We all make decisions based on the revelation that we do have, Metmom. To say that nothing can counteract or stump the power of God is a true saying. That fact, however, has not prevented any number of creatures from nonetheless trying to do so. Did Satan’s rebellion triumph over God? No it has not as will be seen in the will have not.
So, because Satan cannot counteract God’s purpose and power, does that mean Satan hasn’t really done bad? No. He has done evil, and that sin will be punished eventually in the lake of fire.
With us is there anyone God has decreed to be born who will remain unborn? Never. God’s sovereignty overcomes all.
Is the intention to change the status of those who are to exist to the status of those who will not exist a sinful thought? I think it is. I think it is an assumption of sovereignty in the same way that thought of murder is an assumption of sovereignty. (BTW, every pro-life argument supports this viewpoint. The pre-born are living creations of God.)
What about the pre-conceived? Are they real?
Well, only if there is evidence that the “yet to be conceived” have ever been predicted and the prediction come true. The Messiah Jesus, John the Baptist, and Cyrus come quickly to mind.
Therefore, the intention of the heart to do away with the yet to be conceived is a sin of the heart akin to the taking of a life.
Far better to err on the side of life.
Then, do you agree with me that NFP and the so-called "Rhythm Method" are also playing God with pre-conceived life? If this is where you want to go then how far do you take it? What about any medical intervention in treatments developed to extend lives is this also "playing God" or do you think God's permissive will can work WITH human beings to accomplish His goals? There was, and still are in some places, religious people who shun ANY medical intervention in favor of trusting in God for all healing - often at risk of their and their children's lives. Do you imagine a church hierarchy should be able to mandate to its members on every area of their lives or do we have a liberty in the non-essentials to decide between us and God what is good for us? Scripture doesn't specify - other than "thou shall not kill" - what is acceptable in the marriage bed, "Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." (Hebrews 13:4)
There can be legitimate reasons for a married couple to use condoms (i.e.,prevention of transference of infection; financial inability to support children at the time; physical danger of pregnancy in the wife). However, my argument was more geared towards what appears as hypocrisy in the Roman Catholic Church when they forbid all methods of contraception - even condoms which do not cost the life of the unborn child (such as would an IUD and most BC pills) - yet approve of methods that allow the couple to enjoy the sexual union without risking pregnancy. How is that different than using a condom?
A good question to ask is if NFP is okay, then is the use of a condom also to doubly protect against conception okay? I can't help but think there is double talk going on in regard to this subject. There are other areas where I disagree with Catholicism theologically and I can back up my belief with Scripture. On the subject of what another man and wife do in their own marriage bed, well that's not really my business.