers anytime..Later.

Anonymous said...

um ... clearly you guys won't have much gracious to say to a middle-aged due who got snipped years ago (during life in the far county) to prevent his then liberal feminist from getting pregant and probably getting an abortion.

Life is messy guys. Arguments from silence (well almost if you consider Gen 38:9 to be an argument for birth control) are dangerous.

This is the problem I continue to have with all too many of you Baptists and other "TR" Reformed Types. You preach a salvation by grace alone then you saddle folks with more rules and (mis) applications of "God's Law" then the Talmud.

Ya'all need to get beyond religious proposition and the idea that you're God's little enforcers for some kinda post-Puritan culture cure.

Wise up to pure grace now guys, just in case life kicks you in the arse to such a degree that all you can do is cling to Christ Himself, sans the Fundamentalist-Rabbinical spin.

Anonymous said...

above correction: "liberal feminist" should read "liberal feminist girlfriend"

Josh Brisby said...


I accept respectful dialogue on my blogsite. Clearly there are exceptions for human need, and perhaps your case was one of true human need where birth control was permissible.

Please do not come here with disrespectful dialogue in the future, or your comments will be deleted. Also, please refrain from using foul language, even if it's of the "silly" kind (like "arse").

Thank you. For what it is worth, welcome to The Reformed Oasis.

Josh Brisby

Josh Brisby said...


Although of course I'm sure you would agree now that you shouldn't have been having sex with your girlfriend at the time. Praise God for His mercy and for changing wretched sinners like us to love His Son.


Anonymous said...

Given the sacredness of God's design for marriage, I of course agree with you that it was sin Josh. I confessed this to this woman over 10 years ago; she since has married (I have remarried after having been divorced before this girlfiend) and from what I can tell she has at least acknowledged my repentance and bears no grudge.

Sorry for yanking your chain dude! I'll be sure and be nicer in the future!!

Anonymous said...


Love the site bro, and the agruments. I don't have a lot of time this evening to look around, but I'll definitely be back. Thanks for speaking up and speaking out.

For the Kingdom,
Brother Hank

Anonymous said...

Fuck you, ignorant shits...
Sinful my fucking ass...
Let me overdose on birth control as I let Jesus fuck me with a condom... He likes...

Anonymous said...

Cool post as for me. It would be great to read something more concerning that topic.
By the way check the design I've made myself Overnight escorts

Anonymous said...

This culture hates children? Really? Are you blind? This culture, and pretty much every culture believes children are the most innocent and precious things in the universe. This culture loves kids so much, that child-free people like myself (especially us child-free women) are constantly insulted and met with the disapproving wagging finger.

You need to back off. Not everybody wants babies, nor does everybody believe in God. Your ideas are dangerous, and I hope people like you never ever become successful in your anti-birth control crusade...

Cynthia said...

RESPONSE: Yes, it does. The full giving of each spouse to each other is blocked. Sex can then possibly become a selfish act. (Note, I said possibly.) Sex is about pleasing your partner, not just about getting yourself pleased.

"The full giving of each spouse to each other is blocked." That, dear sir, is a very simplified understanding of sex. I'm a mature post menopausal woman who never had children, never wanted children; hence, I used hormonal birth control for a lot of my life. However, when children are desired, I can imagine that having sex with the intent of becoming pregnant would be really special; however, I can also imagine that if children are desired, and conception does not occur after repeated tries, sex could become desperate, even mechanical. This would be especially true in a culture in which a woman's only role and value is that of wife and mother. In those instances, the wife may look upon her husband not as a loving sexual partner, but as a semen donor.

In that case the so called "...full giving of each spouse to each other" becomes less about the love shared between a man and woman, and more about "Have we conceived?...Have we conceived?"

Sex is many things. Men and women engaging in sex can be opportunistic, selfish, even cruel. At other times, they can delight in each others' bodies and mutually feel transcendence (even while engaging in birth control).