I don’t see the example of Onan as God forcing married couples to have children.
I see the story of Onan in Genesis 38 as NOT a general prohibition against contraception, but rather a SPECIFIC judgment against Onan’s actions for disobeying God’s command to produce an heir for his brother.
I don’t see the Bible explicitly condemning the use of contraceptives ( as in THOU SHALT NOT), and therefore, their use is not inherently sinful.
Couples should be responsible for deciding when to have children and how many children to have.
And I repeat — CHILDREN are a blessing from God and I do see encouragement to have children for loving couples. But I do not see the Onan example as applicable to everyone but ONLY to Onan.
In ancient Jewish tradition, specifically according to the laws outlined in the Torah, the practice of yibbum (levirate marriage) was a key response to a situation where a man died without leaving an heir. If a man died without children, his brother was expected to marry the widow and produce offspring in the deceased brother’s name, ensuring the continuation of his lineage.
This practice is outlined in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. If the brother refused to fulfill this duty, the widow could perform a ceremony called halitzah (the release), which publicly marked the refusal. The punishment was not a physical one but rather a public humiliation. In the ceremony, the widow would remove the brother-in-law’s sandal and spit in his face, saying, “This is what is done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.” The refusal was considered shameful, but no legal or physical punishment was imposed beyond this public disgrace.
Over time, halitzah became the preferred option in many Jewish communities over the levirate marriage itself.
The above is from chat GPT…so if God already had a defined punishment for rejecting your brothers wife, then why would there be a super punishment of death in this case. This is a critical verse that defines one of the theological differences between Protestants and Catholics.