Dear Les and whoever may read this letter,
Les says that he has an answer to my last letter, which he is going to write and send me. This is not surprising, although it would be better for him to concede defeat, rather than to bring any more foolish ideas. Because as I have said, there is nothing sensible to be said to defend birth control, and the use of a natural family planning chart. I do not say this out of pride as though I am so wise that I cannot be defeated, but I say this because God's Truth is such a wonderful thing that it defends itself. Sure, there will always be arguments for and against certain issues, some may even have seemingly valid arguments, but there is only one Truth and this is all I am interested in. This subject is important and there will always be debate over it, yet in this case there really isn't any good argument for birth control. Of course my opponents will say there is, but in reality there is not. The only thing that can make any of these ridiculous ideas seem at all plausible is the fact that most people are grasping for some proof that they are in the right and so accept these silly ideas in order to relieve themselves of their guilt and shame. As I said the onus is on those who defend birth control to prove to me that God allows them to take life into their hands, but there is no proof. So although I expect answers from people who do not want to admit their sinful ways (yet one day they will have to), even though I expect an answer I know it will be a foolish one. Yes Les, you have read the Bible twice as long as me, actually you have probably read it more like five or six times as long as me. But this does not mean that you are right and I am wrong, however it does mean that you should know better. I can understand that it may be difficult for you to take this from a young upstart. But you must remember that Jesus and many others started their ministry even younger than I am now. And they corrected both young and old who did not like it either. So many of them would not repent but thought that they knew better and so missed out on salvation. Don't you be the same. I do realise that elders are to be afforded a certain amount of respect but this does not mean that they are exempt from correction especially when they stiffen their necks. So now once again I am writing an answer to his answer before I receive it, not because I am so good but because of my confidence in the Truth.
He called me again, even though I did ask him not to. I will not discuss anything with any one over the phone, but if you have questions then please write. I cannot make you accept and believe what I tell you. I hope and pray that one day you will, but this is up to you. He was able to say before I cut him off, that he has an answer for me and that he would abstain from relations with his wife for a period of twenty days at a time. He then said he did not know what I thought of this yet. I suspect that he does as I made it quite clear that NFP or natural family planning is sinful just as any other form of birth control. So from these few words I gather that he will be looking into 1st Corinthians chapter 7. Although he says he has an answer, he will not really. There is no real answer to the main question that I have and that is where is your concrete proof that God has given you authority to plan your family? And of course there is none, except some thought or feeling that someone might have, some fair words to speak, but no substance. These words some may affirm are concrete, but boy am I glad that they did not build my house. Before we look at 1st Corinthians chapter 7 there are a couple of other points, which I would like to look at. Firstly some seem to think that because I believe that all s-xual relations should remain open to procreation, that I think that we should have as many babies as possible and that s-x is only made for this reason. Also, they say it is wrong to just have s-x, s-x, s-x. I suppose I am telling people they should have more s-x, because unless there is a good reason why not to then we should. I am not simply promoting s-x, but I am saying that we should not have to hold back if we desire to, we should be free to do so, if we want to. We should do what comes natural and not abstain from it just because we are in the danger zone. So we should have as many children as God would give us, (naturally). Might I also add that just because I have more children than most this does not mean that I have more s-x than most as you only need to have relations with your wife once in order to produce offspring. I also do realise that I am not Jesus or any of the great Prophets of old, I will be the first to say that I know I fall way short of any of these great men of God. I do also realise that I will not be going to heaven just because I have lots of babies. These things they say not necessarily because they think that I am silly enough to believe all these things but rather in most cases, so that they might have some point to prick me with. So what should I do? Anything that I do or say will be wrong somehow. Some will say yes I agree with you (BUT). If you really agree then what are we arguing about? I am told that it is wrong for me to push my beliefs on people. No matter what I do or say it will be wrong to some for one reason or another. Should I then shut up? This would make many happy but how then would I do the work of God? So it is better that I obey God and speak, and those who don't like what I say should complain to God not to me because He has asked me to say these things whether you like it or not. But if I was saying something that people wanted to hear then I would not be a pushy so and so. No, I would be a hero. Should we call Jesus and the Prophets pushy? How would you expect them to do their job if they were not allowed to speak? And you would not say a bad word against them because we can see that they were of God from reading the Word. Yet I wonder what the people said in their days? Most likely the same things that you say about me now. So I can not speak about birth control, because this is being pushy, yet others are allowed to speak of other things (even rubbish) as much as they like, even in my ear when they know that I don't agree. Hypocrites. To some it doesn't matter what I do and say there will always be something that I have done wrong. But praise be to God I do not have to answer to them and I will receive a reward for this from God. Like I said there will be no answer from Les that I would care to build my house on, lest it collapse. Yet he will, like others, have answers which will make good sense to those who are perishing. I am told that I should not base a doctrine on the things I say, as if I needed to prove it. I used to worry and wonder how I could prove what God had shown me, but now I realise that I don't need to prove anything, you do. Now we will look at the scriptures that Les will no doubt bring.

1st Corinthians chapter 7:1-9
1. Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife and let every woman have her own husband. 3. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. 5. DEFRAUD YE NOT one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to FASTING AND PRAYER; and come together again, that Satin tempt you not for your INCONTINENCY. 6. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. 7. For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner and another after that. 8. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. 9. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
We can see from this the importance of the s-xual relationship between a husband and wife, which is basically the subject of these few verses. From verse 1 we see that the apostle Paul is, as it seems, answering a question that the Corinthians had asked him about the s-xual relationship between a husband and wife. He begins his answer by saying that it is good for a man not to touch a woman or in other words that it is good if a man can stay single for the work of God. Nevertheless Vs 2. To avoid fornication let every man have his own wife and every woman her own husband. We all have a natural God-given desire for the opposite s-x. Why is this so? Is it given just for pleasure? Sure it is for pleasure and that is fine, but it is more than that, it also keeps a husband and wife close, but there is even more to it than that. Though it is pleasurable and natural, we are also expected to keep it under control. But if it were not pleasurable then people would not do it, especially when the result is the responsibility of raising children. If it were not pleasurable, then the human race would die out because people do all sorts of things to avoid a pregnancy as it is, but what if nobody was interested in s-x? I do realise that people do decide to have children, but still if s-x was not enjoyable I think it would have a huge effect on the number of marriages and children. So I believe that the enjoyment of s-x is not only for our pleasure but also for procreation. Anyway, because we have this natural desire, most of us will need to marry in order to avoid fornication because even though we need to keep these feelings under control they are very strong. Therefore Paul gives this advice that we should marry to avoid fornication. Vs 3. Then Paul says that a husband and wife should render to each other due benevolence, or in other words we should render or give that which is due to our partner. This benevolence is the love and act of making love to satisfy our partner, to give them this love which is due to them as part of the marriage agreement and duties. Not so much as a duty, but freely given in love one to the other. In Vs 4. He goes on to say that not only should we give of ourselves to each other, but that our bodies are not even to be considered our own, we not only give our bodies to God but we also give our bodies to our spouse. So much so that our bodies are said to be not under our own power but it is under the power of our husband or wife. Sometimes the wife does have a headache etc., and we should understand but at the same time we should freely give of ourselves to our partner, to please and satisfy them, even if we don't really want to. Vs 5. We have seen the importance Paul places on the s-xual relationship and the giving of ourselves to avoid fornication but now Paul speaks even more strongly by saying DEFRAUD YE NOT one the other, he straight out tells us NOT to defraud one another. Defraud means to hold back what is rightfully someone elseís. Our body is not ours, but our partner's and we are NOT to hold back what is rightfully theirs and defraud them, EXCEPT as it says, it is by consent for a time that we may give ourselves to fasting and prayer, and that we come straight back together again that Satan tempt us not for our incontinency. I assume that this will be the part that Les will attempt to exploit. He will no doubt be saying that this proves that separating for a period of time is OK and therefore the use of NFP, otherwise known as the Billings ovulation method in the church is OK too. But of course, I don't agree. Sure, separating by mutual agreement is not necessarily sinful especially when it is done for fasting and prayer. Vs 6. Says that it is beneficial, but not a commandment that you separate for fasting and prayer, as he said he speaks by permission and not of commandment. He then goes on to verse 9 stressing how important it is for most to have a partner. Only those with a special gift from God can live as he does without the need for a relationship. And so he could not command that we separate for fasting and prayer because for some it may be too difficult. So Les will say that because the Bible says that it is not sinful to separate then the billings method is not sinful either. For a start, although it is said to be not sinful and is even a sacrifice which aids the power of prayer, Les does ignore one important fact. The fact that this scripture condoning separation does so only in the case of fasting and prayer. Paul says defraud ye NOT one the other EXCEPT it be by consent for a time that we may give ourselves to fasting and prayer. So we are clearly given the ONLY reason for separation, and that is, by consent for FASTING AND PRAYER. Nowhere here or anywhere else in the Bible does it say by consent for NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING OR BIRTH CONTROL. Yes it is proof that it is not always sinful to separate but it does not automatically justify the Billings Method. To draw such a conclusion from this is not only wrong but also rather foolish. Any time I would mention Genesis chapter 38 and Onan's sin the response would be that I should not base a doctrine on these couple of verses. For a start there is a very good argument to be made against family planning from this passage of scripture. Also this is not my only argument, and last of all I do not presume to teach any false doctrine but I do stand up for the Truth. It is a sad time when God's people call his Truth a doctrine (in a negative sense). I have been made to feel for many years that I must prove this truth to others, but now I see that these people who say they love God so much have to prove to me that God allows this birth control. It should not be natural to assume that it is OK unless proven otherwise. You say you love and respect God so much, yet you feel quite at ease in deciding if and when you will allow God's children to live. This is not true love and respect. I am expected to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that it is sinful and I think that I have, but this is all you can come up with? Please excuse my ignorance but I don't see that you have proved from these verses that God allows us to plan a family. I do see that it is not sinful to abstain from relations with your wife (by consent) for a brief period of time in order to fast and pray more effectively. There may also be some other legitimate reasons that it may be done, like during the time of menstruation or perhaps some medical reason, but dear Christian does this say that it may be done to plan your family? Is this the concrete evidence you have? I would not base a doctrine on something as flimsy as this, yet others can. Do you want to risk eternal damnation based on this? This is not evidence, itís a joke. So I do not have to prove him wrong, as many may expect, because he has not shown anything for me to answer to, he has not presented an argument at all. All we can see from this is that if a couple agree they may separate for a brief period of time to give themselves to fasting and prayer. But nonetheless I do have something to say to those who may agree with this foolishness. As we can see clearly from these verses the s-xual relationship between a husband and wife is very important this is why he gave us these instructions here in 1st Corinthians chapter 7. That our bodies are not our own, the giving of ourselves to each other, that to avoid fornication we should marry, and that we should only by consent separate for a brief period of time for fasting and prayer, and come back together again that Satan tempt us not for our incontinence. Yet Les would have us believe that this is proof that we may use the billings method. Les said that what he would do is to abstain for twenty days. This of course may be done so with consent and also perhaps in prayer, but is it done as an unselfish sacrifice for God? No, it is done for the selfish reason of birth control. We must also remember that Paul recommends that we marry and that we should satisfy our desires in order to avoid incontinence, that the Devil might not be able to get a hold on us. He does give permission for us to separate for a (usually brief) period of time to give ourselves to fasting and prayer as we have discussed, but we must note that Les is saying he would abstain for a period of twenty days. I don't think that many would fast too often for this period of time, of course some have but how often would this occur in the average Christian's life? Not too often I would imagine, and seeing it is such a long time not just for the one doing the fasting, but also their partner, would the average couple feel comfortable with this? I don't think so. And this would not be a rare occurrence in order use this as birth control, but rather it would be a regular occurrence, once a month (twenty days) out of thirty, in order to avoid a pregnancy. Is this what Paul meant? I don't think so, this would be the opposite of what he was trying to teach us. After all that he's said do you really think he would condone the average person to abstain on a basically full time basis for twenty days out of thirty? He did not even command that we abstain during a time of fasting and prayer which more often than not would only be a few days at the most, and this is not a commandment but said by permission. And you cannot say this is a fast because as I said it is a selfish fast, it is not done to get closer to God, so please don't insult him by saying so, the fact is, as you know, it is done to avoid children. And it is done regularly and for a long period of time, which goes against what Paul was teaching. I have read that NFP natural family planning methods in the church is a good thing because it teaches self-control, and that it also enhances the experience when you come back together again. It also guards against falling into a monotonous routine and that it prevents us from taking each other for granted. Also it teaches that rotten so-and-so from demanding s-x all the time. All of this can be spiced up to sound like a good argument and it may seem right to those who are looking for an excuse for their behavior. But is it right? Unfortunately many Christians have no more wisdom than those in the world and so to them it sounds good, especially since it allows them to live as they want. But think about it from Christís point of view and consider not just these fair words that come from people who are far from God. Consider what we have just seen from 1st Corinthians chapter 7 and the fact that God made all. Can all these things they say be backed up by the Word of God? Does Paul say that we should separate for birth control? Does he say that it is responsible parenting to do so, as many do say, (Thus saying that I am not)? Does he say that we should do this to teach ourselves self-control? Was he warning us about the dangers of monotonous s-x, and teaching us to savor the s-xual experience? Did he say that too much s-x shows a lack of self-control or that it means we take each other for granted? Did he reprimand the selfish husband for demanding s-x? WELL? Think about it! Quite plainly these ideas did not originate from 1 Cor 7. It seems from the way these people speak that they tag some as lacking self-control and having not enough care for the woman, they are branded selfish as it seems. They say NFP is good because it teaches self-control and discipline, but does this mean that it is right? It just goes to show how much people despise the thought of bringing too many children into this world and they are the selfish ones who choose to discipline themselves like this rather than to have children. Furthermore there are many demonic cults, which require even more discipline and sacrifice than this, but this does not mean that they are right either. I read somewhere that the difference between unnatural FP and NFP is that the unnatural way uses God's designated fertile days and makes it so that they can be used to enjoy safe s-x. Whereas the natural way uses only the God-given safe days. This to most would sound very good (unfortunately). BUT once again I do not agree because even though it is true that these days are designated by God as infertile, the fact remains that you are still making a decision that God never gave you the authority to make. And to me it seems even worse in a way because of the planning and the frequent decision that must be made to avoid a child. They think themselves so wise to have this knowledge and talk as if it was all in God's plan that at this time man has now come so far that we can understand these things and according to His will now use this knowledge to plan our family. I do feel so sorry for the others who have lived since the beginning of mankind until now who were not as wise as we are to be able to find this knowledge. It seems that God has failed them greatly. So these enlightened people now understand how to use this knowledge as a natural form of birth control as God has apparently made the womanís cycle for this reason. Many people including Pastor Gas ask the question why did God make the woman with this cycle? My answer to this question is, "I do not know". Nor do I know why God made us with two arms and two legs, except to say that he made us in His image. Exactly why He has two arms and two legs, I cannot tell, (although they are rather handy). What I can say is that although God has made us in this way, we that are Bible-believing Christians should not jump to the conclusion that He did so that in the ages to come we might increase in knowledge so that we could use this as a form of birth control. The fact that He made a woman so, does not mean that it is His will for us to use it for birth control. This is no proof that He has given us authority to decide who lives and who doesn't. God made fire, which can be very useful when used properly but this does not mean we can use it to burn down our neighbors house. Yes God made a woman with a cycle but please do show me where it says you can use it to plan your family. God has made times that are fertile and times that are infertile. It is not always sin to have s-x during the infertile times nor is it necessarily sinful to not have s-x during the fertile times, it becomes sinful when you sit down and study how a womanís cycle works and then use this information as birth control. To study and know when she may become pregnant and then to deliberately avoid relations with your wife during this time, even though you may desire to and even though Paul has warned us against being separated for too long, you then suppress these natural feelings to selfishly avoid a pregnancy. This is wrong. This is the point where you make a decision that God has never given you authority to make, this is the time when you know that a child will most likely be conceived and for this reason you deliberately abstain in order to avoid having this child enter into this world. It may be OK to abstain for some reasons as we have discussed such as a (real) time of fasting and prayer or if one or the other is sick. Or even perhaps for a period of time in which the woman cannot afford to be pregnant for some reason, perhaps some medical reason. As we all know if a woman is pregnant when she has an X-ray, unless God performs a miracle the baby could be deformed. This could perhaps be a legitimate reason to separate for a period of time to avoid a pregnancy during a certain time. But don't get too excited now, I havent changed my mind. There is a difference. This way of avoiding a pregnancy is done without the knowledge or consideration of the danger zone. The womanís cycle is not studied and the danger zone pinpointed then avoided. It is simply avoiding s-x altogether for a period of time, to avoid a pregnancy during a certain period so that you do not cause the child to be deformed. Then without the knowledge or care of when the danger zone is, normal relations are resumed and the seed is not deliberately wasted and could produce fruit. If you have a good enough reason there is no sin in separation for a period of time. But the billings method is studied to pinpoint the time of ovulation to avoid s-xual relations at that time, and only then. But the worst part is that not only do you avoid the danger zone, but then you deliberately spill the seed when you know it will bear no fruit. You plan to sow seeds out of season with this knowledge (that it will bear no fruit). It is not always sinful to separate, but then to knowingly and deliberately waste the seed is. To have no relations with your wife is in fact 100% sure birth control but the fact is that it is so, only because you do not have any s-x. You are not wasting seed whilst enjoying s-x because you are not having any. But the billings method means that you are still enjoying s-x without the inconvenience of children 99% sure. You can safely enjoy s-x to a certain point and then you must abstain for a time so as not to plant seeds in fertile ground and then when there is no longer a chance of a pregnancy then you resume relations with your wife and deliberately spill the seed, knowing that there is only a one percent chance of a child being conceived. This is the difference, the fact that you are still having s-x yet being in control of birth and life, and the seed is knowingly and deliberately wasted. "Oh, but this doesn't stop God from doing His work," you say. "He can still give a baby." Yes, He can but we have been through all of this in my last letter haven't we? If it were in God's hands you need not do anything. The fact that you sit down and plan all this proves that you have taken matters into your own hands. You may think that you haven't taken full control, but any control is wrong. From reading up about this I see that it has been said that we only seek to have a reasonable amount of control. As I said, any control is sin, but do you know that they used to joke about this type of method (NFP) saying that they have a word for those who use it and that is PARENTS. But now with even more knowledge about these things they boast that this method can be used successfully by women who are breast-feeding and also women who don't have regular cycles. How successful? How much is that reasonable amount of control? 98.5- 99% effective. The pill is 98-99% and nothing is said to be 100% not even a vasectomy or tubule libation. Yet this is considered reasonable? You have a 99% chance of your will being done and you give God a 1% chance for His will to be done! And as I said there is still no evidence at all that God has given mankind any authority at all to make these decisions concerning the lives of His children. I should add to this that, although it is sinful to use this information as birth control, I do not think that it would be wrong to use this information to become pregnant. It is only the use of this information to avoid a pregnancy which is sinful. Yet not all ways of achieving a pregnancy are right. So this could be useful and good for some in this case. But know this, the use of this information to limit or space your family is most definitely SINFUL and God will surely punish those who do so.

Birth control nfp 2