The last 60 years have seen a revolution in man’s ability to control conception: to prevent it where it is not desired, or to produce it where it is.

Biblical Principles Regarding Birth

1. God’s first command to man was to be fruitful and multiply (Gen 1:28). Children are celebrated as a gift from God (Ps 127:4-5). Question: Does this mean that Christian married couples should have as many children as their bodies allow?  
2. God is sovereign over conception (Gen 20:18). Question: Should we not then avoid interfering in any way, and leave the results up to God?
3. Doesn’t the Bible condemn birth control in the case of Onan?
4. Marital sexuality without procreation is not condemned in Scripture (Prov 5:18-19).

When Birth Control Would Be Wrong

1. It is wrong to use it outside of marriage for illicit sexual activity.
2. It is wrong to use it if a married couple simply wish to indefinitely reject the responsibility of parenting.
3. It is wrong to use it if it produces abortions.

When Birth Control Could Be Right

1. If a married couple are not yet in a place to care for a child (Prov 24:27)
2. If a couple cannot afford to properly care for more children than they have (1 Tim 5:8, Lk 14:28).
3. To put space between children.
4. Very fertile people can have children in rapid succession, which can place great strain on the family.
5. To protect the health of the parents – in some cases, more children could harm the physical (or mental) health of the parents.
6. To limit and complete the number of children. No Scripture forbids parents from doing so.
7. Some couples may choose childlessness for very specific ministry purposes. Some rare vocations almost require childlessness (Mt 19:12).

The Ethics of Birth Control and Fertilisation Technologies

1. Natural methods. Following a woman’s natural cycle has no moral issues. It requires rather unusual discipline, and would not be considered reliable.
2. Barrier methods. Again, no moral issue is here.
3. Sterilization. Jesus speaks of ‘eunuchs’ (Mt 19:12).
4. Hormonal methods. Whether taken as a pill, or supplied through an intrauterine device, these methods seek to prevent conception.

The moral issue with these is a third possibility: some claim that a breakthrough fertilised egg is possible, and the uterus will be thinned, causing the fertilised egg to not implant. If this third case occurs, you have the equivalent of an abortion. The majority consensus seems to be that hormonal pills or devices that prevent conception do not have abortifacient results; however, each Christian couple would have to prayerfully make a decision of conscience based on what evidence exists.

5. Emergency Contraception. The drug RU-486, is clearly a drug that kills a fertilised zygote, and this is murder. So called ‘morning-after pills’ vary in their make-up. However, there is a higher chance of preventing a fertilised zygote from implanting, and Christians should be advised of the higher danger here.
6. Intra-uterine fertilisation, or artificial insemination, is using technology to overcome impediments to birth. This is usually provided by the husband (AIH). If the husband is infertile, a couple may elect to use donor sperm (AID). Question: is this adultery by proxy? Is it only the wife’s child? Is donor sperm immoral in itself?
7. In-vitro fertilisation. As the technology currently exists, multiple ovum and sperm are united in a Petri dish, and later transplanted. The problem here is that for the sake of obtaining one fertilised zygote, many are sacrificed.
8. Surrogate Motherhood. This is essentially the reverse of IUF, and uses the womb of another woman for AID. However, it carries much more baggage. There is the potential of the exploitation of womanhood. The maternal instinct is strong, and more than one biological surrogate had had a very hard time giving up her child. Wisdom would suggest that adoption is a better course.

Material adapted from Norm Geisler

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa