OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 08:13:27 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What Would The Catholic Church Have To Concede?  (Read 4719 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Online Online

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 3,940


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #270 on: November 26, 2013, 02:51:30 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #271 on: November 26, 2013, 03:01:59 PM »

The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).

Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.

http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  Roll Eyes

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
What do you say about the Winnipeg Statement and Cardinal Martini, among others?

That they speak error and stand already condemned based on the teachings of the Church. Pius XI in CASTI CONNUBII and Paul VI in Humanae Vitae have infallibly slammed the door on this.

Heretics will be Heretics.......doesn't affect the truth of things.

well, well.  So you are part of the Vatican II church.

So you state that Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae are infallible according to Pastor Aeternus?

The situation in the Church since V2 is difficult to figure out, though I have my thoughts on the matter......none of which have anything to do with our topic at hand.
"What would the Vatican Church have to Concede"

Besides, if you can't figure out Double Effect I doubt explaining that can of worms to you will do any good.
Jesuitry isn't hard to figure out.

Anyway, yes.....I believe both statements to be infallible since they were promulgated by the highest authority in the Church
ah....now we are back to what you say has nothing to do with the our topic at hand "What would the Vatican church have to Concede"
and reinforce what the Church has always taught regarding this issue.
CC expands on the change the Vatican instituted in the previous century in the Roman penitentiary.  HV contradicts the patristics its apologists depend on to defend it.

They key is continuity of teaching.

And the Vatican doesn't have it. Besides that, do you still teach the humunculus and preformation?


In fact, Casti Connubii was written directly against the Lambeth Conference of 1930 where the Anglicans were the first to give way to the ways of the world regarding contraception.
Somewhere here I posted about 1930 being the year that preformation was finally abandoned and died out.  here's a brief account:
http://10e.devbio.com/article.php?id=66
And as I pointed out above, CC just furthered the Vatican's change in the 1800's in the Roman penitentiary.

It is interesting to note that Paul VI received accolades from Orthodox leaders at the time of Humanae Vitae stating that it agreed with Orthodox teaching. That's a far cry just 50 years later where very few Orthodox bishops or priests still profess that belief.
I've only seen "accolades" (and non-specific ones at that) from EP Athenagoras.  It wasn't his only mistake.

The Vatican church is a far cry across the board in its beliefs and practices just 50 years later.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #272 on: November 26, 2013, 03:05:34 PM »

One needs to wear "Vatican Goggles" to figure out that God created woman with a menstrual cycle with signs of fertility?  Huh
To see a moral difference between latex and timing, especially when, with perfect use, the latex is "more open to life" as the Vatican puts it.
OK....I am now done with this particular topic with you. I'll let the unbiased observer be the judge of our arguments.
that would require not wearing Vatican goggles.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #273 on: November 26, 2013, 03:09:03 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.

And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.

I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
ErmyCath
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic (inquiring with GOA)
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Mobile
Posts: 141



« Reply #274 on: November 26, 2013, 05:11:02 PM »

Of course he doesn't know Latin. In fact, knowing Latin might lose you a few votes in the papal elections these days.

Actually, there's every indication that he knows Latin.  The interview he did with the Jesuits a few months back includes the following:

Quote
At this point the pope stands up and takes the breviary from his desk. It is in Latin, and is worn down by continued use. He opens it to the Office of the Readings of the Feria Sexta, that is Friday, of the 27th week. He reads a passage to me taken from the Commonitórium Primum of St. Vincent of Lerins: "ita étiam christiánae religiónis dogma sequátur has decet proféctuum leges, ut annis scílect consolidétur, dilatétur témpore, sublimétur aetáte" (“Thus even the dogma of the Christian religion must proceed from these laws. It progresses, solidifying with years, growing over time, deepening with age.”)

The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.The pope comments: “St. Vincent of Lerins makes a comparison between the biological development of man and the transmission from one era to another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with time..."

If he's comfortable enough with Latin to pray a good chunk of his daily prayer in Latin and interpret and comment on a patristic passage on the spot, he's probably more fluent than people give him credit for.  I have a feeling that the "aversion to Latin" some ascribe to him has more to do with pastoral considerations: if he's not saying Mass alone, but with a congregation, and the congregation doesn't know Latin to that degree, he would probably need to be convinced of the need to celebrate in Latin before doing so.  On his own, he can probably do it just fine and happily.  

Fair enough. 
Logged

"You must have an opinion on everything and loudly confront everyone with it." - Cyrillic
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #275 on: November 26, 2013, 05:28:24 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

What nonsense. Sure, you can use NFP to "optimise the chances of conception" but it is explicitly recommended by the Catholic Church as a means of having sex while avoiding pregnancy. You can use euphemisms like "spacing of children" all you want, but at the end of the day it is still contraception and is certainly as "artificial" as anything else.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #276 on: November 26, 2013, 05:35:31 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.
bad contraception is still contraception.  Or is it not contraception if you pull out (other method of "NFP") during the critical moment rather than before it?
And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.
or just withdraw.
I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
missed that.  A quick search didn't find it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #277 on: November 26, 2013, 05:36:05 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.

And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.

I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.

From the USCCB website:

NFP is an umbrella term for certain methods used to achieve and avoid pregnancies. These methods are based on observation of the naturally occurring signs and symptoms of the fertile and infertile phases of a woman's menstrual cycle. Couples using NFP to avoid pregnancy abstain from intercourse and genital contact during the fertile phase of the woman's cycle. No drugs, devices, or surgical procedures.

That's contraception. The fact that "drugs, devices, or surgical procedures" aren't involved is irrelevant (and actually the various methods used for NFP are devices).

NFP allows people to have sex while deliberately avoiding pregnancy. According the Fathers cited by the Catholic Church in its position on contraception, that is sinful. None of them indicated that the root of the problem was using "drugs, devices, or surgical procedures."

« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 05:36:47 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #278 on: November 26, 2013, 05:50:56 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.
bad contraception is still contraception.  Or is it not contraception if you pull out (other method of "NFP") during the critical moment rather than before it?
And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.
or just withdraw.
I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
missed that.  A quick search didn't find it.

Why do I have to do all your work for you?

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,53425.45.html

Reply #48 clearly implies that she feels there should be exceptions when abortion should be allowed.
Reply #59 seems to imply the same
Reply #80 shows that she would be hesitant to give her life for her child's
Reply #88 implies the same as the above.....complete with sugar coated, lib-speak about "removing the fetus surgically with minimal trauma"

And the cherry on top..... Reply #25 where she states courageously that she would have her unborn child killed in order to save herself.

All this took me less than 5 minutes........you sure you couldn't find it?
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Online Online

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 3,940


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #279 on: November 26, 2013, 07:53:39 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

What nonsense. Sure, you can use NFP to "optimise the chances of conception" but it is explicitly recommended by the Catholic Church as a means of having sex while avoiding pregnancy.

I'm reluctant to take recommendations from the Catholic Church concerning the mechanics of conception seriously, but that's me.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #280 on: November 26, 2013, 08:11:01 PM »


NFP allows people to have sex while deliberately avoiding pregnancy. According the Fathers cited by the Catholic Church in its position on contraception, that is sinful. None of them indicated that the root of the problem was using "drugs, devices, or surgical procedures."


Having "unprotected" sex at any time puts the couple at risk of conceiving.
NFP is not 100 percent effective. Thus, the couple must be open to life.

I used to teach NFP, and I have seen some charts that left me and other instructors scratching our heads as that chart showed that this particular couple should not have conceived, yet they did, and they bore a healthy child -- a wanted child too. Some sperm must be healthier than those of others. In addition, the mucus provided by some females is more life-sustaining than that of others. When a healthy couple gets together,  they are bound to have children.

However, if that couple were to use mechanical (condoms, sponges), chemical (spermicides, IUDs) and biological warfare (the pill, depo-provera shots, RU), then sperm and any life created would be murdered.

Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #281 on: November 26, 2013, 08:33:41 PM »


NFP allows people to have sex while deliberately avoiding pregnancy. According the Fathers cited by the Catholic Church in its position on contraception, that is sinful. None of them indicated that the root of the problem was using "drugs, devices, or surgical procedures."


Having "unprotected" sex at any time puts the couple at risk of conceiving.
NFP is not 100 percent effective. Thus, the couple must be open to life.

By this logic, the condom, pill, coitus interruptus, etc. are also "open to life."

C'mon, NFP people, is it really this difficult to assemble a coherent argument?
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 08:35:38 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #282 on: November 26, 2013, 09:11:52 PM »



C'mon, NFP people, is it really this difficult to assemble a coherent argument?

Isn't the blatant and deliberate use of chemical, physical, and biological weapons to kill sperm and an unborn child a coherent argument against the use of artificial birth control? Isn't the use of such chemical, physical and biological weapons not making war against an innocent and defenseless new life? Artificial Birth Control (ABC) is closed to life because it uses chemical and biological warfare, and these weapons can and do damage a woman's body by interfering with her hormones, perforating her uterus (IUDs) and causing ectopic pregnancies. There is also the increased risk of cancer. Spiritually, a woman who uses ABC and her man who is complicit in this wicked deed, is guilty of murder as ABC causes abortion.

NFP, on the other hand, does not wage a relentless and hostile chemical, physical, and biological war against sperm and the unborn. It is open to life.

Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #283 on: November 26, 2013, 09:12:13 PM »

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.

Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.

Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.
bad contraception is still contraception.  Or is it not contraception if you pull out (other method of "NFP") during the critical moment rather than before it?
And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.
or just withdraw.
I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
missed that.  A quick search didn't find it.

Why do I have to do all your work for you?

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,53425.45.html

Reply #48 clearly implies that she feels there should be exceptions when abortion should be allowed.
Reply #59 seems to imply the same
Reply #80 shows that she would be hesitant to give her life for her child's
Reply #88 implies the same as the above.....complete with sugar coated, lib-speak about "removing the fetus surgically with minimal trauma"

And the cherry on top..... Reply #25 where she states courageously that she would have her unborn child killed in order to save herself.

All this took me less than 5 minutes........you sure you couldn't find it?
You were there.  I was not.

I do notice that she called you on the sanctimony of pickling the baby alive to satisfy some scholastic theory (though I think inducement would be better. I don't know of surgery with minimal trauma).

I can't remember if Arachne already has children who would be deprived of their mother.

Brave words from someone who will never face that choice.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #284 on: November 26, 2013, 09:16:31 PM »



C'mon, NFP people, is it really this difficult to assemble a coherent argument?

Isn't the blatant and deliberate use of chemical, physical, and biological weapons to kill sperm and an unborn child a coherent argument against the use of artificial birth control?

sperm isn't an unborn child.  We know that now for at least 80 years.  don't mix the orange juice in the apple juice.
Isn't the use of such chemical, physical and biological weapons not making war against an innocent and defenseless new life?
Against a new life, yes.  Against sperm, no.
Artificial Birth Control (ABC) is closed to life because it uses chemical and biological warfare, and these weapons can and do damage a woman's body by interfering with her hormones, perforating her uterus (IUDs) and causing ectopic pregnancies. There is also the increased risk of cancer. Spiritually, a woman who uses ABC and her man who is complicit in this wicked deed, is guilty of murder as ABC causes abortion.
Use a condom.

NFP, on the other hand, does not wage a relentless and hostile chemical, physical, and biological war against sperm and the unborn. It is open to life.
Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Btw, how are you on chemical, physical and biological fertility treatments?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #285 on: November 26, 2013, 09:25:40 PM »



C'mon, NFP people, is it really this difficult to assemble a coherent argument?

Isn't the blatant and deliberate use of chemical, physical, and biological weapons to kill sperm and an unborn child a coherent argument against the use of artificial birth control?

sperm isn't an unborn child.  We know that now for at least 80 years.  don't mix the orange juice in the apple juice.
Isn't the use of such chemical, physical and biological weapons not making war against an innocent and defenseless new life?
Against a new life, yes.  Against sperm, no.
Artificial Birth Control (ABC) is closed to life because it uses chemical and biological warfare, and these weapons can and do damage a woman's body by interfering with her hormones, perforating her uterus (IUDs) and causing ectopic pregnancies. There is also the increased risk of cancer. Spiritually, a woman who uses ABC and her man who is complicit in this wicked deed, is guilty of murder as ABC causes abortion.
Use a condom.

NFP, on the other hand, does not wage a relentless and hostile chemical, physical, and biological war against sperm and the unborn. It is open to life.
Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Btw, how are you on chemical, physical and biological fertility treatments?

I suspect a trick question.

I oppose fertility treatments that are unnatural, unsafe, and that use pharmaceutical drugs to induce ovulation. Kegal contractions, consumption of capsicum to develop a better liquid mucus, and use of natural thyroid to normalize hormones are the only ones that I would recommend. Some surgical procedures might be warranted, but I would hope that most women would not volunteer for unsafe or questionable procedures.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 09:26:02 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #286 on: November 26, 2013, 09:30:22 PM »

sperm isn't an unborn child. 

St. John Chrysostom said somewhere that killing of sperm is akin to homicide.

I take him at his word as sperm are alive. When we deliberately kill any living thing that God has created, be it sperm, spiders, or ducks, we are not acting in a very Christian manner.

Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #287 on: November 26, 2013, 09:33:05 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 09:34:00 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,172


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #288 on: November 26, 2013, 09:34:02 PM »

Quote
St. John Chrysostom said somewhere that killing of sperm is akin to homicide.
Not everything the saints say is absolutely correct. Just ask around about St.Augustine.

Quote
I take him at his word as sperm are alive. When we deliberately kill any living thing that God has created, be it sperm, spiders, or ducks, we are not acting in a very Christian manner
You're a vegetarian?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
OrthoNoob
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 991



« Reply #289 on: November 26, 2013, 09:34:46 PM »

sperm isn't an unborn child. 

St. John Chrysostom said somewhere that killing of sperm is akin to homicide.

I take him at his word as sperm are alive. When we deliberately kill any living thing that God has created, be it sperm, spiders, or ducks, we are not acting in a very Christian manner.



Not only does this imply that you dont eat meat but...you do realise plants are alive also, right?
Logged

http://avengingredhand.wordpress.com -- My blog

'These words I, Leo, have set down for love and as a safeguard of the Orthodox Faith'
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #290 on: November 26, 2013, 09:36:34 PM »

sperm isn't an unborn child. 

St. John Chrysostom said somewhere that killing of sperm is akin to homicide.

I take him at his word as sperm are alive. When we deliberately kill any living thing that God has created, be it sperm, spiders, or ducks, we are not acting in a very Christian manner.



Not only does this imply that you dont eat meat but...you do realise plants are alive also, right?

Eating of food is different from killing just for the pleasure of it. When men and women kill sperm so that they can experience pleasure without the risk of pregnancy, this is a lustful and sick act.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #291 on: November 26, 2013, 09:37:05 PM »

Quote
St. John Chrysostom said somewhere that killing of sperm is akin to homicide.
Not everything the saints say is absolutely correct. Just ask around about St.Augustine.

Quote
I take him at his word as sperm are alive. When we deliberately kill any living thing that God has created, be it sperm, spiders, or ducks, we are not acting in a very Christian manner
You're a vegetarian?

PP

Yes, most of the time. SO?
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #292 on: November 26, 2013, 09:42:16 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing to give his dead brother an heir.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 09:45:17 PM by sheenj » Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,190


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #293 on: November 26, 2013, 09:44:00 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament.

Is there a commandment where God commands the death penalty for withdrawal?  Or is this referring to the story of Onan which has been used to condemn withdrawal, masturbation, and anything/everything except sleeping with one's sister-in-law?  

Quote
Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed.

"Holy" sex still involves the spilling of seed (women are not sponges, after all).  Are we to ensure that no sperm is lost?  What did people do before we had such knowledge?  Are we to reasonably ensure that every sperm is safe, healthy, alive, and performing swimmingly?  Is this even possible?  

Quote
Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

By this standard, tampons, thermometers, etc. are all forbidden.  
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #294 on: November 26, 2013, 09:44:13 PM »

I would hope that the Roman Catholic Church would hold to its encyclical on human life, especially the one condemning birth control.

It used to be that the Orthodox Church held a similar view with the Catholic Church on birth control.
Unfortunately in 1920, Orthodoxy caved into the same position as the Anglican Church, changed its teachings and started allowing birth control. This happened at the same time that the Orthodox Church forced the horrific New Calendar on an unsuspecting Orthodox people. Coincidence? No.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
lovesupreme
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 734


Out of This World


« Reply #295 on: November 26, 2013, 09:44:31 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #296 on: November 26, 2013, 09:45:37 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

It was BOTH.

Other people who refused to honor the levirate union were not killed by God.
The onerous act was the deliberated spilling of sperm.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,190


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #297 on: November 26, 2013, 09:47:30 PM »

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Is Genesis 38 authoritative enough?

Quote
Genesis 38

8 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.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also.
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #298 on: November 26, 2013, 09:48:22 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament.

Is there a commandment where God commands the death penalty for withdrawal?  Or is this referring to the story of Onan which has been used to condemn withdrawal, masturbation, and anything/everything except sleeping with one's sister-in-law?  

Quote
Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed.

"Holy" sex still involves the spilling of seed (women are not sponges, after all).  Are we to ensure that no sperm is lost?  What did people do before we had such knowledge?  Are we to reasonably ensure that every sperm is safe, healthy, alive, and performing swimmingly?  Is this even possible?  

Quote
Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

By this standard, tampons, thermometers, etc. are all forbidden.  

In some Christian denominations, anything inserted into a woman's vagina, such as tampons, fingers (for checking the cervical mucus), and thermometers are forbidden as they are considered unnatural.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 09:54:15 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
lovesupreme
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 734


Out of This World


« Reply #299 on: November 26, 2013, 09:49:09 PM »

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Is Genesis 38 authoritative enough?

Quote
Genesis 38

8 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.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also.

Well, no, because I could just as easily bold the unbolded part and make my case for the opposite. I'm asking more for an authoritative interpretation.
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #300 on: November 26, 2013, 09:49:26 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Exactly. Modern people like to read new things into the Bible, so that they can get away with sin.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,190


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #301 on: November 26, 2013, 09:49:45 PM »

In some Christian denominations, anything inserted into a woman vagina, such as tampons, fingers (for checking the cervical mucus), and thermometers are forbidden as they are considered unnatural.

If the vagina can make even one's own fingers "unnatural", then the vagina is a magical thing indeed!

That, or these Christians denominations are crazy.  
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,772


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #302 on: November 26, 2013, 09:55:51 PM »

In some Christian denominations, anything inserted into a woman vagina, such as tampons, fingers (for checking the cervical mucus), and thermometers are forbidden as they are considered unnatural.

If the vagina can make even one's own fingers "unnatural", then the vagina is a magical thing indeed!

That, or these Christians denominations are crazy.  

Checking the mucus at the cervix can lead to infections or stimulate the woman (masturbation).
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,618



« Reply #303 on: November 26, 2013, 09:56:44 PM »

St. John Chrysostom said somewhere that killing of sperm is akin to homicide.

I take him at his word as sperm are alive. When we deliberately kill any living thing that God has created, be it sperm, spiders, or ducks, we are not acting in a very Christian manner.

By this logic we shouldn't administer medication like antibiotics that would kill the living bacteria that God has created deliberately.
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #304 on: November 26, 2013, 09:58:57 PM »

I would hope that the Roman Catholic Church would hold to its encyclical on human life, especially the one condemning birth control.

It used to be that the Orthodox Church held a similar view with the Catholic Church on birth control.
Unfortunately in 1920, Orthodoxy caved into the same position as the Anglican Church, changed its teachings and started allowing birth control. This happened at the same time that the Orthodox Church forced the horrific New Calendar on an unsuspecting Orthodox people. Coincidence? No.

Horrific? Like...genocide horrific? Terrorism horrific? What does horrific mean to you, Maria?
Logged

Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,190


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #305 on: November 26, 2013, 10:01:40 PM »

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Is Genesis 38 authoritative enough?

Quote
Genesis 38

8 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.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also.

Well, no, because I could just as easily bold the unbolded part and make my case for the opposite. I'm asking more for an authoritative interpretation.

You could, but your case would be weak.  The entire passage centers around Onan going in to his brother's wife for a particular purpose, not "just because".  The spilling of his semen was the way he obstructed that purpose.  There's no reason to believe that God's hot displeasure lashed out against Onan simply for spilling his seed in and of itself given how many times the levirate marriage angle is underscored in the passage.  

If there are other places in the OT where God prohibits withdrawal in the Mosaic law, or in some other stories, I'd be happy to reconsider this interpretation.  

I agree that "the traditional interpretation" has to do with declaring spilling the seed an abomination in all its forms, but I'm not convinced of this just based on Scripture itself.  This is not because I'm eager to "get away with sin", but rather I think it is a more convenient interpretation.  The "wrongness" of spilling the seed is the one application that can be extended to all people by reference to this story.  It's much more difficult to explain why it was OK for you to sleep with your sister-in-law back in the day, both in the sight of society and in the sight of God, but not anymore.  

"Traditional interpretations" of matters related to sexuality are sometimes a stretch.  For example, the "traditional" interpretation of I Cor 7 is that St Paul was positively commanding abstinence from sexual relations for married couples for certain periods dedicated to prayer: the canons related to Lenten discipline cite this passage as the basis for imposing abstinence on married couples.  And yet, St Paul is basically saying the exact opposite: "if you both want to, maybe that would be a good idea, but only temporarily, and definitely make sure to come back together again", not "Lent is only fifty days long, deal with it" or "Plan your amorous activities on Mondays, because God doesn't want to deal with it any other day of the week".      
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #306 on: November 26, 2013, 10:03:10 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Honestly, I don't have a source for that. That's just what I've been taught by priests and deacons in my Church.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,190


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #307 on: November 26, 2013, 10:05:53 PM »

Checking the mucus at the cervix can lead to infections or stimulate the woman (masturbation).

Well, the next time my doctor tells me to do a monthly TSE to make sure I don't have any abnormalities, I'll just tell him that I'd rather get testicular cancer than accidentally masturbate. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
lovesupreme
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 734


Out of This World


« Reply #308 on: November 26, 2013, 10:09:34 PM »

Checking the mucus at the cervix can lead to infections or stimulate the woman (masturbation).

Well, the next time my doctor tells me to do a monthly TSE to make sure I don't have any abnormalities, I'll just tell him that I'd rather get testicular cancer than accidentally masturbate. 

Yeah, I clean that uh... area... pretty regularly. Pretty sure you can't "accidentally" masturbate.

Also Mor and sheenj: fair enough. I guess I was just hoping for a Patristic quote, if only to spur the conversation.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 10:10:17 PM by lovesupreme » Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,144


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #309 on: November 26, 2013, 10:35:38 PM »


In some Christian denominations, anything inserted into a woman vagina, such as tampons, fingers (for checking the cervical mucus), and thermometers are forbidden as they are considered unnatural.

Maria, in icons of the Nativity of the Lord, the midwives are seen bathing the newborn Child. Orthodox tradition gives us the story of one of them, Salome, who disbelieved that the Mother of God had conceived as a virgin. From the protoevangelium of James:

19. And I saw a woman coming down from the hill-country, and she said to me: O man, whither art thou going? And I said: I am seeking an Hebrew midwife. And she answered and said unto me: Art thou of Israel? And I said to her: Yes. And she said: And who is it that is bringing forth in the cave? And I said: A woman betrothed to me. And she said to me: Is she not thy wife? And I said to her: It is Mary that was reared in the temple of the Lord, and I obtained her by lot as my wife. And yet she is not my wife, but has conceived of the Holy Spirit. And the widwife said to him: Is this true? And Joseph said to her: Come and see. And the midwife went away with him. And they stood in the place of the cave, and behold a luminous cloud overshadowed the cave. And the midwife said: My soul has been magnified this day, because mine eyes have seen strange things -- because salvation has been brought forth to Israel. And immediately the cloud disappeared out of the cave, and a great light shone in the cave, so that the eyes could not bear it. And in a little that light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and went and took the breast from His mother Mary. And the midwife cried out, and said: This is a great day to me, because I have seen this strange sight. And the midwife went forth out of the cave, and Salome met her. And she said to her: Salome, Salome, I have a strange sight to relate to thee: a virgin has brought forth -- a thing which her nature admits not of. Then said Salome: As the Lord my God liveth, unless I thrust in my finger, and search the parts, I will not believe that a virgin has brought forth.

20. And the midwife went in, and said to Mary: Show thyself; for no small controversy has arisen about thee. And Salome put in her finger, and cried out, and said: Woe is me for mine iniquity and mine unbelief, because I have tempted the living God; and, behold, my hand is dropping off as if burned with fire. And she bent her knees before the Lord, saying: O God of my fathers, remember that I am the seed of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; do not make a show of me to the sons of Israel, but restore me to the poor; for Thou knowest, O Lord, that in Thy name I have performed my services, and that I have received my reward at Thy hand. And, behold, an angel of the Lord stood by her, saying to her: Salome, Salome, the Lord hath heard thee. Put thy hand to the infant, and carry it, and thou wilt have safety and joy. And Salome went and carried it, saying: I will worship Him, because a great King has been born to Israel. And, behold, Salome was immediately cured, and she went forth out of the cave justified. And behold a voice saying: Salome, Salome, tell not the strange things thou hast seen, until the child has come into Jerusalem.
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,144


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #310 on: November 26, 2013, 10:40:00 PM »

Checking the mucus at the cervix can lead to infections or stimulate the woman (masturbation).

Well, the next time my doctor tells me to do a monthly TSE to make sure I don't have any abnormalities, I'll just tell him that I'd rather get testicular cancer than accidentally masturbate. 

Indeed. PAP smears for cancer screening, and similar gynecological investigations where the uterus and cervix are examined would also be forbidden.
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,027



« Reply #311 on: November 26, 2013, 10:41:04 PM »

if I see one more off topic sex or body part post I will put everyone who posted a post on it on official warning and immediately post moderate the person who nexts make a post on this. Keep it on track or I will lock it and issue out warnings. Username! Section moderator
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 10:42:16 PM by username! » Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #312 on: November 26, 2013, 10:44:05 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Honestly, I don't have a source for that. That's just what I've been taught by priests and deacons in my Church.
Answers here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21230.msg1034647/topicseen.html#msg1034647
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #313 on: November 26, 2013, 10:54:25 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

It was BOTH.

Other people who refused to honor the levirate union were not killed by God.
The onerous act was the deliberated spilling of sperm.
replied to here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21230.msg1034656/topicseen.html#msg1034656
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #314 on: November 26, 2013, 10:55:34 PM »

Condoms are more open to life, as is withdrawal.  Nautural enough?

Withdrawal was punished by death in the Old Testament. Condoms are a form of withdrawal, and neither are natural as the sperm is spilt or destroyed. Again live sperm are destroyed. Besides introducing a filthy condom into a woman is not natural at all.

Or do you not read the Old Testament?

I would focus more on understanding than reading. Onan's sin was not coitus interruptus, it was the denial of the levirate union and refusing his dead brother an heir.

Really? Not to be interrogative, but could you please provide a source that backs this up? As far as I know, the tradition interpretation has always been that the sin was coitus interruptus, hence the term "Onanism."

Exactly. Modern people like to read new things into the Bible, so that they can get away with sin.
LOL.  You think that started in 1922 too?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.196 seconds with 74 queries.