No Birth Control for Baptists

In a sermon to the students of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary earlier this month, Dr. Thomas White said taking birth control pills is a “sin” and “murder,” according to a report on the WFAA TV website. The crux of his argument is that “although the pill is supposed to work by preventing the release of an egg, it can also prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall.”

While his comments were certainly polemical, it is important for Christians to have a clear understanding of birth control. For those of us who believe that life begins at conception is there an ethical difference between abortion and birth control methods that prevent implantation?

What do you think?

HT: Jim West

Login to comment

IMPORTANT Did you have an account on the old ThinkChristian.net site? Click here transition your account. This will sync all your comments with your email address.

Comments (36)

Richard Land commented on this and seemed to add surgical sterilization to the list of scripturally unapproved birth control methods
Wha? Has this always been a Baptist position?
Perhaps we should also be asking, as we reduce the death rate from disease, and extend life expectancy, just how many people this planet was meant to support? Instructing one small tribe in one small area of one continent to be fruitful and multiply is a far cry from doubling 3 billion to 6 billion to 12 billion all over seven continents. There has to be a balance somewhere. Reducing the number of children conceived is far better than bringing millions into this world to die of famine and renewed epidemics, or in genocidal wars over diminished resources, which seems to be a root of what is going on in Darfur.
here's another question: if God allows miscarriages, does that mean He's participating in abortion? it's rhetorical. i think the discussion of abortion is getting out of hand.

while i don't want people to have abortions, i recognize (and think others should too) that most of the people who are adamant proponents of bans on abortion are NOT going to be among those adopting children, feeding babies and otherwise helping families who are going to be in serious need of help after they have these children.

Read this:
http://www.notyourmamasreligio...
Thank God that the Pastors are finally preaching the truth about the possibility of creating an abortion from the pill- we should support his brave, yet unpopular stand. Godly men need our support.
"Godly men" is an arrogant oxymoron. "All fall short of the glory of God."
"Godly men" is an arrogant oxymoron. "All fall short of the glory of God."

I do not believe that is supported by the fullness of The Gospel. Yes, in our natural life (our adamic nature) we are sinful and there is nothing that we can DO in order to attain righteousness or Godliness.

But, a thourough understanding of Romans 6,7,8 will clear up the picture for you. As believers we have entered into a new nature - Christ's nature - which is eternal life. The scripture is very clear that we were with christ at crucifixion, resurrection, ascencion, and seated in Him at the right hand of the Father. Through the surrender of our desires and passions and the allowance of Christ's life to be manifest as our life (Read Romans 12) we have renewed minds. Holy and acceptable to God. We have become holy, righteous, children of a loving Father - not by what we DO but by who we ARE .... the trick after that is to LET Christ be our life.
The arrogance, in my seldom humble but admittedly limited opinion, is when men define themselves AS "godly" or defer to others as "godly." This assumes that we know what God would do. For a man or woman to strive to be more like God, to understand what God would have us do with our lives, is the essence of faith in God. To proclaim that any given proposition offered from the pulpit is "the truth" and that those who offer it are "godly men" is arrogant, no matter what the proposition is. If it is true, let the truth become manifest as it is quietly accepted by those who hear it. Obviously, I find discussions like this edifying, so I don't mean we shouldn't talk about it. But ungodly men have been known to preach from pulpits, and sincere servants of Christ have been known to be wrong.
I think it's an important thing to consider.

I believe that the Catholic stance on birth control is a very nuanced position which addresses the ethics of the matter without reducing it to a good/evil polemic. Basically the stance is that by preventing life, you might not be destroying life but you are doing injustice to the life-giving system that God created. It's not that sex is not for pleasure, but that God created it for both pleasure and the creation of life, and hence but practising it with birth control, you are subtracting from the totality of sexuality in the form that God created it.

But, that said, it isn't addressing the distinction between preventing implantation and destroying the fetus. I think a (somewhat) arbitrary line could be drawn between stifling creative potential and destroying the created being. As Jim West pointed out, if preventing implantation was murder, then every 'night effusion' and every sperm that doesn't make it to an egg is an act of murder (genocide?) to some degree.

Personally, I would tend toward there being an ethical difference between the two. But I'm curious the arguments of those who disagree.
Damian, I'm a bit of a dunce on the vocabulary here. But I think Jim is confusing fertilization of the egg with implantation in the uterus. Just shows you what happens when theologians (and men mostly) discuss gynecology! 8)
Ahhh yes, you're right David. Fools, we are. After a wiki-gynocology lesson, I realise I was addressing the wrong part of the process.

In which case, preventing the blasocyst from adhering to the wall of the uterus is akin to starving it to death. Certainly problematic ethically.

But, I think my previous comment still applies to other forms of contraception.
In my own process of seeking, finding and fully receiving the forgiveness of Jesus for my years of sexual immorality and my abortion, I have had to face the fact that in those days on birth control pills and IUD I conceived and destroyed countless fertilized eggs, that is human beings made by God, and I will one day encounter these precious beings in heaven. They are in Jesus, and therefore have already forgiven me, as Jesus has. The surprise when I get to heaven will be how many are going to be at the family reunion.
This is not something that I have given a great deal of thought , that said. Is an embryo in a petrie dish a human being? Does that differ from an embryo that is attached and on it's developemental road to birth? If we consider the first state a human life then it follows that an embryo that does not attach and is released with menstrual flow is in fact a death. I think that for me this draws an important moral distinction and I don't think birth control morally wrong. I am interesred in other opinions and they're supporting arguments, hoping like yourself, that my view on this might more fully develope.
This came up at church one day several years ago. I was with my women friends at our large Southern Baptist Church outside of Houston. I mentioned that I believed the use of birth control signified a lack of trusting God. Well, the firestorm began! I was the only one on my side. One of my best friends about exploded. Well! God expects us to use common sense and medicine! She had often spoke of how she trusted God for EVERYTHING. I mentioned this - everything except something so important as a life?! So, I learned to keep my opinion to myself.

Since then, I've gone back and forth on this issue several times. Strangely, this came up with my husband just days before I began reading about it on the internet. I'll be interested in the comments. I must admit I'm not exactly disagreeing with Dr. White.
I remember having this discussion with a friend at University a number of years ago.

As I understand it, birth control pills actually have 2 different functions, as mentioned above. However, the latter function is regarded as statistically insignificant - 0.0001% or something like that. I think God is more worried about our attitude of heart, and attitude to sex, than something like that. If we took into account all our actions that could, in 0.0001% of cases, lead to sin, I think we'd tie ourselves in knots.

(As a clarification, I would say that I don't think using the "morning after" pill is right, though)

See the latest in:

Promotion

promo 1 promo 2
promo 3 promo 4

Donate Now