T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 1 Contraception
Historically, Christians always have condemned contraceptive sex. The two
forms mentioned in the Bible, and sterilization, are
condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9-10, Deut. 23:1). The Fathers of the
Church recognized that in natural law the purpose of sexual intercourse is
procreation; contraceptive sex, which deliberately blocks that natural
purpose, is therefore a violation of natural law.
Every church in Christendom condemned contraception until 1930, when, at its
decennial Lambeth Conference, Anglicanism gave permission for the use of
contraception in a few extraordinary cases. Soon all Protestant
denominations had adopted the secularist position on contraception. Today
not one stands with the Catholic Church to maintain the ancient Christian
faith on this issue.
How badly things have decayed may be seen by comparing the current state of
non-Catholic churches, where most pastors counsel young couples to decide
before they are married what form of contraception they use, with
these quotations from the Fathers, who condemned contraception in general as
well as in particular forms of it (sterilization, oral contraceptives, <
coitus interruptus>, and orally-consummated sex).
Many Protestants, perhaps beginning to see the inevitable connection between
contraception and divorce and between contraception and abortion, are now
returning to the historic Christian position and are rejecting contraceptive
sexual practices.
Letter of Barnabas
"Moreover, he [Moses] has rightly detested the weasel [Lev. 11 :29]. For he
means, 'Thou shalt not be like to those whom we hear of as committing
wickedness with the mouth with the body through uncleanness [orally
consummated sex]; nor shalt thou be joined to those impure women who commit
iniquity with the mouth with the body through uncleanness"' (
Barnabas> 10:8 [A.D. 74]).
Clement of Alexandria
"Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is
not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted
" ( 2:10:91:2 [A.D. 191]).
Clement of Alexandria
"To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature"
(ibid. 2:10:95:3).
Hippolytus
"[Christian women with male concubines], on account of their prominent
ancestry and great property, the so-called faithful want no children from
slaves or lowborn commoners, they use drugs of sterility [oral
contraceptives] or bind themselves tightly in order to expel a fetus which
has already been engendered [abortion]" ( 9:12 [
A.D. 225]).
Lactantius
"[Some] complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have
not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means
were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the
poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable
to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife"
( 6:20 [A.D. 3o7]).
Lactantius
"God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be
performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital ['generating'] part of
the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other
purpose than the generation of offspring" (ibid. 6:23:18).
Council of Nicaea I
"[I]f anyone in sound health has castrated [sterilized] himself, it behooves
that such a one, if enrolled among the clergy, should cease [from his
ministry], and that from henceforth no such person should be promoted. But,
as it is evident that this is said of those who willfully do the thing and
presume to castrate themselves, so if any have been made eunuchs by
barbarians, or by their masters, and should otherwise be found worthy, such
men this canon admits to the clergy" (canon l [A.D. 325]).
Epiphanius
"They [certain Egyptian heretics] exercise genital acts, yet prevent the
conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy
lust, are they eager for corruption" ( 26:5
:2 [A.D. 375]).
John Chrysostom
"[I]n truth, all men know that they who are under the power of this disease
[the sin of covetousness] are wearied even of their father's old age [
wishing him to die so they can inherit]; and that which is sweet, and
universally desirable, the having of children, they esteem grievous and
unwelcome. Many at least with this view have even paid money to be childless
, and have mutilated nature, not only killing the newborn, but even acting
to prevent their beginning to live [sterilization]" (
28:5 [A.D. 391]).
John Chrysostom
"[T]he man who has mutilated [sterilized] himself, in fact, is subject even
to a curse, as Paul says, 'I would that they who trouble you would cut the
whole thing off' [Gal. 5 :12]. And very reasonably, for such a person is
venturing on the deeds of murderers, and giving occasion to them that
slander God's creation, and opens the mouths of the Manicheans, and is
guilty of the same unlawful acts as they that mutilate themselves among the
Greeks. For to cut off our members has been from the beginning a work of
demonical agency, and satanic device, that they may bring up a bad report
upon the works of God, that they may mar this living creature, that imputing
all not to the choice, but to the nature of our members, the more part of
them may sin in security as being irresponsible, and doubly harm this living
creature, both by mutilating the members and be impeding the forwardness of
the free choice in behalf of good deeds" (ibid. 62:3).
John Chrysostom
"Why do you sow where the field is eager to destroy the fruit, where there
are medicines of sterility [oral contraceptives], where there is murder
before birth? You do not even let a harlot remain only a harlot, but you
make her a murderess as well.... Indeed, it is something worse than murder,
and I do not know what to call it; for she does not kill what is formed but
prevents its formation. What then? Do you condemn the gift of God and fight
with his [natural] laws? . . . Yet such turpitude . . . the matter still
seems indifferent to many men—even to many men having wives. In this
indifference of the married men there is greater evil filth; for then
poisons are prepared, not against the womb of a prostitute, but against your
injured wife. Against her are these innumerable tricks" (
Romans> 24 [A.D. 391]).
John Chrysostom
"Observe how bitterly he [Paul] speaks against their deceivers . . . 'I
would that they which trouble you would cut the whole thing off' [Gal. 5:12]
.... On this account he curses them, and his meaning is as follows: 'For
them I have no concern, "A man that is heretical after the first and second
admonition." If they will, let them not only be circumcised but mutilated' [
Titus 3:10]. Where then are those who dare to mutilate [sterilize]
themselves, seeing that they drawn down the apostolic curse, and accuse the
workmanship of God, and take part with the Manichees?" (
Galatians> 5:12 [A.D. 395]).
Jerome
"But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us
for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan,
who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we
approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?" (
1: 19 [A.D. 393]).
Jerome
"You may see a number of women who are widows before they are wives. Others,
indeed, will drink sterility [oral contraceptives] and murder a man not yet
born, [and some commit abortion]" ( 22:13 [A.D. 396]).
Augustine
"You [Manicheans] make your auditors adulterers of their wives when they
take care lest the women with whom they copulate conceive. They take wives
according to the laws of matrimony by tablets announcing that the marriage
is contracted to procreate children; and then, fearing because of your [
religious] law [against childbearing] . . . they copulate in a shameful
union only to satisfy lust for their wives. They are unwilling to have
children, on whose account alone marriages are made. How is it, then, that
you are not those prohibiting marriage, as the apostle predicted of you so
long ago [1 Tim. 4:1-4], when you try to take from marriage what marriage is
? When this is taken away, husbands are shameful lovers, wives are harlots,
bridal chambers are brothels, fathers-in-law are pimps" (
15:7 [A.D. 400]).
Augustine
"For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures
, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust,
but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal
flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to
propagate progeny" (ibid., 22:30).
Augustine
"For necessary sexual intercourse for begetting [children] is alone worthy
of marriage. But that which goes beyond this necessity no longer follows
reason but lust. And yet it pertains to the character of marriage . . . to
yield it to the partner lest by fornication the other sin damnably [through
adultery].... [T]hey [must] not turn away from them the mercy of God . . .
by changing the natural use into that which is against nature, which is more
damnable when it is done in the case of husband or wife. For, whereas that
natural use, when it pass beyond the compact of marriage, that is, beyond
the necessity of begetting [children], is pardonable in the case of a wife,
damnable in the case of a harlot; that which is against nature is execrable
when done in the case of a harlot, but more execrable in the case of a wife.
Of so great power is the ordinance of the Creator, and the order of
creation, that . . . when the man shall wish to use a body part of the wife
not allowed for this purpose [orally or anally consummated sex], the wife is
more shameful, if she suffer it to take place in her own case, than if in
the case of another woman" ( 11-12 [A.D. 401]).
Augustine
"This proves that you [Manicheans] approve of having a wife, not for the
procreation of children, but for the gratification of passion. In marriage,
as the marriage law declares, the man and woman come together for the
procreation of children. Therefore, whoever makes the procreation of
children a greater sin than copulation, forbids marriage and makes the woman
not a wife but a mistress, who for some gifts presented to her is joined to
the man to gratify his passion" ( 18:65 [A.D.
388]).
Augustine
"I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the
sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing
their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this,
although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any
reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. Sometimes
this lustful cruelty, or cruel lust, comes to this, that they even procure
poisons of sterility [oral contraceptives] . . . Assuredly if both husband
and wife are like this, they are not married, and if they were like this
from the beginning they come together not joined in matrimony but in
seduction. If both are not like this, I dare to say that either the wife is
in a fashion the harlot of her husband or he is an adulterer with his own
wife" ( 1:15:17 [A.D. 419]).
Caesarius
"Who is he who cannot warn that no woman may take a potion [an oral
contraceptive or an abortifacient] so that she is unable to conceive or
condemns in herself the nature which God willed to be fecund? As often as
she could have conceived or given birth, of that many homicides she will be
held guilty, and, unless she undergoes suitable penance, she will be damned
by eternal death in hell. If a women does not wish to have children, let her
enter into a religious agreement with her husband; for chastity is the sole
sterility of a Christian woman" ( 1:12 [A.D. 522]). | T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 2 Onan’s Onus
A sidebar in W. Bradford Wilcox’s “The Facts of Life & Marriage”
by David Mills
Though opposition to contraception is now widely thought to be a “Catholic
thing,” the great Reformers rejected it as strongly as any modern Catholic.
For earlier Christians, children were such a great gift from God and
sterility such a curse that the evil of willed sterility was self-evident.
As Martin Luther wrote in his Lectures on Genesis, in Genesis “fertility
was regarded as an extraordinary blessing and a special gift of God,” but
we do not regard this so highly today. Although we like and desire it in
cattle, yet in the human race there are few who regard a woman’s fertility
as a blessing. Indeed, there are many who have an aversion for it and
regard sterility as a special blessing. Surely this is also contrary to
nature. Much less is it pious and saintly.
Those who do not want children (and he meant many children), he wrote
elsewhere, “deserve that their memory be blotted out from the land of the
living.” Their desire for sterility “serves to emphasize original sin.
Otherwise we would marvel at procreation as the greatest work of God, and as
a most outstanding gift we would honor it with the praises it deserves.”
Luther and Calvin’s opposition to contraception is revealed in their
writing about what Luther called “the exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the
basest of wretches,” described in Genesis 38:8–10. Onan, he wrote in
Lectures on Genesis, “must have been a malicious and incorrigible scoundrel
. This 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.”
He insisted that “at such a time the order of nature established by God in
procreation should be followed.” Onan, however, “preferred polluting
himself with a most disgraceful sin to raising up offspring for his brother.”
John Calvin wrote much the same thing in his Commentary on Genesis:
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.
“The impiety is especially condemned,” he continued, because like an
abortion, it “casts upon the ground the offspring of his brother, torn from
the maternal womb. . . . If any woman ejects a fetus from her womb by drugs
, it is reckoned a crime incapable of expiation, and deservedly Onan
incurred upon himself the same kind of punishment.” Onan “tried, as far as
he was able, to wipe out a part of the human race.”
But it was fruitfulness they valued. Luther noted that many people avoid
having children because they feel they couldn’t support them. They unjustly
blame marriage and fruitfulness, he said. “You are indicting your unbelief
by distrusting God’s goodness, and you are bringing greater misery upon
yourself by disparaging God’s blessing. For if you had trust in God’s
grace and promises, you would undoubtedly be supported. But because you do
not hope in the Lord, you will never prosper.”
Read more: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-01-040-f#ixzz2d1I8XqSk | z********o
发帖数: 18304 | 3 “基督教先哲”是人，不是“神”。“基督教先哲”的意见对基们来说顶多有一点参考
价值。
所以你这个没太大意义。
但是，“圣经”“新约”的教导不一样，那个代表的是基们“全知全能”的主子的意思
。所以：
“圣经”“新约”明确要求女基督徒们在教会要“闭口不言”，基们不遵守是说不过去
的。
“圣经”“新约”明确要求基督徒们生病的时候要请人来抹油/祷告，基们不遵守是说
不过去的。 | J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 4 I know some of the Catholics tend not to use contraceptive.
Again, I don't think anyone will lose salvation(become non-Christian) due to
the use of contraceptives or gain salvation(become Christian) by not using
contraceptives.
I personally never heard of any non-Roman-Catholic Christian group ban the
use of contraceptive.
I am not familiar with JW. Maybe some JW can say what their rules are.
its
【在 T*****n 的大作中提到】
: Contraception
: Historically, Christians always have condemned contraceptive sex. The two
: forms mentioned in the Bible, and sterilization, are
: condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9-10, Deut. 23:1). The Fathers of the
: Church recognized that in natural law the purpose of sexual intercourse is
: procreation; contraceptive sex, which deliberately blocks that natural
: purpose, is therefore a violation of natural law.
: Every church in Christendom condemned contraception until 1930, when, at its
: decennial Lambeth Conference, Anglicanism gave permission for the use of
: contraception in a few extraordinary cases. Soon all Protestant
| z********o
发帖数: 18304 | 5
Keep in mind: what you think doesn't mean anything to most people.
重要的是事实/逻辑/证据。 （请你重复几次：重要的是事实/逻辑/证据。你弱智的脑
袋好像总是搞不明白这一点。）
你只有口号，没有说服力。
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: I know some of the Catholics tend not to use contraceptive.
: Again, I don't think anyone will lose salvation(become non-Christian) due to
: the use of contraceptives or gain salvation(become Christian) by not using
: contraceptives.
: I personally never heard of any non-Roman-Catholic Christian group ban the
: use of contraceptive.
: I am not familiar with JW. Maybe some JW can say what their rules are.
:
: its
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 6 I agree with you that Christians' creeds are not equivalent to scripture.
Scripture has higher authority.
About the oil and women, you use descriptive verses as prescriptive again.
Did anyone tell you to use oil when you were sick while you were in Church?
I even saw women give sermons in some churches. There is great diversity
in Christian churches. Don't think the church you know is every church.
【在 z********o 的大作中提到】
: “基督教先哲”是人，不是“神”。“基督教先哲”的意见对基们来说顶多有一点参考
: 价值。
: 所以你这个没太大意义。
: 但是，“圣经”“新约”的教导不一样，那个代表的是基们“全知全能”的主子的意思
: 。所以：
: “圣经”“新约”明确要求女基督徒们在教会要“闭口不言”，基们不遵守是说不过去
: 的。
: “圣经”“新约”明确要求基督徒们生病的时候要请人来抹油/祷告，基们不遵守是说
: 不过去的。
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 7 I would like to hear what other Christians will say about this.
You cannot speak for Christians because you are not.
【在 z********o 的大作中提到】
:
: Keep in mind: what you think doesn't mean anything to most people.
: 重要的是事实/逻辑/证据。 （请你重复几次：重要的是事实/逻辑/证据。你弱智的脑
: 袋好像总是搞不明白这一点。）
: 你只有口号，没有说服力。
| z********o
发帖数: 18304 | 8
没有。那是因为基们故意忽略了“圣经”的教导。
“圣经”“新约”明确要求基督徒们生病的时候要请人来抹油/祷告。这是你家主子启
示出来的要求，这不是“描述性历史事件”。你那个弱智到极点的基脑子能不能搞明白
这一点？
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: I would like to hear what other Christians will say about this.
: You cannot speak for Christians because you are not.
| T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 9 你这招对基督徒一点用也没有，最多效果只是让不喜欢基督教的人对基督教更增加一点
反感。
对于基督徒来说，遵守可以找到理由，不遵守也完全可以找到理由，关键看怎么解读圣
经了。反正谁都认为自己解读是最正确的。需要字面理解的时候就字面理解，需要精义
的时候就精义，什么时候字面什么时候精义，完全是“基督教先哲”决定的。
【在 z********o 的大作中提到】
: “基督教先哲”是人，不是“神”。“基督教先哲”的意见对基们来说顶多有一点参考
: 价值。
: 所以你这个没太大意义。
: 但是，“圣经”“新约”的教导不一样，那个代表的是基们“全知全能”的主子的意思
: 。所以：
: “圣经”“新约”明确要求女基督徒们在教会要“闭口不言”，基们不遵守是说不过去
: 的。
: “圣经”“新约”明确要求基督徒们生病的时候要请人来抹油/祷告，基们不遵守是说
: 不过去的。
| z********o
发帖数: 18304 | 10
“你这招对基督徒一点用也没有”，基督徒们到最后满地打滚撒泼耍赖，我这招当然就
没用了。但是基督徒们满地打滚撒泼耍赖的时候，旁观的人们也就容易认清楚基督教的
邪恶本质了。
【在 T*****n 的大作中提到】
: 你这招对基督徒一点用也没有，最多效果只是让不喜欢基督教的人对基督教更增加一点
: 反感。
: 对于基督徒来说，遵守可以找到理由，不遵守也完全可以找到理由，关键看怎么解读圣
: 经了。反正谁都认为自己解读是最正确的。需要字面理解的时候就字面理解，需要精义
: 的时候就精义，什么时候字面什么时候精义，完全是“基督教先哲”决定的。
| x********u
发帖数: 37 | 11 旁观者为你喝彩！
【在 z********o 的大作中提到】
:
: “你这招对基督徒一点用也没有”，基督徒们到最后满地打滚撒泼耍赖，我这招当然就
: 没用了。但是基督徒们满地打滚撒泼耍赖的时候，旁观的人们也就容易认清楚基督教的
: 邪恶本质了。
| d******r
发帖数: 5008 | 12 这个倒是实话， 所以不管老七的马子是不是被基泡过， 这都不能抹杀耶神是邪恶的事
实。 老七用的是独孤九剑。
【在 z********o 的大作中提到】
:
: “你这招对基督徒一点用也没有”，基督徒们到最后满地打滚撒泼耍赖，我这招当然就
: 没用了。但是基督徒们满地打滚撒泼耍赖的时候，旁观的人们也就容易认清楚基督教的
: 邪恶本质了。
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 13 zhaowendao is notorious for his twisted understanding of Bible.
Please take a look at my post about suffering.
Please let us know what do you think.
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/TrustInJesus/946209.html
What do you think of this post?
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/TrustInJesus/947651.html
If you are trying to know more about Christianity, please do not waste time
to see zhaowendao's post.
Think yourself, won't it be ridiculous to learn Christianity from someone
who is determined to be against Christianity.
(I am not saying Muslism is against Christianity)
Will anyone go to Muslism mosque to learn about Jesus Christ?
【在 x********u 的大作中提到】
: 旁观者为你喝彩！
| T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 14 LOL 你们两个半斤八两，都认为自己解读圣经是正确的。
time
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: zhaowendao is notorious for his twisted understanding of Bible.
: Please take a look at my post about suffering.
: Please let us know what do you think.
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/TrustInJesus/946209.html
: What do you think of this post?
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/TrustInJesus/947651.html
: If you are trying to know more about Christianity, please do not waste time
: to see zhaowendao's post.
: Think yourself, won't it be ridiculous to learn Christianity from someone
: who is determined to be against Christianity.
|
|
