[DarkSavant]

It's not a misapplication, it's how the verses were read in every generation before the 20th century. Then, when people wanted to use contraceptives, the interpretation changed. Imagine that.

A good summary

"That Onan's unnatural act as such is condemned as sinful in Gen. 38: 9-10 was an interpretation held by the Fathers and Doctors of the Catholic Church, by the Protestant Reformers, and by nearly all celibate and married theologians of all Christian denominations until the early years of this century, when some exegetes began to approach the text with preconceptions deriving from the sexual decadence of modern Western culture and its exaggerated concern for 'over-population.' "

[CynicalBear]

>>it's how the verses were read in every generation before the 20th century.<<

That length of time polemic is weak. The concept and practice of "queen of heaven" goes back to Babylon in the Old Testament. That certainly doesn't make it right for Christians.

[CynicalBear]

The sin of Onan was that he was not obedient in preserving and perpetuating the name and inheritance of his brother. It had to do with the lineage of Judah from which came Christ and also the promise to Abraham to make of him a great nation. To use it like the Catholic Church does is a perversion of Scripture.