I got into a discussion yesterday with someone about the Church’s ban on artificial birth control. I got all the normal anti Catholic arguments regarding this subject, including the ‘old law’ argument. He asked me where the ABC ban is biblically supported and I told him about the sin of Onan. His only response to it was “well that’s in the OT, so it’s the old law”. What the correct rebuttal to this ridiculous argument? At the time, the best I could come up with was to tell him that the Ten Commandments are in the OT also, but nobody argues against them…his weak reply was that they’re in the NT also. :rolleyes: I left it alone because I really didn’t want an argument, but I’m sure there is a better way to combat the ‘old law’ argument.
Morality didn’t change between the Old Law and the New Law, the only laws that changed were the cultural laws of the Jewish nation.
When you bring up the sin of Onan next time, and he says it was part of the Old Law, ask him if he thinks it was a cultural law or a moral law. We have very good evidence that it was not a cultural law: the cultural laws are all repeated in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and the sin of Onan isn’t. Therefore it was not a cultural law, but a moral law, and as a moral matter, it is not subject to change.
Do you think that argument will help?
Cultural law vs moral law. Makes sense. Thanks!
Any other ways to combat this argument?