Islamic Scholar By Birth Born in Christian Family : Miracle of Miracles

According to a huge number of online sources, a 5 year old Kenyan boy – sometimes he’s claimed to be Tanzanian or Nigerian – can recite the entire Qur’an and preach in at least 5 languages. The boy is alleged to have converted thousands of people all over the world. This article which was printed in the “Scotland on Sunday” newspaper seems to be the original source for the story circulating on a large number of Islamic websites: There are orphans and street children everywhere. So much so that the sight of another small child standing on a street corner hardly merits a second glance. But only when the boy opens his mouth to speak do onlookers realise that Shariff Idd is special. The five year-old speaks in five languages – English French Italian, Swahili and Arabic – even though he is completely uneducated. Shariff is a preacher who draws crowds of thousands in Kenya to his increasingly regular sermons. The Libyan leader Colonel Muammar al Gaddafi is a great supporter following an audience with him earlier this year. Last week was a milestone for the child introduced to gawping throngs as the “miracle boy” of East Africa. He smiled triumphantly when told he had notched up his one thousandth conversion to Islam in a country where Muslims are a minority. Tours of France and Britain now beckon, according to Hajji Maroulin, one of the boy’s four guardians. he will travel as a missionary on a trip to e financed by a Muslim businessman from the Ivory Coast. “When he is not

Lewis University students studied abroad May 9-20 and visited St. Peter’s Basilica, the Roman Forum and Coliseum in Rome, the Uffizi in Florence, and the Basilica d’ San Francesco in Assisi, among other sites. The 16 students were enrolled in a “Christian Faith and the Arts” course, “Ancient World” course, or independent study. The itinerary included visits to churches, museums and other sites of historical or cultural significance. Dr. Dominic Colonna, chair of Theology and associate professor, and Dr. Dennis H. Cremin, director of the Lewis University History Center: Urban, Cultural and Catholic History of the Upper Midwest and assistant professor, led this year’s program. The Theology Department has been leading the trips since 2002. Dr. Colonna has led the interdisciplinary program six times. Dr. Colonna said, “Volcanic ashes, transportation delays, inclement weather, and other personal challenges presented us a different experience this year than previous trips. I was impressed with the students’ ability to overcome adversities through supporting each other while obtaining a once in a lifetime learning experience.” Cremin added, “We were so excited to be able to blend our own personal history with world history on this trip through new friendships, educational experiences, and good times.” Students involved in the program included: Gregory Aimaro of New Lenox, Stephanie Anzelc of Minooka, Brooke Balash of Downers Grove, Shelby Brown of Evanston, Kristen Calvert of

New Book Uses Faith, Reason to Overcome Birth Stigma

(PRWEB) March 05, 2012

In her new book ?No Longer a Bastard? (published by CrossBooks), Minister A. Mason Rogers offers a faith-based argument for removing the negative power of the word “bastard.?

?No Longer A Bastard? was written to dispel the myth about the word bastard and the stigma that is placed on individuals because of single parenthood. ?The word bastard has been used to be offensive, to degrade, injure and has been insulting to many people due to the nature in which it was used,? Rogers writes. ?We don?t get to choose our biological parents, but we get to choose a loving father who loves us unconditionally because we allow him to chastise us concerning the errors that we make in this life therefore restoring us to right fellowship and relationship.?

?No Longer a Bastard? offers this dedication to readers:

?We don?t get to choose our parents or who births us naturally. But we do get to choose our destiny and come to the fulfillment of our purpose in this life by accepting Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. May this word be a blessing to you the reader. Remember, the fulfillment of your purpose lies in the quotient of all your errors.?

Much of the inspiration for ?No Longer a Bastard? can be given to Rogers?s own childhood. ?I was born to a single parent,? she offers. ?My father died when I was 10 years old. I never really knew him, and I would have loved to have had a father-daughter relationship. It would have filled so many areas in my life that were empty.?

Filled with remembrances and faith-filled argument, ?No Longer a Bastard? offers readers an uplifting and inspirational method of overcoming intolerance and insult.

About the Author

Minister A. Mason Rogers, known as ?Mama J,? attended the Beeson Divinity School of Samford University in Montgomery, Alabama. She serves as a minister at Jubilee Christian Fellowship International Church and works with the Women of Revolutionary Distinction. Rogers resides in Tuskegee, Alabama.

CrossBooks, a division of LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention, is a Christian publishing imprint committed to bringing more Christian voices into the publishing industry. Established authors, first-time authors, and authors anywhere in between can meet their goals and fulfill their vision for their books by publishing with CrossBooks. CrossBooks? innovative style of publishing blends the best of traditional and self-publishing. While our authors contribute monetarily to cover the cost of publishing, we maintain a strict moral and quality standard that every manuscript must meet for us to publish. For more information on publishing your Christian book with CrossBooks, log on to or call 1-866-879-0502.

Related Christian Singles Press Releases

Birth Control and the Christian

Recently we received a call from a man who inquired if we had

anything we could send him on birth control. He and his wife were

discussing the subject, and he was looking for information which

could clear up the matter. It so happens that in 1986 we

published a booklet entitled “Family Planning and God’s

Word.” We have decided to reprint the portion of that

booklet which deals with birth control methods.

There are tremendous pressures upon couples today to practice

some form of family planning. Only a few decades ago most couples

gave little thought to the matter, but this is no longer the

case. Also in the last few decades there has been a tremendous

increase in the methods of birth control available, thus making

family planning easier.

It is not our intention to address the question of family

planning in general. What we desire to do with this article is

demonstrate how the various methods of birth control work and to

show that there are some forms which no Christian should use.

Beyond that, we believe the decision to practice birth control is

a personal matter.



We have said that family planning is not something to which we

can give a simple “yes” or “no” answer. In

many aspects it is something that each couple must decide alone

before God. Yet at the same time, there are several forms of

birth control which are clearly condemned by Scripture and which

therefore a Christian is not free to use.

In the following section we will discuss abstinence, abortion,

and some kinds of birth control devices–the IUD, certain birth

control pills, and the new anti-progesterone pill (RU-486).


“Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me:

It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to

avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let

every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto

the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the

husband. 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. 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 Satan tempt

you not for your incontinency.” (1 Corinthians 7:1-5)

If a couple decides family planning is God’s will for them,

the question of method still must be answered. What about

abstinence? Some decide to abstain from sexual relations in order

to avoid conception. The New Testament does not allow such an

arrangement on a long-term basis. In I Corinthians 7 the Apostle

Paul says that one purpose for marriage is to protect men and

women from fornication. In marriage, couples are entirely free to

satisfy themselves. There is nothing unspiritual about relations

between marriage partners.

“Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed

undefiled… ” (Hebrews 13:4)

“Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running

waters out of thine own well. Let thy fountains be dispersed

abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets. Let them be only

thine own, and not strangers’ with thee. Let thy fountain be

blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be

as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy

thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her

love.” (Proverbs 5:15-19)

Abstinence within marriage is not good. It is dangerous! It

is, in fact, disobedience to God’s Word. The Bible commands

Christian couples not to defraud one another sexually.

“Let the husband render unto the wife due

benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The

wife hath not authority over her own body, but the husband:

and likewise also the husband hath not authority over his

body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other …” (1

Corinthians 7:3-5)

The husband is responsible to satisfy the wife’s physical

needs; she is responsible to satisfy his. The only exception is

for the purpose of fasting and prayer, and this is only to be for

a time–not a permanent or long-range agreement, but a temporary

one for special periods of concentrated prayer. Any other

abstinence brings increased danger of Satan using the natural

desires of the flesh to create situations of temptation.

” … except it be with consent for a time, that ye

may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together

again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency [lack

of self control].” (1 Corinthians 7:5)

Thus, except for brief periods agreed upon by husband and wife

for prayer and fasting, abstinence is not to be used as a birth

control method.


“Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she

should not have compassion on the son of her womb?

YEA….” (Isaiah 49:15)

It is almost strange that in speaking to Christians about

family planning, we would have to deal with the matter of

abortion being morally wrong. But the fact is that many large

Christian denominations today support “pro- choice.”

Many Christian leaders are not giving a sure warning against this

great evil. In fact, some who call themselves evangelical are

beginning to support abortion for some cases. For example,

Intervarsity Press published a book in 1985 called Brave New

People by Gareth Jones. Consider some quotes from this book–

“If abortion is contemplated, a reasonable decision

will take into account the fetus, and also the parents and

siblings” (p. 157).

“In this instance it has to be decided whether

abortion will benefit the fetus” (p. 158).

“No biblical passage speaks of humans possessing

personhood before birth” (p. 169).

“I am prepared to admit there may be circumstances

where, very regretfully, even Christians may have to

contemplate an abortion” (p. 173).

“Unfortunately, some families cannot cope with such a

challenge, and a compromise must be reluctantly adopted,

namely, termination of the pregnancy [abortion] … God’s

love for the weak … requires comparable concern for the

abnormal and for those likely to be rejected by society”

(p. 179).

Because of pressure from various sides Intervarsity stopped

distributing the book. But it has already been published by

another Christian publisher, Eerdmans, and is supported by many

who claim to be evangelical Christians.


For the Bible-believer there can be no doubt on this issue.

Scripture tells us that human life begins at conception. The

moment the sperm unites with the egg, a brand new human life has

begun. Many say it is not possible to know exactly when the

embryo becomes fully human; thus it should be called a child. The

Bible leaves no such confusion. Consider the following:

“Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my

mother conceive me.” (Psalm 51:5)

In Psalm 51 David is showing his repentance for the adultery

with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband. In verse five he

acknowledges that he was sinful from the moment of conception.

This is reaffirmed by the Apostle Paul in Romans

5:12–“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world,

and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all

have sinned.” Ever since Adam and Eve rebelled against God,

their fallen nature has been passed on from generation to

generation through the father’s seed.

But notice that David spoke of himself in a personal way even

when considering his conception. He said I was shapen in

iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. It was David

himself who was conceived.

“Thou has covered me in my mother’s womb. I will

praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made … My

substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret,

and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine

eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy

book all my members were written, which in continuance were

fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.” (Psalm


For Bible-believers, this amazing passage leaves no question

whatsoever regarding whether or not an embryo is a real human

child. The writer, David, says that it was God that formed him in

the womb of his mother and that God knew all about him even while

he was growing from conception–before his little heart started

beating at three weeks after conception, before the little buds

of arms and legs appeared at four weeks after conception, before

his little brain divided into two sections at five weeks after

conception, before his eyes took shape at six weeks after

conception–“when as yet there was none of them,” God

knew him. The impregnated egg in the womb of David’s mother’s was

only a tiny, microscopic-size thing, but that impregnated egg was

known by God as David, the future king of Israel and

great-great-grandfather of the Lord Jesus Christ.

We see that when an impregnated egg is cut off in some way so

that it dies, the death of a distinct individual human being has

taken place. It is true that many eggs for various reasons

naturally fail to become attached to the mother’s uterine wall

after impregnation and do not therefore mature to birth. But man

has nothing to do with that. It is the same with life after

birth. Men die in many ways, natural and unnatural. Often that

cannot be stopped. But if someone takes a knife or a poison and

ends the life of an individual, it is murder. If the murderer

argues that the one he has killed would die anyway, or that

people die every day so we should not be so concerned, his

argument would not be acceptable. He has murdered a human being

and will be punished. Likewise, if someone stops the growth of a

tiny embryo though drugs or some other way, that person has

killed a tiny individual already known by God.

“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that

her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he

shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband

will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for

life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for

foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for

stripe.” (Exodus 21:22-25)

Note that the Bible says the woman’s unborn fruit is a CHILD.

God calls it a child, and if that unborn child is hurt, God

required that the one who caused the hurt to be punished.

“As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit,

nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with

child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh

all.” (Ecclesiastes 11:5)

Again, the Bible says the tiny, unborn creature growing in the

womb of a woman is a CHILD. It is not a blob of protoplasm, or a

thing, or an undeveloped human. It is a child even while the

little bones are being formed.

“Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people,

from far; The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the

bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name … And

now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his

servant….” (Isaiah 49:1,5)

“Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before

thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I

ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” (Jeremiah


The passage in Isaiah refers prophetically to the Lord Jesus

Christ, and possibly also refers to Isaiah himself. The similar

passage in Jeremiah speaks of the prophet’s relationship with God

before his birth. Notice again that we see that God called them

even before they were born, and it was God who formed them in the

womb of their mothers. Those who interfere with the process of

growth after the mother’s egg has been fertilized are interfering

with God’s work of forming a human being that is known of God.

This is a very serious matter.

If we asked Isaiah’s mother or Jeremiah’s mother what was in

their wombs, they would have answered, had they known the

prophecies which were to follow, “This is Isaiah,”

“This is Jeremiah.” Regarding the Lord Jesus Christ,

the Bible leaves no question whatsoever. “Now the birth of

Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was

espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with

child of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 1:18). Later the angel

told Joseph that the child’s name would be Jesus and “that

which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew


As soon as Mary conceived her firstborn son by the

supernatural power of the Holy Spirit, He was called a CHILD. And

this was at the very earliest stages of the process of growth in

the womb.

“…and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even

from his mother’s womb.” (Luke 1:15)

It is true that John the Baptist was no ordinary child, but

the fact that he was filled with the Holy Ghost even before his

birth proves clearly that he was fully a human being. If anyone

had aborted that little being in Elisabeth’s womb, that one would

have been the murderer of John the Baptist.

“And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the babe

leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy

Ghost.” (Luke 1:41)

This passage shows from the Bible’s side what even medical

doctors are discovering–that the unborn infant is aware of

things outside the womb and responds to them. In this case, the

unborn baby was John the Baptist. Remember that he was already

filled with the Holy Spirit, and he knew of the situation which

was happening outside the womb when the mother of his Lord and

Savior met his own mother, Elizabeth. Notice, too, that the

unborn one here is called a BABE.

With these Scripture references before us we have but two

choices–we can reject the Bible and its teaching or we can

acknowledge that the fertilized egg is a tiny human being, known

by God, and the mysterious and marvelous growth which will occur

during its nine months in the womb is the direct process of God

working to form that baby according to His own plan and purpose.

Any time, therefore, someone interferes with the growth of an

embryo he is committing murder.



Having considered abstinence and abortion, there are yet some

other birth control methods which, when considered in light of

Bible teaching, are forbidden to Christians. In brief, any method

of birth control which cuts off the growth of the already

fertilized egg is a form of abortion and is therefore murder. We

have seen that according to the God’s Word the human life begins

at conception–at the moment when the male sperm joins with the

mother’s egg. At that time a new and unique human life begins its

eternal journey, having become a living soul through the

mysterious working of Almighty God. We have seen that the Bible

teaches this. Not all modern scientists would agree that the

newly conceived embryo is a human being at that point in time,

but all agree that it is a new and unique life which has begun

its explosive growth toward full development.

Scientists also know that a new human life begins at

conception (fertilization). In an excellent book entitled The

Position of Modern Science on the Beginning of Human Life

(copyright 1975, Scientists for Life) we read this brilliantly

simple and clear explanation on page 15–

“When did your life begin?” The answer to this

question can be phrased simply by going backward in time.

Before you were an adult, you were an adolescent, and before

that a child, and before that an infant. Before you were an

infant–i.e., before you were born–you were a fetus, and

before that an embryo. Before you were an embryo, around the

time of your implantation, you were a blastocyst, and before

that a morula, and before than a zygote or fertilized ovum.

However, you were never a sperm or an unfertilized ovum.

Therefore, while life is continuous, your life began when the

nucleus of your father’s sperm fused with the nucleus of your

mother’s ovum, or at fertilization. [The Christian News

(Jan. 13, 1986), p. 8]

Because of newly discovered methods of research such as the

electron microscope, scientists can now observe the tiny cells

and genes which make up a living body. They have actually

observed the formation of the human being from the time the genes

of the mother and father are united. Consider the following

description of what happens during the first few weeks after


“In the [first seven weeks] the cells perform their

most intricate maneuvers, arranging into patterns that give

the embryo its human form. Toward the end of the third week a

gutterlike groove in the back folds into a neural tube–the

future nervous system. As the tube closes, the brain takes

shape, already differentiating into hind-, mid- and

forebrain. The five-week embryo, ONLY ONE-THIRD OF AN INCH

LONG, is a marvel of miniaturization: limb buds are sending

out shoots whose dimples mark the nascent [beginning to form]

hands and feet, and the hindbrain has grown stalked eye cups.

By the seventh and eighth weeks, the embryo’s face looks

human, limbs hinge on joints, hands splay into fingers and

primitive external genitals appear … After eight weeks

almost all of the internal organs are in place and the

embryo, SCARCELY AN INCH LONG, looks like a tiny person.

“At this point [eight weeks after conception!], 95

percent of the known structures, features and organs, from

tiny nerves to fingers and muscles, are there,” says Dr.

Ronan O’Rahilly, an embryologist at the University of

California at Davis(Newsweek, Jan. 11, 1982, p. 37).


In thinking about birth control methods, it is important to

understand something about this process whereby the mother’s egg

is fertilized and then grows into a fully developed child.

The process can be divided into three stages–1)

Fertilization, 2) Implantation, 3) Growth.

In FERTILIZATION, the father’s sperm penetrates the

mother’s egg. This happens in the mother’s uterine tube near the

womb. It is at that point in time that the genes of the mother

and father are joined to make the new human life of their

offspring. At this stage the developing child is called in

medical terms a “zygote,” which is a Greek word meaning

“yoked together.”

Next the tiny, growing person continues its travel to the

uterus where it becomes attached to the uterine wall. This is IMPLANTATION

and occurs between day 5 and 8 and is completed by day 9 or 10 (The

Merck Manual, Fourteenth Edition, p. 1708).

The developing child is now called an “embryo,”

which is from a Greek word meaning “to swell.” That’s a

very good term, because the cells of this newly created little

being are multiplying at a breathtaking rate. For a very short

time the developing embryo draws its sustenance directly from the

uterus until the placenta and umbilical cord are developed.

After this, nothing is left but GROWTH as the baby’s

body rapidly forms. After approximately eight weeks the child is

called by the medical term “fetus,” which is from the

Latin word meaning “offspring.”

The “incredibly intricate and beautiful process of

conception” is described by a medical doctor as follows–

“First, there is the ovary, deep within the body,

that, propelled by some unknown force, turns once a month

towards the funnel-like opening at the end of the fallopian

tube. On the surface of the ovary is a tiny bubble, a

blister, that contains the one egg that alone, for some

mysterious reason, has emerged from a field of 250,000 to

ripen that month.

“Suddenly the bubble bursts. Triggered by a surge of

luteinizing hormone, an eloquent chemical messenger from the

brain, the ovary contracts sharply and the ripe egg bursts

forth. The fringed projections at the end of the fallopian

tube reach out like fingers to grasp the ovum [egg] and draw

it into the narrow tunnel of the tube. In a dreamlike,

slow-motion ballet, thousands of tiny, undulating cilia

caress the ripening egg and gently move it along on its

four-inch, four-day journey to the womb.

“Guided by a direction-finding mechanism whose nature

we can only guess at, the sperm swim up past the barrier of

the cervix, into the womb itself. They must then navigate the

entire length of the uterus and swim into the narrow upper

reaches of the dark fallopian tube to meet and fertilize the


“The process is precisely orchestrated, the co-

ordination of the myriad of biologic details staggeringly

complex. It is, for instance, only at this time of the month

that mucus produced by her cervix will allow sperm to pass

through the cervix and into the womb. At other times of the

month, the molecules of the mucus form a crosshatched pattern

to block the sperm lest they reach an egg too young or too

old to be properly fertilized, thus producing a deformed

baby. At the right moment, though, the molecules of the mucus

realign themselves, forming microscopic tunnels to aid the

sperm on their journey.

“The biochemical communications system that

orchestrates all this is so sophisticated that it makes the

technology of beaming planetwide transmissions off orbiting

satellites look like child’s play. When the sperm finally

meet the egg, they secrete a series of enzymes that soften

the outer shell of the egg and make it permeable. Meanwhile,

other chemicals secreted in the tube have completed the

ripening of the egg so it is ready to accept the sperm that

has managed to permeate the outer shell. The sperm and ovum

lock genetic arms, a mating of a still more complex

biochemistry, and the mingled DNA and RNA of the mother and

father create a blueprint from which a unique human being

will grow.

“Once fertilized, the egg completes its journey down

into the uterus. The uterus, notified of the impending

pregnancy through an elaborate chemical communications

system, has grown thick and rich” (Woman/Doctor: The

Education of Jane Patterson, M.D., New York: Avon Books,


As we have said, any process whereby we interfere purposefully

and knowingly to stop the growth of the fertilized egg, which is

already a newly created, unique human being, is abortion. If the

fertilized egg is not allowed to implant in the uterus, it is

being killed. The only difference between this and a later

abortion is the size and stage of development of the tiny human




Many of our readers will probably be thinking, as we did not

long ago, that birth control pills and similar devices act to

PROHIBIT fertilization. Actually, as we will see from medically

proven facts, birth control pills have the potential to produce

an abortion AFTER fertilization. The IUD, birth control pills and

the new anti-progesterone pill are actually abortion devices,

since they prohibit implantation, thereby acting to destroy the

already-living, rapidly developing, microscopic embryo.

In an article entitled “Contraceptives: On Hold” in

the May 5, 1986 issue of Newsweek, several types of birth

control devices are discussed which are still in the development

stage. After describing one drug which blocks the preparation of

the uterus for the implantation of an already fertilized egg,

this statement is made: “Many experts believe that the

present anti- abortion climate would make it an unlikely prospect

for the U.S. market, SINCE, IN EFFECT, IT INDUCES AN


That birth control drugs can produce early abortions of the

newly fertilized egg is therefore a fact known and acknowledged

by those who understand how the drugs work. Yet these facts are

not widely known outside of medical circles, and many are

ignorant of these things. It is hoped that the following will

receive a wide hearing.

The following shocking material was published by Lutherans for

Life. The medical facts are written by J.C. Willke, M.D.,

Chairman of the National Right to Life Committee in America.

The I.U.D.

What is the mechanism of action of the IUD? It would seem at

this time that medical opinion has crystallized to a near

unanimity. The presence of this foreign body within the cavity of

the uterus produces a foreign body reaction. This is a local,

sterile (usually), inflammatory reaction, which alters the normal

body fluids within the uterus. It changes what had been a

friendly environment, for the migration of sperm and the

subsequent implantation of the new human being, to an unfriendly

environment. Some have described the intrauterine fluid produced

as containing “sterile pus.” This unfriendly fluid

environment can have an influence on the sperm migrating into the

uterus and tubes, and quite clearly does have an influence on

later implantation.

Not too much has been said or written to indicate that the

sperm are incapacitated in their passage through the uterus, for

if they were, fertilization could not occur. Most of the research

done tells us the same thing. A substantial number of sperm do

pass through the uterine cavity, proceed out to the ovary, and


What is quite plain is that, following fertilization, the

process does not proceed to a normally implanted pregnancy. What

are the mechanisms postulated as to why she does not “get

pregnant”? Overwhelmingly, almost all medical studies have

demonstrated various mechanisms that prevent implantation into

the nutrient lining of the womb, due to the foreign body and

inflammatory reaction caused by the IUD. The end result, however,

in almost every case, when fertilization does occur (an

occasional pregnancy is carried to full term and delivery with

the IUD still in the uterus), IT IS FOLLOWED BY A PROCESS THAT






The fact that it is described as a “contraceptive”

agent is because of a change in the meaning of words by the Food

and Drug Administration and the American College of Obstetrics

and Gynecology a decade ago, when they redefined the word

“conception” to mean implantation. Under these semantic

gymnastics it is a “contraceptive,” but everyone

familiar with the function understands thoroughly that its action

is that of an abortifacient.

One other relevant medical comment should be made. In all

likelihood, the IUD possibly could be withdrawn from the market

within a reasonable period of time for it has serious side

effects. The “sterile pus” mentioned above does not

always remain sterile. At times it becomes infected, resulting in

varying degrees of inflammation of the female organs and at times

sterility. All practicing physicians in the United States were

notified several years ago, if they were to insert one specific

type of IUD, the Dalcon Shield, into a woman, that it was their

legal obligation to inform her that this might make her

permanently sterile. To protect from a possible later malpractice

suit, such consent should be in writing. In the face of such

concern, this specific type of IUD was removed from the market.

Whether or not other types of IUD’s will remain on the market

indefinitely is an open question. It is at least possible that

they may be removed for medical reasons before any law can do so

(The Christian News, Jan. 13, 1986).


The `pill’ consists now of over 30 different varieties of

chemical combinations of the synthetic equivalent of the female

hormones estrogen and progesterone, as well as the so-called

`mini-pill’ which contains progesterone alone. Understanding that

there are different degrees of actions with different pills, that

one has more of this effect and the other has more of that

effect, they can, to some extent at least, be described


The combination pills basically exert three actions in

`preventing’ pregnancy. The first effect of the contraceptive

pill is to prevent ovulation or release of the ovum from the

ovary. This has been described as `freezing’ of the ovary. Even

if the sperm do reach the ovary, fertilization cannot occur

because the ovum has not been released. This action is accurately

described as temporary sterilization, but in common usage it is

usually spoken of as `contraceptive’ action.

The first contraceptive pill, Enovid, contained ten milligrams

of estrogen- like hormone. It was believed that its physiological

function was almost totally that of temporary sterilization.

Enovid-5 was then marketed, to be followed by Enovid E (2.5 mg.).

Since that time lower and lower does of estrogen have been

presented to the consumer so that now does of 0.5 mgm. and 0.35

mgm. are commonly used.

The well known reason for the reduction of the estrogen dosage

was to try to minimize the threat of blood clot complications.

Paralleling the reduction of the estrogen dosage, however,

there has been the development of breakthrough ovulation, as the

lower doses have apparently not been successful in completely

suppressing ovulation.



but as described below, these women do not ordinarily `get

pregnant.’ [This means the fertilized egg is not allowed to

become implanted in the mother’s uterus; it is killed.]

The second action is one of thickening of the mucous plug at

the cervical opening. This normally happens at the beginning and

at the end of a menstrual cycle, with the plug melting away at

mid-cycle, and being replaced by an egg white-like substance

containing nutrient fluids, which are `friendly’ to the passage

of sperm. The combination pill prevents this from occurring at

mid-cycle, maintaining the plug, and as such probably exerts true

`anti-fertilization’ action by preventing entrance of the sperm.

The third function of the combination pill is

anti-implantation or anti- nidatory. When this is the function

that is dominant in the particular month, there is sperm passage,

there is fertilization and migration of the new human through the

tube and into the uterus, but implantation does not occur. This





There is no definitive medical agreement as to what percentage

of times this function occurs, in which women and with which pill

(The Christian News, Jan. 13, 1986).


The mini-pill is a form of birth control pill, different from

the combination of estrogen and progesterone above. This contains

only a small dose of progesterone. It is taken daily, 30 days a

month, rather than the 21-7 schedule for the combination pill. It

allows a menstrual flow to occur monthly while the pill is being

taken. There is considerable controversy as to whether or not its

action is primarily in preventing implantation, as other

mechanisms of action have been suggested, but general scientific

opinion at this time is in substantial agreement. It would seem







DES or Diethylstilbestrol is a synthetic estrogen. Given in

high dosage, in the days immediately following intercourse, it is

known as the morning- after pill. What is its function? This is

best illustrated by giving two examples.

In the first, a woman is raped at midnight Saturday and is

given DES at 2 a.m. in a hospital emergency room. Within a few

hours there is a high level of estrogen in her blood. Her body

was programmed to ovulate 24 hours later at midnight Sunday. The

high level of estrogen blocks that ovulation, fertilization does

not occur, and she does not get pregnant. This effect is one of

temporary sterilization.

In the second case, rape also occurs at midnight Saturday and

the medication is given at 2 a.m.. This woman, however, has

ovulated several hours before the rape. The ovum awaited. It was

fertilized. She also does not “get pregnant” but the

mechanism of action is quite different. The drug had

“hardened” the lining of the womb. THE MULTICELLED TINY



Which mechanism occurs in any specific case may well not be



Other medications, such as a shot of progesterone are often

used in place of DES, as well as other forms of estrogen. Without

going into detail one can say that their mechanism of action is

substantially the same” (The Christian News, Jan. 13,



As is well known, these substances cause the onset of strong

uterine contractions and delivery of whatever size baby the

uterus contains. If used before viability [before the baby is

able to live outside the womb], this is the equivalent of


The first form licensed, Prostin F2 alpha, carried a directive

from the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] that limited its use

to the induction of mid-trimester abortion only. Subsequently,

Prostin A2 and 15M have been licensed. These have now been

authorized for use for several therapeutic medical conditions

(uterine inertia, non-malignant Hyatidaform mole and missed

abortion). [This study was reviewed before publication by Matthew

Bulfin, M.D.; Thomas Hilgers, M.D.; and Richard Schmidt, M.D.] (The

Christian News, Jan. 13, 1986).

The fact that modern birth control pills can and at times do

function as an abortifacient (although they will often use

different words than abortifacient) is freely admitted by The

Food and Drug Administration, by medical books such as Physicians’

Desk Reference (PDR) and Nursing ’85 Handbook; by

pro-abortion books such as My Body, My Health by Felicia

Stewart, M.D; by pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood;

by drug companies in the literature which accompanies the pill,

and by some non- medical reference books such as Random House

College Dictionary. Quotes from these sources follow:

“How the IUD prevents pregnancy is not completely

understood. Several theories have been suggested. IUD’s seem to

interfere in some manner with the implantation of the fertilized

egg in the uterine cavity. The IUD does not prevent

ovulation” (The Federal Register, Part III, May 10,

1977, Department of Health, Education and Welfare–Food and Drug

Administration, “Intrauterine Devices,” p. 23781).

In describing the mechanism of Parke-Davis’ Norlestrin family

of birth control pills we read this notice in the PDR:

“Although the primary mechanism of action is inhibition

of ovulation, alterations in the genital tract, including changes

in the cervical mucus (which increase the difficulty of sperm

penetration) and the endometrium (WHICH REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF


EFFECTIVENESS” (Physician’s Desk Reference, Medical

Economics Company, copyright 1985, p. 1548).

This same notice is given for the Lo/Ovral and Nordette family

of birth control pills marketed by the Wyeth company (PDR, pages.

2255 and 2266).

“Progestogen … also causes endometrial changes that


Drug Handbook, Spring House Corporation, 1985).

“In a natural cycle, the uterus lining thickens under the

influence of estrogen during the first part of the cycle, and

then matures under the influence of both progesterone and

estrogen after ovulation. This development sequence is not

possible during a pill cycle because both progestin and estrogen

are present throughout the cycle. EVEN IF OVULATION AND


UNLIKELY” (Felicia Stewart, M.D.; Felicia Guest; Gary

Stewart, M.D. and Robert Hatcher, M.D.; My Body, My Health,

Consumers Union, pgs. 169,170).

“The endometrium (uterine wall) is definitely affected by


BLASTOCYST [the fertilized egg, the newly created

offspring]” (Planned Parenthood, Grant Application submitted

on September 1, 1982).




“What We Know About the Pill,” July 1977, p. 21).

“Birth control pill: an oral contraceptive for women that

INHIBITS ovulation, fertilization, or IMPLANTATION OF A

FERTILIZED OVUM, causing temporary infertility” (Random

House College Dictionary, revised edition, copyright 1982, p.



One question many people immediately ask is, “How often,

granted that every type of modern birth control pill can and

sometimes will function as an abortifacient, how often do they

function that way? Is it 10% of the time? Is it .00001% of the

time? Is it a percentage which is high enough to be significant

in my attitude toward the pill?”

Absolute percentages are impossible to obtain. There are too

many variables. Yet doctors and scientists are able to obtain

realistic estimates from their research. Here are some figures:

1. Planned Parenthood in their grant application state that

the hormones in the mini-pill “prevent ovulation and

corpusluteum formation in approximately 1/3 of the cycles.”

That means that 67% of the time women using the mini-pill have a

real possibility of a “silent abortion” on any given


2. Albert D. Lorincz, M.D. in The Pill–How Does It Work?

cites a study in which 1200 women were given .5 mg daily of

progestogen (an amount equivalent to many birth control pills).

Yet 60% of these women ovulated. That means that 60% of the women

on this pill had a real possibility of a “silent

abortion” on any given month.

3. J.C. Espinoza, M.D., writes in his book Birth Control:

Why Are They Lying to Women? page 27:

“When ovulation occurs, pregnancy is possible. Years

ago Roland noticed ovulation in 30% of the women taking an

estrogen-progestin preparation (combined Pill). Today it is

clear that in at least 5% of the cycles of women on the

combined Pill `escape ovulation’ occurs. This fact means that

conception is possible during those cycles, but implantation

will be prevented and the `conceptus’ (child) will die. That

rate is statistically equivalent to one abortion every other

year for all women on the Pill. Mini-Pills have a much higher

ovulation rate. Pituitary block to prevent ovulation is

evident in only 50% of the cycles. Conception, then, is

possible every other month. This new Pill may produce

abortion 50% of the time–six for every year of use. The very

low dose progestin-only Pill may never prevent ovulation.

With any pill there are a small percentage of pregnancies

that go to full term.”

Some doctors may give somewhat different numbers, but the

evidence is clear–every modern birth control pill can and at

times does function as an abortifacient. The IUD works strictly

as an abortifacient.


Your heart may be troubled right now. You may have been using

the IUD or modern birth control pills without realizing that they

could be abortive. You probably are asking yourself, “Could

I have had a silent abortion? Or even several of them? Could I

have ended the life of a child which God intended me to


The answer, of course, is that only God knows. It is a

definite possibility that you have had a silent abortion, if not

several. Nowhere in Scripture does God promise to keep us from

committing sins in ignorance.

At this juncture we can praise the Lord for His great mercy.

The Scriptures promise, “If we confess our sins, he is

faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from

all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). Also, “He that

covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and

forsaketh them shall have mercy” (Proverbs 28:13).



We have said that any form of birth control which destroys a

life that has been created through the binding of the male and

female genes is wrong because it is a form of abortion. It can be

called “silent abortion,” or “microscopic

abortion,” or any other term, but it is still abortion and

as such is a breaking of the sixth commandment–“Thou shalt

not kill.”

The question remains: Are there any proper methods of birth

control which Christians can practice? Is it contrary to the will

of God for Christian couples to try to prevent pregnancies?

The first question can be answered much easier than the

second. There are methods of birth control which do actually keep

the sperm and the egg from uniting and therefore do not involve

the destruction of life. We will list these, and for more

detailed information a couple can contact their doctor or

qualified books on this subject:

1. THE CONDOM. Used by the husband, these are readily

available in most areas, are inexpensive and are effective when

used properly.


used by the wife and are also quite effective when used properly.

They immobilize or kill the sperm and in some cases provide a

mechanical barrier to the sperm. According to The Merck Manual,

“As the woman’s age increases, the effectiveness of these

agents increases greatly and, in women over age 30, is similar

[in effectiveness] to that of the IUD.

3. DIAPHRAGM. This is a device which is used by the

wife and blocks the sperm from entering the cervix. It “must

be carefully fitted by a physician, and the woman must know how

to insert it so that the cervix is covered … Contraceptive

cream or jelly should be used with the diaphragm….”

4. RHYTHM. “For the rhythm method to be

successful, the woman’s menstrual cycles should be regular. To

determine the period of abstention, 18 days should be subtracted

from the length of the shortest of the previous 12 cycles and 11

days from the longest. Thus, if the woman’s cycles vary between

26 and 29 days, the couple must abstain from … day 8 through

day 18 of each cycle. A more effective method is based on

measuring the woman’s basal body temperature each morning before

arising … Even with this refinement of technic, the failure

rate of the rhythm method is estimated to be about 7%; without

the use of temperature recording, the failure rate is several

times higher” (The Merck Manual, pp. 1699,1700).

Because of the fact that the couple are required to abstain

from meeting one another’s needs for approximately one-third of

the time, I fear that this method is dangerous in light of the

warning in 1 Corinthians 7:1-5.

5. STERILIZATION. It is very difficult to reverse the

effects of the sterilization operation, and it is said that such

reversals are effective only 30% of the time (The Merck

Manual, p. 1705). Therefore, this decision should be

considered permanent. Since it is impossible for us to know what

the future holds, it doesn’t seem that sterilization is a wise

thing for an individual or couple to do. What if my mate dies and

I desire at a later date to have more children? What if something

happens to some or all of our children? Sterilization means there

is very little possibility that we could have more children.

We are not saying these methods are proper for the Christian,

nor are we saying they are wrong. But we have listed them because

they are methods of birth control whereby the egg is not

fertilized and therefore a new life is not destroyed.

This material cannot be stored on BBS or

Internet sites without permission from the author. Any articles

which are redistributed by e-mail must be left intact and nothing

must be removed or changed, including these informational

headers. Copyright 1995 by David W. Cloud. All rights are

reserved by the author. David Cloud is editor of O Timothy, a

monthly magazine. Annual subscription is US$20 FOR THE UNITED

STATES. Send to Way of Life Literature, Bible Baptist Church, P.O.

Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, The Way of Life Internet web

site is