But we know from Genesis 38: 8-10 that Onan’s offense of “spilling his seed” was grave enough to cost him his life.
When I pointed out the biblical condemnation of birth control, they all disappeared; only the crickets could be heard. (Although in fairness, it seems to be socially acceptable to disappear when one can’t respond to a point.)
As if the Catholic teaching is not from the Bible
Are you intentionally being deceptive or just lack basic reading comprehension. His issues was disobedience not spilling his seed. If Gen 38 is your proof text you’re in trouble.
And as always, context will bring the correct meaning of the verses into the light.
6Now Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar.
7But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was evil in the sight of the LORD, so the LORD took his life.
8Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.”
9Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother.
10But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He took his life also.
11Then Judah said to his daughter-in-law Tamar, “Remain a widow in your father’s house until my son Shelah grows up”; for he thought, “I am afraid that he too may die like his brothers.” So Tamar went and lived in her father’s house.
*****
Roman Catholics are living under the Old Testament.
What I don’t understand is how Catholics feel they must be correct in interpreting the Bible when as here, they must often force it to support what they want it to say.
For while, based upon Biblical principles, I believe preventing conception is wrong, yet the condemnation that this text describes is due to whose child this would be, rather than simply preventing conception.
And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. (Genesis 38:9)
That utterly selfishly-motivated act got him executed, while nowhere is simply preventing conception explicitly condemns, let alone as a capital; offense.
Instead, the basis for preventing conception being wrong flows from design and the blessed primary (but not exclusive) purpose of sexual union, that of producing children. Which also is part of the reason why homosexual unions are wrong. We are not to seek to prevent children as if was an evil or abnormal thing as cancer.
And asserting "When I pointed out the biblical condemnation of birth control, they all disappeared; only the crickets could be heard" simply testifies to their and your ignorance. But I see you have only been here less than 2 months.
However, if you and they has cared to even read classic commentaries, you could see responses deal with this text (even possibly leading some support to your extrapolation), such as,
Onan, though he consented to marry the widow, yet, to the great abuse of his own body, of the wife that he had married, and of the memory of his brother that was gone, he refused to raise up seed unto his brother, as he was in duty bound. This was so much the worse because the Messiah was to descend from Judah, and, had he not been guilty of this wickedness, he might have had the honour of being one of his ancestors. (Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible Published in 1708-1714)
The God of covenant is obliged to cut off Er for his wickedness in the prime of life. We are not made acquainted with his crime; but it could scarcely be more vile and unnatural than that for which his brother Onan is also visited with death. “And be a husband to her.” The original word means to act as a husband to the widow of a deceased brother who has left no issue. Onan seems to have been prompted to commit his crime by the low motive of turning the whole inheritance to his own house. (Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible Albert Barnes: 1798-1870)
Wherefore he slew him also - The sin of Onan has generally been supposed to be self-pollution; but this is certainly a mistake; his crime was his refusal to raise up seed to his brother, and rather than do it, by the act mentioned above, he rendered himself incapable of it. Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible Adam Clarke, LL.D., F.S.A.:1715-1832)
In addition, you apparently are also ignorant of the testimony that evangelicals have as many or more children than Catholics , and use conception likewise , while your church shows how to understand its teachings by what its leadership does. Including by manifestly counting even proabortion, prosodomite pils as members in life and in death.
Your Catholic body is overall sick, from its earthly head down, and her distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation. and which best shows how the NT church understood the OT and gospels).