Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 1519 | ||
Dear Friend, I appreciate your doggedness regarding this issue, and admire and respect your faith. I have read your many contributions and am impressed by your knowledge. You are correct, common sense can be holy and heathen. However, Prudence and 'evident' wisdom ARE from the Bible. The problem remains that, as another saint pointed out, the Bible is silent about contraception. Your 'generalities' may make sense where you are, but to tens of millions of Christians living in poverty, in famine, in oppression, in political turmoil, surrounded by real death, real danger, and real persecution, they are 'specifics.' To your 'hypotheticals' I can only say the punch-line of an old joke, "Speak for yourself, white-man!" (Tonto, speaking to the Lone Ranger, I forgot the joke, but I think you get it. And before anyone screams, "Racism!" I am a Christian caucasian living in a country over 99 percent non-Christian and non-white.) I live in Japan where abortion is not just commonplace, it is the norm. A typical home is less than 700 sq.ft. and costs USD300,000. As to my daily 'experience,' I fellowship regularly with saints from Malaysia, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Ghana. Many of my acquaintances are actively involved with mission work in Uganda, India, China and the Philippines. To these Christians, trusting God in the sense you use is not prudent or wise. Finally, though the Lord has blessed me with two 'miracle' children, now my wife has a tumor in her womb. It is not life-threatening in itself, and fairly common, but bearing children is not advisable, and possibly dangerous. I must 're-think' the issue, and answer to God for my actions. Indeed, modern contraception is a new thing, and as with many 'new-fangled' technologies we must be careful to use them carefully. Even the PC I am using to discuss this with you, and the internet in general can be Satan's tool if abused. I do not promote abuse, but careful, thoughtful use under the guidance of ministerial counsel and God's Spirit. My friend, this is just another view of the issue. I look forward to continued fellowship. Blessings to you in Christ Jesus. |
||||||
2 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | bjanko | 1523 | ||
Well, I had hoped it would have been clear that I was addressing your "general" question about the topic. I suggested in my last post, that certain "specifics" might bring in other factors which might make other conclusions valid. I cannot speak to your specific situation, since I do not fully understand it. As far as I understand this issue -- IN GENERAL -- I have to stand by what I said until I have further data. Again, this is presuming that we are having a GENERAL discussion about the topic. If you have a SPECIFIC question, I would hope you first consult your spiritual leader (pastor, or whoever) and then other trusted Christians. I would hope that you would not trust advice coming from strangers on a message board. But anyway, I wish you the best and will pray for the healing of your wife's tumor. Regards, bjanko |
||||||
3 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 1525 | ||
Dear bjanko, Thank you for your prayers for my wife. I understand this to be a personal 'specific' situation. I am under pastoral counsel in this matter. Still, I must think that the several million believer's circumstances that I outlined could hardly be called hypothetical or specific (except to the individual). It would seem that considering their plight would come under the topic of 'data for discussion of contraceptive use among Christians,' as the Bible is not clearly for or against contraceptives. As I said, I am not an advocate of misuse or abuse, I am only making the point that saying, "Under no circumstance is it allowable!" is unwise and rigid, leaving less room for the Holy Spirit to work in a personal manner with the individual believer. Nonetheless, I respect your opinion and your faith. In Christ Jesus. charis |
||||||
4 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | bjanko | 1529 | ||
Maybe you could list the other variations of circumstances where a believer's situation should come into play. Because unless I have a specific idea as to the various types of scenarios I'm omitting, I'm unable to more properly -- or "wisely" -- admit modification of what I have already exressed. In a general discussion, after all, we cannot always account for every situation, but it would be good to account for EVERY TYPE of situation. So, maybe you can itemize a little more clearly the TYPES of situations I might be omitting, rather than just toss out of a handful of examples. By the way, I never said or implied that "Under no circumstance is it allowable!"; I simply gave a general principle/guideline. And in fact far from making the above statement, I even admitted that my view might not apply in certain circumstances which I have not considered. A refrain of mine has been, though, that even if we allow for exceptions in certain situations, I think the tendency would be for most Christians to claim these exceptions rather than just bite the bullet and do the right thing. But even so: there might still very well be some exceptions. You seemed to say that in your country (or somewhere) there are people living in poverty, etc. Having many children in such a situation would not be a new or unusual thing. Anway, I don't say they should have many children; they just ought not prevent the having of children. You are right: this is not directly addressed in the Bible. What I am saying is based on a bit of inference and also the idea that we should resist modernist ideas which smack of worldly wisdom and rob of us the opportunity to trust the Lord. However, since this is something which is less clear in Scripture, I could concede that it may be like the food which Paul mentions in Romans 14. Some feel right about contraception and others do not; each one should be led by his own conscience. However, we should remember that any form of contraception which retroactively destroys the egg after conception is really an abortion! Birth control pills are not safe. So, the only thing I can think of that's left would be condoms, which are not, of course, one hundred percent reliable. If a pregnant woman is likely to die while in labor, I would say that is a very, very unfortunate situation, like having a fatal disease. Yet, to "save" her by murdering the child is still murder. In your own case, since your wife is not yet pregnant, then I would say that contraception is not only called for, but demanded. There is no child to "abort" at this point, and the best thing to do is to prevent that, since it might prove fatal for your wife. While nothing is one hundred percent, it would seem wise in your particular instance, to save your wife's life, that she have her tubes tied or you have a vasectomy or BOTH! How can I turn around and suddenly advocate such a radical form of contraception in your case, after all I have said? Because I believe the biblical precept which does apply here is "Thou shalt not murder." This is broader than it sounds; we know from the Sermon on the Mount that it ranges from hatred to murder and therefore, we can assume that the preserving of innocent life in all cases in which we can is the correct option. You and I agree that abortion is murder. Well, since the Lord, in His goodness, has allowed you to know about your wife's tumor, Lord willing the doctors will be able to remove it. But if you know pregnancy could bring her into a condition which might cost her life, then you should do all that you can to prevent that from occurring. Total abstinence is unhealthy and unbiblical for a marriage. But in a case such as yours, it would seem that a radical form of contraception -- tubal ligation AND vasectomy would be called for. Realize friend, I'm approaching this all in the abstract; I cannot empathize or share your worries as much as I would like, since we are only communicating in these little boxes. But forgive me if my tone sounds harsh and uncaring. I'm trying to respond as best and honestly and as helpfully, I pray, that I can. Regards. |
||||||
5 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 1598 | ||
Dear bjanko, good answer, my friend. You are absolutely correct about people (even Christians!) thinking of their situation as an exception. That is precisely why I have been saying that they must be under the spiritual counsel of a shepherd AND the Holy Spirit. (It is amazing how many selfish things can be attributed to the Holy Spirit, isn't it?) You are also correct that poverty alone is a poor (no pun intended) excuse for not having children. If I were to try and typify some possible factors for considering non-abortive contraception, it would be 1) Poverty and Government oppression (like China) The PROC expressly forbids more than one child, the punishment can be extreme! 2) Poverty and poor health care (like India) Having many children is certain doom for those truly finite resources and almost no medicine or hospital facilities. 3) Poverty and disease (like many parts of Africa) AIDS is a REAL epidemic. Bearing children without care is murder. 4) Poverty and political turmoil (like much of Africa and Asia) I am not real sure about this one, but moderation COULD be in order where terrorism and religious persecution are daily realities. 5) Poverty and overpopulation (many metropolitan cities) I am not a 'save the world from overpopulation' nut, but I have been to many places where there is no physical ability to keep more children. I am aware that you could hang them from the ceiling in hammocks, but prudence CAN be a factor. My friend, I am very much aware that now that I have gone 'out on a limb' to list possible factors. Now you are at liberty to just say, "1-5, No excuse! Christians have lived through that before." But these factors, sometimes more than one, affect millions of believers in a real way that we Americans cannot fathom. 'Armchair Quarterbacks' don't win football games. I am simply making a case for us to be moderate in our dictation of ethics, especially where the Bible is silent or unclear. Blessings to you in Christ Jesus. | ||||||
6 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | bjanko | 1603 | ||
I have answered as well as I can on trying to apply biblical principles to the general subject. I could only speak hypothetically concerning the specific situations you have mentioned. I could tell you that in situation X an exception can be made, whereas in situation Y there does not seem to be an excuse for not applying the general rule. And I would hope I could be objective enough to live out my convictions were I in a similar situation. Of course, sometimes it is getting into a different situation which causes one to change his convictions -- not alwasy just because "now it's happening to ME!" but because in light of the new situation, the whole principle looks different and your perspective is broadened. Anyway, I do not think I could really lay out my ideas in any more concrete way than I have already. If I did, I do not believe there would be any benefit of it to anyone. You said you were "simply making a case for us to be moderate in our dictation of ethics, especially where the Bible is silent or unclear." I agree in spirit, but to be more precise, I would say it like this: "Let us be firm in our dicatation of ethics where the Bible is firm; and let us be moderate in our dictation of ethics where the Bible is silent or unclear." The issue we have been discussing is not something which Scripture pronounces a firm ethic about. I would agree with you that we should be wise, and would add that we take great pains to think it out carefully. I finally say that we must be cautious in the "rules" we lay out in regard to this issue, because the Bible simply does not address the mattter. I think you and I, discussing this, have done a pretty good job of it. Blessings to you. |
||||||
7 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 1613 | ||
Dear bjanko, "You are a gentleman and a scholar." These are words my father praised me with when I 'done good.' I thank you for your patience with me. In all truth, my beliefs are very similar to yours. As one whose spiritual counsel is sometimes asked, I must approach, in grace, every individual as a 'special' case before God. But you are perfectly correct in "Let us be firm in our dicatation of ethics where the Bible is firm; and let us be moderate in our dictation of ethics where the Bible is silent or unclear." Well said! Is this yours, or should we give credit to another wise man? Either way, you said it, and I receive it. In Christ Jesus, and Amen! |
||||||
8 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | bjanko | 1618 | ||
You wrote: "Let us be firm in our dicatation of ethics where the Bible is firm; and let us be moderate in our dictation of ethics where the Bible is silent or unclear." Well said! Is this yours, or should we give credit to another wise man? My response: Let's just say that it was a collaboration between you and I, brother -- to God's glory. Blessings in Christ to you and your family. |
||||||
9 | How about common sense? | Bible general Archive 1 | Xapis | 2171 | ||
Gentlemen, I thank you for this thread. It has been a joy to read. May God bless you both and heal charis' wife. Jude 24-25. Xapis. | ||||||