7. The Fallacy of the False Dilemma

There is a tendency to frame the conception control argument as either/or – to imply that the only options are

• have as many children/blessings as you possibly can.
• selfishly refuse God’s blessing by not having enough children, and be in sin.

Might the situation be more complex? Perhaps with one family, six children would be all that God expects, and with another family, twelve might be expected. How many children can you effectively disciple?

Jesus didn’t seem to think that he could disciple more than twelve in depth, and this might have a bearing on how many a given parent can adequately raise in the fear and nurture of the Lord. Perhaps there are times when BLCC people are pleasing God when they have temporarily “made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake” (Matt. 19:12). I doubt very much that Jesus was talking about literal self-castration or vasectomy in that passage (though some believe this to be the case). Instead, I believe that Jesus is talking about a voluntary refusal to make more children. If he had simply meant that these people chose not to be married, he had words to indicate that, but by using the word “eunuch,” Jesus clearly had in mind the frustration of the procreative function. He considered this to be legitimate in some circumstances as a service to God. Such a person is obviously not insulting God by “refusing the blessing of children.”

Even if you do not accept that interpretation, might it be the case that having six children could be honored by God as having fulfilled the mandate of fruitfulness (even though more were possible) whereas having forty-two children (as one poverty stricken family had) might be considered by God to be poor stewardship since they simply were not able to feed and clothe those children? When Scripture insists that “if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8), I would have to say that in this case having that many children was not a lawful blessing but actually fit the curse of God in Genesis 3:16. It might be wise for such a person to heed the admonition in Proverbs 24:27, which commands us to make financial provision for our family before we build or expand our family.¹³⁵

In any case, we have already seen that “greatly multiplying … conception” can on occasion be a curse (Gen. 3:16), and having forty-two unclothed children certainly fits “greatly multiplying … conception” as being a bad thing or a “sorrow.” On the other hand, if “four or five” olives on a branch can still be a “fruitful branch” (Is. 17:16), and if Joseph was considered to have been “a fruitful branch” when he had his two (Gen. 49:22),¹³⁶ is it possible that fruitfulness can have a wide range of acceptability in the eyes of God? It is my belief that the NCC and the BLCC should stop arguing with each other and should focus on convincing the “I-Don’t-Want-Children” people to have more children. I believe that the BLCC people and the NCC are in the same boat and should be focusing our attention on the people using unprincipled birth control, who are not seeking to implement God’s Word on the subject at all.