S
Steven_Merten
Guest
Hello Bible Reader,
Well don’t just leave us in suspence! Give us some Book, Chapter and verses. We are especially interested in the “damned to Hell” part.
Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
- Status
Well don’t just leave us in suspence! Give us some Book, Chapter and verses. We are especially interested in the “damned to Hell” part.
Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
B
BibleReader
Guest
Steven Merten:
I’ll post that material tomorrow morning,
B
BibleReader
Guest
Most think, “How could the Bible possibly condemn contraceptive use, if it was written thousands of years ago, and contraceptives weren’t invented until our era?”
In fact, around 500 B.C., North Africans discovered silphium. It is not the same “silphium” commercially available today. The silphium of North Africa was a fennel-like plant, which grew wild in North Africa – nobody ever figured out how to cultivate it. Orally imbibed as a tea, it completely disrupted the girl’s reproductive tract. It was a very successful contraceptive. Around 400 A.D., the last silphium plant was picked, and the species became extinct.
Remember “Simon of Cyrene” who helped Christ carry the cross in the gospels? Well, Cyrene, Libya, was the main point of export for silphium. In the centuries before Christ, Cyrene even minted a coin featuring a naked girl holding up a fennel plant and pointing to her genital region.
Other popular and somewhat successful contraceptive herbs used before and after Christ were asafoetida, and what we today refer to as Queen Anne’s Lace, and pennyroyal. Asafoetida is still sometimes used as an ingredient in Worcestershire saurce. (Please do not go out and brew your own contraceptive teas or drink a bottle of Worcestershire sauce. You don’t know enough about quantity.)
All of these contraceptive preparations game to be referred to with the euphemism *pharmakeia *in the Greek-speaking Roman Empire – “drugs.”
All of this is well-discussed in the March/April, 1994 issue of Archaeology magazine.
The main retailers of pharmakeia in the Roman Empire were sorcerers! – palm readers, tea leaf readers, and so on.
The local teaveling sorcerer would come into town. The local promiscuous girls would go running to the sorcerer to ask about his or her latest love prospects. The reader would give the usual vague optimistic answer, and then after charging for her reading would open up her box of contraceptive teas, and make some more money selling these.
As a consequence, contraceptives also came to be referred to with the appellation “sorcery,” meaning “sorcerer’s stuff.” Contraceptive curses – incantations meant to avert conception – were referred to with the word magiae, “magic.”
The reason why you had to read all of that is to understand the exact meaning of a catechetical summary employed in the early Church – very shgortly after the time of the Apostles – called the Didache.
Didache 2:2 condemns (1) magiae; (2) pharmakeia; (3) abortion; and (4) infanticide.
Do you see what is going on there? Progressively-invasive anti-reproductive measuresare being condemned – reproductive curses, contraceptive chemicals, post-contraceptive abortions, and post-birth child killing.
So, the Didache, essentially written in the same era as Paul’s letter to the Galatians and as the Book of Revelation, is a reliable benchmark assuring us that when pharmakeia were condemned by Early Church Christians, use of contraceptives was being condemned.
A letter by Pope Clement also condemned use of pharmakeia.
*Pharmakeus * were users or sellers of pharmakeia.
To be continued.
In fact, around 500 B.C., North Africans discovered silphium. It is not the same “silphium” commercially available today. The silphium of North Africa was a fennel-like plant, which grew wild in North Africa – nobody ever figured out how to cultivate it. Orally imbibed as a tea, it completely disrupted the girl’s reproductive tract. It was a very successful contraceptive. Around 400 A.D., the last silphium plant was picked, and the species became extinct.
Remember “Simon of Cyrene” who helped Christ carry the cross in the gospels? Well, Cyrene, Libya, was the main point of export for silphium. In the centuries before Christ, Cyrene even minted a coin featuring a naked girl holding up a fennel plant and pointing to her genital region.
Other popular and somewhat successful contraceptive herbs used before and after Christ were asafoetida, and what we today refer to as Queen Anne’s Lace, and pennyroyal. Asafoetida is still sometimes used as an ingredient in Worcestershire saurce. (Please do not go out and brew your own contraceptive teas or drink a bottle of Worcestershire sauce. You don’t know enough about quantity.)
All of these contraceptive preparations game to be referred to with the euphemism *pharmakeia *in the Greek-speaking Roman Empire – “drugs.”
All of this is well-discussed in the March/April, 1994 issue of Archaeology magazine.
The main retailers of pharmakeia in the Roman Empire were sorcerers! – palm readers, tea leaf readers, and so on.
The local teaveling sorcerer would come into town. The local promiscuous girls would go running to the sorcerer to ask about his or her latest love prospects. The reader would give the usual vague optimistic answer, and then after charging for her reading would open up her box of contraceptive teas, and make some more money selling these.
As a consequence, contraceptives also came to be referred to with the appellation “sorcery,” meaning “sorcerer’s stuff.” Contraceptive curses – incantations meant to avert conception – were referred to with the word magiae, “magic.”
The reason why you had to read all of that is to understand the exact meaning of a catechetical summary employed in the early Church – very shgortly after the time of the Apostles – called the Didache.
Didache 2:2 condemns (1) magiae; (2) pharmakeia; (3) abortion; and (4) infanticide.
Do you see what is going on there? Progressively-invasive anti-reproductive measuresare being condemned – reproductive curses, contraceptive chemicals, post-contraceptive abortions, and post-birth child killing.
So, the Didache, essentially written in the same era as Paul’s letter to the Galatians and as the Book of Revelation, is a reliable benchmark assuring us that when pharmakeia were condemned by Early Church Christians, use of contraceptives was being condemned.
A letter by Pope Clement also condemned use of pharmakeia.
*Pharmakeus * were users or sellers of pharmakeia.
To be continued.
B
BibleReader
Guest
Continued from previous post…
Okay, here are the 4 Bible verses, 3 of which condemn the persons connected to the pharmakeia use to Hell. They, of course, are found in Galatians and Revelation.
19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: immorality, impurity, licentiousness, 20 idolatry, sorcery [pharmakeia], hatreds, rivalry, jealousy, outbursts of fury, acts of selfishness, dissensions, factions, 21 occasions of envy, drinking bouts, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians 5:19-21.
21 Nor did they repent of their murders, their **magic potions [pharmakeia]**, their unchastity, or their robberies. Revelation 9:21. 8
But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers [pharmakeus], idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death." Revelation 21:8.
15 **Outside [the Heavenly City] **are the dogs, the sorcerers [pharmakeus], the unchaste, the murderers, the idol-worshipers, and all who love and practice deceit. Revelation 22:15.
In the Galatians verse, “idolatry” is thought to be a reference to sexual rites in Gnostic temples. In Revelation 22:15, “dogs” is thought to be a snide reference to one of the common sex positions of male homosexuals. So, in every case, note well that the pharmakeia term is paired-up with sex sin…
Galatians 5:19-20: impurity, licentiousness,
20 idolatry, sorcery [pharmakeia],
Revelation 9:21: their **magic potions [pharmakeia]**, their unchastity,
Revelation 21:8: the unchaste, sorcerers [pharmakeus],
Revelation 22:15: dogs, the sorcerers [pharmakeus], the unchaste,
Why did the Catholic translators not use “contraceptives” and “contraceptive users” as their English translation?
Because none of the Greek vocabularies they employ for their translations do that.
In any event, there is very little doubt that the New Testament very, very, very nastily condemns contraceptive use. The language of the Didache locks-in the identification of the meaning of the term.
Okay, here are the 4 Bible verses, 3 of which condemn the persons connected to the pharmakeia use to Hell. They, of course, are found in Galatians and Revelation.
19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: immorality, impurity, licentiousness, 20 idolatry, sorcery [pharmakeia], hatreds, rivalry, jealousy, outbursts of fury, acts of selfishness, dissensions, factions, 21 occasions of envy, drinking bouts, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians 5:19-21.
21 Nor did they repent of their murders, their **magic potions [pharmakeia]**, their unchastity, or their robberies. Revelation 9:21. 8
But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers [pharmakeus], idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death." Revelation 21:8.
15 **Outside [the Heavenly City] **are the dogs, the sorcerers [pharmakeus], the unchaste, the murderers, the idol-worshipers, and all who love and practice deceit. Revelation 22:15.
In the Galatians verse, “idolatry” is thought to be a reference to sexual rites in Gnostic temples. In Revelation 22:15, “dogs” is thought to be a snide reference to one of the common sex positions of male homosexuals. So, in every case, note well that the pharmakeia term is paired-up with sex sin…
Galatians 5:19-20: impurity, licentiousness,
20 idolatry, sorcery [pharmakeia],
Revelation 9:21: their **magic potions [pharmakeia]**, their unchastity,
Revelation 21:8: the unchaste, sorcerers [pharmakeus],
Revelation 22:15: dogs, the sorcerers [pharmakeus], the unchaste,
Why did the Catholic translators not use “contraceptives” and “contraceptive users” as their English translation?
Because none of the Greek vocabularies they employ for their translations do that.
In any event, there is very little doubt that the New Testament very, very, very nastily condemns contraceptive use. The language of the Didache locks-in the identification of the meaning of the term.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
biblereader has just given us a good example of what real bible study produces. very well done.
the arguments contained in HV, unchanging Church teaching for 2000 years, can also be deduced by reasoning from the evidence of natural law. Good statistical analysis of social trends of the 20th century will confirm the truth of all the predictions and warnings made by the Pope in HV. It is also true that pagan writers and sages warned repeatedly and consistently about the dangers of contraception, sorcery with regard to sexual matters, the promiscuity that mentality promoted, the adultery, fornication, and consequent breakdown of the families, the bulward of Roman society. Their dire predictions also came true.
the arguments contained in HV, unchanging Church teaching for 2000 years, can also be deduced by reasoning from the evidence of natural law. Good statistical analysis of social trends of the 20th century will confirm the truth of all the predictions and warnings made by the Pope in HV. It is also true that pagan writers and sages warned repeatedly and consistently about the dangers of contraception, sorcery with regard to sexual matters, the promiscuity that mentality promoted, the adultery, fornication, and consequent breakdown of the families, the bulward of Roman society. Their dire predictions also came true.
R
RobinHood
Guest
puzzleeannie, you wrote:
puzzleannie:
I’m sorry, but I do not believe you are right. Sex may not bring unity and intimicy between husband and wife, but to make love does. There is a differance.
Sexual act would not lose all joy and divine spark because we can still give ourselves totally to each other…even more so without the worry of having another child to we could barely care for.
I’m sorry, but I do not believe you are right. Sex may not bring unity and intimicy between husband and wife, but to make love does. There is a differance.
F
fix
Guest
Of course, your view contradicts the truth.
R
RobinHood
Guest
You seem intent on generalising. From personnal experiance, I am more connected to my wife, and feel as one with her when I know that this time of for us only.
We are powerless to go against God’s Will. If He decides that we have to have another child in our family, He will provide that child even if the parents use contraceptive methods. And we will love that child because he is, as are all, a child of God.
Robin
GBU all
F
fix
Guest
The post I replied to said that even if contracepting, both people still give themselves while contracepting. That is false. It is faux marital embrace. They are holding back.
Parents are procreators. They act with Christ. They can shut Him out. How is that generalizing?
R
RobinHood
Guest
I apologize, I misused ‘generalizing’, you see english is not my mother tongue. Not all parents are procreators…some are infertal (they adopt). Does that mean that infertal parents who still make love, or have sex, there act is meaningless…I think not.
How can you truly shut Him out if you are a loving and caring individual? You can’t for God is Love.
Robin
GBU all
F
felra
Guest
This reads as a naive or ambiguous statement. Alot of “loving and caring individual” Catholic couples intentionally shut God out (via ABC). The fact that God is Love does not equate/dictate that people will take the time and effort needed to make a loving, moral choice in matters of utmost importance.
What only matters is that God is Love (all Good), and our response to His grace to discern and to do His will in matters of faith and morals.By prayer we can discern “what is the will of God” and obtain the endurance to do it.108 Jesus teaches us that one enters the kingdom of heaven not by speaking words, but by doing "the will of my Father in heaven."109 (CCC 2826)
F
fix
Guest
Unintentional infertility is not intentionally shutting God out. The morality of an act depends in large part on our intentions.
Love is not only a feeling, it is an act of the will. To truly love is to do God’s will. Contraception is intentionally acting against God’s will.
F
fix
Guest
Along these lines is the concept of natural love verses supernatural love. My understanding is that only those in a state of grace can have supernatural love.This reads as a naive or ambiguous statement. Alot of “loving and caring individual” Catholic couples intentionally shut God out (via ABC). The fact that God is Love does not equate/dictate that people will take the time and effort needed to make a loving, moral choice in matters of utmost importance.
By prayer we can discern “what is the will of God” and obtain the endurance to do it.108 Jesus teaches us that one enters the kingdom of heaven not by speaking words, but by doing "the will of my Father in heaven."109 (CCC 2826)
Can we understand this to mean that if we are in mortal sin the love we wish to have for another is only natural? And if this is true what are the consequences of only being able to show natural love?
R
RobinHood
Guest
Nobody knows God’s will. I submit that if God’s will is for me to have another child, I will have another child. Contraception or not, for God knows no limits.
Robin
GBU
M
miguel
Guest
God’s will is known through the teachings of the Apostles and their successors. The very word apostle means one who is sent with a message (i.e., emissary, ambassador). But instead of speaking for a head of state, these ambassadors speak for the King of the Universe. “Whoever receives anyone I send, receives me.”
F
fix
Guest
Really? If no one may know God’s will, then we can’t know right from wrong.
God does not interfer with our choices. He respects are free will even when we chose to oppose Him.
F
felra
Guest
What??? This sounds like a passive and/or apathetic faith response to God. God wants our cooperation; our desire to seek and to know and to do His divine and perfect will for our lives.Take some responsibility man (or woman) for your faith and salvation! true, god knows no limits, but us pathetic creatures surely do limit His ability to bring about his perfect will in and through our lives through neglect, apathy, or outright disobediance–take your pick. See the instruction of Jesus in Matthew 7:7-8 & 13-14 below for the active seeking that He expects of His followers in order to know and do God’s will
*7"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; **knock **and the door will be opened to you. **8 **For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened…13"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. *
*14 *How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few".
L
Lamb100
Guest
I think most posters here fail to realize something. Before my conversion to the Catholic faith a year ago, as a Protestant, I knew nothing of the categories “mortal sin” or “venial sin”. I’m not sure I’d even heard the terms. If I’d thought about it, the no birth control edict was just a Catholic rule. I had never heard the term “magisterium” and didn’t know anything about the sources of authority. So, “no fish on Friday”, priestly celibacy, birth control–all the same. When I found out we still teach no contraception, I was so shocked it reallly set me back. Now, of course, I understand the reasons, and thinking about my life, realize that using birth control affected my marriage adversely–I guess that would be the natural law part. But I never would have in my wildest dreams figured there was something morally wrong with contraception–it just wouldn’t have made any sense without further explanation. (I’ll make one correction here–I did at some point find out that the pill was an abortifacient, and with an ill-formed conscience about abortion, it only made me uneasy…I still used the pill, that’s how far off base I was morally.)
So—be charitable. I was genuinely invincibly ignorant. (with the exception of the pill, as mentioned above–and that would be a matter for God to decide–there was definitely some deficiency in my knowledge.) It didn’t have anything to do with selfishness, or not wanting to find out truth. My husband also was surprised the Catholic church still prohibits artificial contraception. (He’s not Catholic.) And we’re educated people and somewhat older adults, too. Most Protestants are like us. They’re not aware they’re doing anything that would be considered evil, and would be stunned to find out that Catholics think this way. Especially about barrier methods of birth control. You’ll find Protestants who oppose the pill but can’t figure out why barrier methods are intrinsically evil–good heavens!
It’s all about education in the faith…be kind, please!
So—be charitable. I was genuinely invincibly ignorant. (with the exception of the pill, as mentioned above–and that would be a matter for God to decide–there was definitely some deficiency in my knowledge.) It didn’t have anything to do with selfishness, or not wanting to find out truth. My husband also was surprised the Catholic church still prohibits artificial contraception. (He’s not Catholic.) And we’re educated people and somewhat older adults, too. Most Protestants are like us. They’re not aware they’re doing anything that would be considered evil, and would be stunned to find out that Catholics think this way. Especially about barrier methods of birth control. You’ll find Protestants who oppose the pill but can’t figure out why barrier methods are intrinsically evil–good heavens!
It’s all about education in the faith…be kind, please!
F
fix
Guest
Your points are well made. I think that most here are arguing with those who are Catholic, yet reject Church teachings. It seems we all forget that we have a serious obligation to form our consciences properly.
S
Steven_Merten
Guest
Hello Lamb 100,
I agree with you that there are many Protestants and Catholics who do not know that the Church teaches contraception as mortal sin. This is why, if Humanae Vitae, is so esencial for eternal life, should it not be moved to the front burner? If it is killing so many souls should it not bypass Church leader focus on their political views such as war and capital punishment which do not directly kill anyones soul? If 70 - 90% of one billion Catholics and a majority of Protestants are in danger of eternal damnation over the Humanae Vitae issue, should this not be the most important warning flowing from all Church leaders mouths? Should they not make this warning their number one loud and often warning to Christ’s flock? The fact that they do not do so makes me suspect of just how sure they are of this teaching.
Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
I agree with you that there are many Protestants and Catholics who do not know that the Church teaches contraception as mortal sin. This is why, if Humanae Vitae, is so esencial for eternal life, should it not be moved to the front burner? If it is killing so many souls should it not bypass Church leader focus on their political views such as war and capital punishment which do not directly kill anyones soul? If 70 - 90% of one billion Catholics and a majority of Protestants are in danger of eternal damnation over the Humanae Vitae issue, should this not be the most important warning flowing from all Church leaders mouths? Should they not make this warning their number one loud and often warning to Christ’s flock? The fact that they do not do so makes me suspect of just how sure they are of this teaching.
Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
- Status