For all the "change" in the world, the world doesn't really change all that much.
Sadly, it's this type that breeds uncontrolled.
These doctrines made perfect sense in the Roman times, when infant mortality rates were high, and believers were frequently persecuted and murdered.
Technology and sheer populations have rendered such dogmas well past their usefulness...but try explaining this to fundies using reason. When you reach your limit, just beat your head against the wall for something more effective to do.
We should advocate "uncontrolled" human breeding, as that is freedom. If there is to be "control" imposed, who is doing the "controlling?" I see nobody trustworthy to "control" but God, and God clearly commanded people to Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.
Sheer populations? Well what for, did God give man dominion over nature and other creatures? Because we are so smart? Ha! Maybe. Or because "we can?" No, I think it was invitation to naturally grow to such sheer numbers, that we would have no other option left but to "dominate" because there's so many of us. It was foretelling or commanding or causing humans to ultimately grow to become among the most populous of the large mammals.
How can people say that growing families, was for "way back when?" So let's say that we have lost the reason to have possibly large families, of filling an "empty" planet. There's no "shortage" of people these days, some might say. 100 great reasons to have children minus 1 reason, that's still around 99 great reasons to go on having children! So it's as relevant as ever. I even did an informal poll of people, that agreed with that conclusion, that God's commandment still applies. Everybody said it does, even some guy at work who said that world population is "huge," but it still applies. My sister said that God has not rescinded his commandment. Could it be that people don't want to be told how many children they can have? Could be a factor, but there are better reasons to promote the value and sacredness of each and every human life.
Somewhere I read that a new "paradigm" is needed. Well here's mine then. As the world population naturally grows vaster and denser, the big city must also be promoted as a place for people to have their "traditionally very large" families, as maybe there's now so many people, that we can't all live in the countryside anymore, and it still be "rural countryside?" But people can still enjoy having their big families, by people exploring how people can in fact, live and breed in closer proximity, at least on the global scale, so that all the more people can fit upon the planet.
I don't believe in "earth control," or the excessive "controlling" of nature to such an extent as to be detrimental to man. Thus, we should not bother to "control" our numbers, going against nature, and also, not all regions have need of humans to impose forest fire suppression, as if remote and unpopulated enough, nature can take care of wildfires naturally, far cheaper to taxpayers than humans can. Some aspects of nature, would still be better off left a bit "wild." Who says that the "sheer numbers" of people now alive, can't be "incredible?" I don't think God was joking when he promised Abraham descendents so numerous as to be nearly as uncountable as the stars of the sky, or the grains of sand in a seashore. Even Genesis 24:60 KJV foretells the "burgeoning billions" of today. "thousands of millions" of descendents, isn't that litterally billions of people?