2. Defining Terms

Many needless disagreements have resulted from an imprecise use of language. This is certainly true in the area of sexuality, conception, and birth.

Most Evangelical and Romanist discussions of the subject have allowed the enemy to muddy the waters by adopting their term, “birth control,” a term coined by Margaret Sanger,²⁸ the founder of Planned Parenthood. Her magazine, The Woman Rebel, used the term “birth control” to describe both contraceptives and chemical abortifacients. ²⁹ When the meaning of the term “birth control” can encompass both prevention of conception and the destruction of a new life formed in the womb, it is a term that should be avoided. The debate should really center on whether it is legitimate to exercise some control over conception, so many Christians prefer the term “conception control.”

Even this is not clear enough, since there are both ethical and unethical ways of preventing conception. Therefore in place of the terms “birth control” and “conception control,” I will be advocating the expression, Biblically Limited Conception Control (BLCC). I will be arguing against both the No Conception Control (NCC) position and the Antinomian Birth Control (ABC) position.³⁰ Each of the words in the expression “Biblically Limited Conception Control” need to be understood to appreciate what this book stands for and what it does not stand for.

Control

The word “control” captures the Biblical concepts of dominion and intentionality. In Genesis 1:26-28 God gave Adam and Eve dominion over all creation. Psalm 8 not only reaffirmed the dominion mandate but also said that God “put all things under his feet” (Ps. 8:6). Nothing was exempted from man’s dominion – not even fertility.

What does it mean to have dominion? It means to rule or to exercise stewardship under God and consistent with His law. The dominion mandate has been defined as follows:

The dominion mandate is God’s call to Adam and his descendants to “bring His truth and His will to bear on every sphere of our world and our society.”³¹ It “is an all-inclusive concept that extends to every sphere of life where man’s mind and hands are employed to control and utilize the processes of nature for the good of all”³² and the glory of God. “The Church must see in this command its role in shaping every area of life according to God’s will - including politics, the fine arts, science, law, medical ethics, and more.”³³

We will get to the ethical dimension of this definition later as we examine the word “Biblically.” In terms of justifying the word “control,” I want to explain the importance of avoiding passivity. Dominion involves stewardship, study, exploration, managing, planning, rationing, apportioning, starting work, resting from work, categorizing, improving, and using this creation to God’s glory. Man was not to be passive in relationship to his environment, his family, his time, future, or any other aspect of creation. Indeed, to passively allow creation to order itself is the opposite of the dominion mandate. If man is to take dominion over conception, he does not have the option to passively allow this aspect of creation to order itself.

In contrast to this very active and intentional perspective on life, NCC writings explicitly remove much of man’s control, dominion, planning, and decision making from the process of conception. The following quotes could be multiplied many times over to demonstrate that the NCC community rejects the concept of “control” from their theology of conception – thus the name, “No Conception Control” (NCC).

Faulty Assumptions of NCC

• No responsibility for making a decision to have more or less children: “Should we have more children?… Was the decision even our responsibility?… I believe wholeheartedly in birth control. But the Scriptures prove that God Himself is our birth Controller. He controls the conception, spacing, and birth of the children He gives so completely and so perfectly that I have absolutely no reason to take over the responsibility.”³⁴
• Dominion over earth, but no dominion over conception: “God has given man dominion over the earth, but never have we been authorized to usurp His plans in our own bodies, His temple. The Christian must give Him dominion to control his or her own body.”³⁵
• Trust in divine sovereignty is falsely pitted against human responsibility: “The real truth about NFP [Natural Family Planning], though, is that it still may be an accurate gauge of the heart. We are not too thrilled about trusting God to accomplish what is best for us. When a couple realizes God’s true part in conception… they realize that NFP is simple needless tinkering with a system He already controls lock, stock, and baby.”³⁶
• Relinquishing any planning in the area of conception: “… trusting God with the size of their families. Most women fear they’ll end up with twenty children… I have taken the same approach in trusting God with this area of our lives… My husband and I made the decision several years ago to release our plans to God and trust Him.”³⁷
• Relinquishing control: “Then we began to feel really convicted about the level of control we were [sic] exerting over this part of our life, and decided to relinquish that and let God have complete control of when to start our family.”³⁸
• Passivity toward size of family: “Can’t we also trust Him to manage the size of our family?”³⁹ “My husband and I have finally decided to let God decide the size of our family.”⁴⁰
• Seeking to remove “intentionality” from the fact that millions of sperm die even when attempting pregnancy. Provan contends that when seed is “intentionally” killed it is akin to “murder,” and when millions of sperm die as a result of intercourse (even when one sperm fertilizes the egg), there is still a “killing” of human life, but in this case, it is God sovereignly doing so, not man.⁴¹ This issue of intentionality is what makes so many people conscience stricken about having sex after menopause or during pregnancy. Couples try not to think about the massive numbers of sperm that die. “Onan was killed because of his intentional destruction of semen.”⁴² “Birth control involves intentional destruction of semen.”⁴³ “The sexual organs were designed by God to perform the sacred function of procreation; any voluntary use of the sexual organs which thwarted this goal was viewed as grossly wicked.”⁴⁴

Much NCC literature exhibits a faulty view of trust and a faulty dichotomy between trust and responsibility. Hebrews 11 makes clear that where Biblical faith in God is present, the believing Christian plans, acts, takes dominion, controls, and decides.⁴⁵ There is never a pitting of sovereignty against responsibility.

The same is true of conception. In John 1:13 God puts a stark contrast between regeneration (which is purely monergistic) and physical conception (which is synergistic). Unlike physical begetting, which is the result of three things:

• “of blood” (physical descent)
• “of the desire of the flesh” (sexual desires which drive men and women to procreation)
• “of the will of man” (or human choice/decision)⁴⁶

Jesus said that regeneration lacks those three elements. While his point was to teach about regeneration, He makes His point by assuming the truth we are articulating here – that man’s decision is very much involved in conception. Man’s planning (“of the will of man”) was never removed from the dominion mandate to be fruitful and multiply. If having babies has been entrusted to man’s “dominion and will” in exactly the same way as the command to make the earth fruitful has been entrusted to man’s dominion and will, then it should be permissible for man to plan the spacing of babies (or to plan not to space babies).

It is also important to understand what is not meant by “control.” Obviously man cannot control anything in the ultimate sense of the word. He is simply a vicegerent of God’s rule. There would be no earth to take dominion over if God did not uphold all things by the word of His power. So the words “control,” “dominion,” “planning,” “decision,” etc. must all be thought of as in submission to God’s kingship. As Gary North has noted with regard to the dominion mandate:

Since God is sovereign over the creation which exists only because of God’s decree, and since man is made in the image of God, man therefore has a legitimate, though subordinate, right of dominion over creation.⁴⁷

Only God has “control” of anything in life in an absolute sense. God is sovereign over even our plans (James 4:15), but that does not stop us from being responsible to plan. When Paul “planned” numerous times and failed in those plans (see Rom. 1:13), it did not stop his planning. In Acts 16 Paul planned to go to Asia in verse 6, but the Spirit changed his plans. He then planned to go to Mysia in verse 7 and the Spirit again changed His plans. He planned to go to Troas in verse 8, and the Spirit gave him the Macedonian call of verse 9. All the way through he was planning, and the Spirit didn’t stop him from planning. In verse 10 Luke says, “Now after he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go to Macedonia, concluding that the Lord had called us to preach the gospel to them.” Note the word, “concluding.” Paul was using his head. He was making a deduction to the best of his ability.

Likewise in Romans 1:13 Paul tells the church of Rome, “Now I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that I often planned to come to you (but was hindered until now).” The fact that his plans were hindered many times did not keep Paul from planning. Purpose, planning, and decision-making are a part of the Christian life, and there is no Biblical reason to exclude conception from this planning simply because God is sovereign. God is sovereign over all of life. Kent Crockett said,

Imagine going on an ocean cruise to an island. After you have been out on the ocean for a week, you say to the captain, “It sure seems like we should have arrived by now. When do we plan to arrive?” The captain answers, “Plans? I don’t make any plans. I just trust God to guide the boat through the wind and waves to the right destination.”

That sounds ridiculous, but many people drift through life in the same way. They make no plans, yet believe they will reach their destination on time. If we fail to plan, we plan to fail. Making plans will cause us to act rather than react.⁴⁸

The same is true of conception. It is a strange passivity that says a woman should not get surgery to repair her scarred fallopian tubes (on the mistaken notion that such actions are overruling God’s closing of the womb). The Biblical Christian should trust God through prayer for healing, and should God sovereignly close that door, to trust God through natural fertility methods, and should God close that door, to trust God through medical fertility methods (if they are ethically permissible). If all forms of closing and opening the womb are sin, then God’s word will clearly declare those things to be sin, but we should not be fooled into a false dichotomy between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility.

Conception

Let us focus on the word conception. The reason “conception control” is being substituted for “birth control” is twofold. First, it is to make it crystal clear that any form of “birth control” that terminates life after conception is ruled out. This book will be arguing against the Morning After Pill, the IUD, and several other forms of abortifacients that Christians have wittingly or unwittingly used to cast off a fertilized egg.

Second, it is to narrow the scope of this book. Certainly there is a place for taking dominion over the birth process (true birth control). I praise God for expert midwives, doulas, doctors, pain killers, technology to stop hemorrhaging, birthing chairs, pools, Pitocin, herbs, backrubs, and myriad other forms of controlling the process of birth and making it safer and more comfortable. This book is focused on the controversy of whether the “control” that even NCC advocates use at the time of birth can be extended to the beginning stages of this wonderful miracle of life – the conception itself.

Limited

If it is sometimes permissible for man’s will (“begotten… of the will of man”) to cooperate with God’s will (“the LORD opened her womb”), then we should try to figure out in which circumstances this is permissible and what are the Biblical limits to man’s responsibility. This book will seek to show that “conception control” is further limited by other considerations, such as 1) the permanency of the decision, 2) the health of the mother, 3) the health of the baby, 4) our motives, 5) our goals, and other factors. The average book on “birth control” rightly argues that some control is allowed by Scripture over the conception process, and then illegitimately moves to allowing many forms of “birth control” that are ruled out by other Biblical criteria. This book will be arguing for a much more limited view on conception control than the average Protestant holds to. Hopefully by digging much more deeply into the Scriptural principles than Protestants have done to date, this study book will contribute to the ongoing discussions on this subject.

Biblically

One principle that the BLCC camp shares with many authors in the NCC camp is that our only source for ethics is the Bible. While it is true that some NCC advocates have drifted away from the doctrine of sola Scriptura in ethics with their overreliance upon the opinions of church fathers and Protestant reformers,⁴⁹ this book assumes that most NCC advocates want to remain faithful to the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible. Hopefully this shared foundation will help the various Evangelical camps to have fruitful discussions. I am a Berean (Acts 17:11), and if anything that I have written can be demonstrated to be unbiblical, I will change it. I have sought to read deeply in the NCC literature over the years in order to test and retest my assumptions and my Biblical exegesis. Though this book may not convince everyone who reads it that the BLCC position is correct, hopefully it will at least correct misconceptions and allow a greater degree of respect between the camps. It should be our conviction that the Bible is more than sufficient to thoroughly equip the man of God for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17).