Is contraception really the answer to fulfilling sexual desires?

[Grazer]

I don't think contraception has played a part, I'd blame the media. Sex is no longer sacred, people aren't aware of its true meaning. What's needed is the media to stop trivializing the subject.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Modern contraception has made sex virtually consequence free and opened up the door to unrestrained fulfillment of sexual desire (talking about married sex here, of course) ...and we get mad when that doesn't happen.

Maybe the potential for pregnancy was a very valuable restraint God built into sexual activity, especially men, that kept us from being mastered by the desire for it and helped us handle it more responsibly.

What do you think, and why?

Incredible hypothesis, Jethro. I think you might be on to something here. This doesn'tt change my view that contraception is not a sin, but sexual desire would definitely be tempered by the thought that it could lead to pregnancy that at any given time would be an economic burden on the family. Also, if contraception weren't so readily available, particularly to teens, would that mitigate the rate of sexual activity among teens? Probably not, as they think they are invincible and nothing bad can happen.

Interesting concept. Got to think on it more.

 

[farouk]

Incredible hypothesis, Jethro. I think you might be on to something here. This doesn'tt change my view that contraception is not a sin, but sexual desire would definitely be tempered by the thought that it could lead to pregnancy that at any given time would be an economic burden on the family. Also, if contraception weren't so readily available, particularly to teens, would that mitigate the rate of sexual activity among teens? Probably not, as they think they are invincible and nothing bad can happen.

Interesting concept. Got to think on it more.

Prayer and Bible study is the form of birth control that works best.

 

[farouk]

You can still leave out the contraceptives and restrain yourself if you prefere that.
Some couples prevent pregnancies only by observing the woman's monthly cycle, figure out when the fertile days are and have no sex during those days (or use condoms during those days, or resort to other ways to pleasure each other). It requires a lot of discipline of both. But christian couples seem to like this "natural" way of family planning.

Claudya:

Well, everyone is different.

Kind of the conundrum, are happenings planned? or does planning just happen?

 

[reba]

Farouk, Claudya is not answering because she is abiding by the rules of this forum... Thanks Claudya

 

[farouk]

Farouk, Claudya is not answering because she is abiding by the rules of this forum... Thanks Claudya

I guess my question was rhetorical anyway...

Someone gets to answer it; no one gets to answer it; whatever...

 

[Sparkey]

Just a couple thoughts to interject into the conversation here. So far, I've heard others say that children are consequences that limit sexual opportunities. This means that they are considered in economic terms as negative consequences but it hasn't always been this way. Barrenness was considered a curse. Artificial barrenness today is considered a blessing?

Genesis 20:18, 29:31, 30:22, 49:25, Deuteronomy 7:13, 28:4, 28:11, 30:9, 1 Samuel 1:5, Job 10:8-11, 31:15, Psalm 22:10, 139:13, Isaiah 44:2, 44:24, 49:5, Jeremiah 1:5.

What if Abraham had today's irrational fear of children? Then when God promised that his children would rival the number of grains of sand or stars in the sky, he would have run away in terror. ed!

 

[reba]

Hawke, I believe you have hit the thought of the op...

 

[farouk]

Hawke, I believe you have hit the thought of the op...

PS: did you want to delete Claudya's posts, too, maybe? then no one will want to answer them; and problem solved, I guess...

Blessings.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Just a couple thoughts to interject into the conversation here. So far, I've heard others say that children are consequences that limit sexual opportunities. This means that they are considered in economic terms as negative consequences but it hasn't always been this way. Barrenness was considered a curse. Artificial barrenness today is considered a blessing?

Genesis 20:18, 29:31, 30:22, 49:25, Deuteronomy 7:13, 28:4, 28:11, 30:9, 1 Samuel 1:5, Job 10:8-11, 31:15, Psalm 22:10, 139:13, Isaiah 44:2, 44:24, 49:5, Jeremiah 1:5.

What if Abraham had today's irrational fear of children? Then when God promised that his children would rival the number of grains of sand or stars in the sky, he would have run away in terror. ed!

Let me hasten to agree with you. My intent was to voice a viewpoint some may hold, not all. My maternal grandparents were farmers during the depression and had ten kids. Obviously their economic status was not of concern to them. I'm particularly looking at the issue from the standpoint of today's young people, many of whom seem to believe they have to have all their "stuff" before they have kids -- the cars, the house, the pool, the stocks and bonds, whatever. It is an issue that we older folk (relax, I'm not calling anyone old, particularly me -- I ain't old, I'm just well-seasoned) didn't consider when we had our kids. But our kids today are. My son and his fiance are trying to decide this very issue. How long to wait -- home first, or kids? I told them not to discuss it outside the context of what God wants. If He is their guide, the timing won't matter. He will have everything in His hands.

 

[farouk]

Let me hasten to agree with you. My intent was to voice a viewpoint some may hold, not all. My maternal grandparents were farmers during the depression and had ten kids. Obviously their economic status was not of concern to them. I'm particularly looking at the issue from the standpoint of today's young people, many of whom seem to believe they have to have all their "stuff" before they have kids -- the cars, the house, the pool, the stocks and bonds, whatever. It is an issue that we older folk (relax, I'm not calling anyone old, particularly me -- I ain't old, I'm just well-seasoned) didn't consider when we had our kids. But our kids today are. My son and his fiance are trying to decide this very issue. How long to wait -- home first, or kids? I told them not to discuss it outside the context of what God wants. If He is their guide, the timing won't matter. He will have everything in His hands.

But is there really an objective answer to how many kids does God want each couple to have?

I think it will vary between each couple.

 

[farouk]

Just a couple thoughts to interject into the conversation here. So far, I've heard others say that children are consequences that limit sexual opportunities. This means that they are considered in economic terms as negative consequences but it hasn't always been this way. Barrenness was considered a curse. Artificial barrenness today is considered a blessing?

Genesis 20:18, 29:31, 30:22, 49:25, Deuteronomy 7:13, 28:4, 28:11, 30:9, 1 Samuel 1:5, Job 10:8-11, 31:15, Psalm 22:10, 139:13, Isaiah 44:2, 44:24, 49:5, Jeremiah 1:5.

What if Abraham had today's irrational fear of children? Then when God promised that his children would rival the number of grains of sand or stars in the sky, he would have run away in terror. ed!

Again, one needs to consider the dispensational aspect of this.

Israel's life involved keeping a name in Israel, as an earthly people in the land. Whereas entry into the church, a heavenly people, is via the new birth (John 3).

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

But is there really an objective answer to how many kids does God want each couple to have?

I think it will vary between each couple.

Of course it will. That's why they have to listen for His voice. Perhaps I should have said " ... the timing and the number won't matter."

 

[farouk]

Of course it will. That's why they have to listen for His voice. Perhaps I should have said " ... the timing and the number won't matter."

this:

Kind of the sovereignty roulette...

(Sovereignty as far as God is concerned, roulette for the couple...?)

 

[Sparkey]

farouk, When you edited my quote you made it seem like I was shouting. I wasn't.
We know that in the end times, black will be called white and white will be called black - things will be twisted. I just wanted to say that having children is a blessing.

 

[farouk]

farouk, When you edited my quote you made it seem like I was shouting. I wasn't.
We know that in the end times, black will be called white and white will be called black - things will be twisted. I just wanted to say that having children is a blessing.

s: Okay, sorry, I see now what you mean; I reduced the font size again, and just kept highlighted the bit I was responding you. You're right about what it looked like.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

J:

So you think that any woman must just be resigned to a husband just indulging himself whenever he feels like it?

No.

Women need to be prepared before they make a decision to get married for the very real possibility that their husband will get more sex than they think or expect ...with all the potential consequences that come with that. You are adding the suggestion that this will be entirely against her will. I'm not suggesting that at all. It doesn't have to automatically be like that, though we're conditioned to think it has to be that way.

The point is, contraception has helped us not think these kinds of things through very well. And then, later, when reality sets in we get really frustrated by all the concerns we were sure contraception would relieve us of...way more frustrated than if we had not depended on contraception to remove all thought of those kinds of things. That was the point--contraception deceives us into not taking all things into consideration that we should when deciding to marry, or not, and who we'll marry.

 

[farouk]

No.

Women need to be prepared before they make a decision to get married for the very real possibility that their husband will get more sex than they think or expect ...with all the potential consequences that come with that. You are adding the suggestion that this will be entirely against her will. I'm not suggesting that at all. It doesn't have to automatically be like that, though we're conditioned to think it has to be that way.

The point is, contraception has helped us not think these kinds of things through very well. And then, later, when reality sets in we get really frustrated by all the concerns we were sure contraception would relieve us of...way more frustrated than if we had not depended on contraception to remove all thought of those kinds of things. That was the point--contraception deceives us into not taking all things into consideration that we should when deciding to marry, or not, and who we'll marry.

J: Ty for the response, but it's not only before they are married that a potential wife has those thoughts. During marriage also, the man must respect whether she is ready or not.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This doesn'tt change my view that contraception is not a sin...

Mine neither...at least not as far as contraception in general. My wife and I had personal convictions about the pill which is why we used the ovulation method.

I believe contraception is entirely a personal choice (abortion is out, of course), but definitely a choice that can be aided by what other people think about it. I had a vasectomy. Now that I've had one I have opinions about it that may help someone else make their own decision about it.

...but sexual desire would definitely be tempered by the thought that it could lead to pregnancy that at any given time would be an economic burden on the family.

And not just the economic burden. We may not have the physical strength and energy that we had in our youth to endure the demands of raising children. Or perhaps a shaky relationship with your spouse, or an uncertain future make it less attractive to bring a child into that relationship.

These concerns can definitely put a damper on a person's demand for sex in a marriage where contraception is not used, or at least not depended on. Which I think can be a good thing for people so they don't get carried away by the body's demand for sex. Demands, I'm suggesting, that may only get worse and potentially out of control when contraception conveniently dismisses those concerns and seem to leave a person unhindered in the pursuit of sexual fulfillment. And look out when something does manage to get in the way of that unhindered pursuit. Instead of calm, rational thinking about the matter, as God intended, angry frustration and impatience move in.

Also, if contraception weren't so readily available, particularly to teens, would that mitigate the rate of sexual activity among teens? Probably not, as they think they are invincible and nothing bad can happen.

I agree, probably not. We've lost at least two generations to this thinking that sex is consequence free and on demand, unhindered by the legitimate, rational concerns God built into sexual activity. As Reba points out, that wasn't nearly as true back in her day. But things are way different now.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I don't think contraception has played a part, I'd blame the media. Sex is no longer sacred, people aren't aware of its true meaning. What's needed is the media to stop trivializing the subject.

I agree that the media is largely to blame, but I don't see how it's possible that contraception has not helped make it possible to be so careless about sex.

Our entertainment media teaches us that we can have sex with whoever we want, whenever we want, where ever we want; and that we can wreck our car, or get in a fist fight and then just go home as if it didn't happen. Then we get mad and frustrated when life really isn't like what we were deceived into thinking it's like on our TV's and computers.