If it's not in the bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Valtiel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

Valtiel

Guest
Well the arguments go none stop between me and my brother, he’s still convinced that all children are to obey their parents no matter what age, complete obediance. I’ve told him it’s common sense that once you reach adult hood the kind of authority they have over as a child is gone, but he says the knoldege of man is wrong or something, some verse he says in is in the bible. 1) How do I combat the logic if it’s not in the bible then it’s wrong and 2) is there any biblical referance to refute his claims???
 
What is he using, which passages?
If it’s “Honor your mother/father”

Honor does not neccissarily equate with obey.
 
Make him show you where in the Bible it says if it’s not in the Bible it’s wrong. He won’t be able to. Therefore, by his logic, his own premise is wrong because it’s not found in the Bible 😛
 
Cats are not mentioned in the bible. But whether cats are wrong is…hard to tell.
 
Ephesians 3:6 or something where children are to obey their parents
 
40.png
Valtiel:
Ephesians 3:6 or something where children are to obey their parents
Click to expand...
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=76001
 
40.png
johnshelby:
… now if it was contrary to something in the
bible, then yes, it’d be wrong…
Click to expand...
Like this?

James 2:4You see then how that by works a man is justified, and **not by faith alone.

**Or this?

1 Pet 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us…

😃

God Bless,
RyanL
 
40.png
Valtiel:
Well the arguments go none stop between me and my brother, he’s still convinced that all children are to obey their parents no matter what age, complete obediance. I’ve told him it’s common sense that once you reach adult hood the kind of authority they have over as a child is gone, but he says the knoldege of man is wrong or something, some verse he says in is in the bible. 1) How do I combat the logic if it’s not in the bible then it’s wrong and 2) is there any biblical referance to refute his claims???
Click to expand...
Valtiel,

First of all, no human being owes any other human being complete obedience. We’re supposed to obey government too, but not if they command something wrong. Scripture is clear that if Jesus calls you then you have to abandon your parents along with everyone and everything else. But you better be darned sure it’s Jesus and not your own arrogant self-will.

One thing we can say for sure–the notion of “coming of age” and no longer having to obey your parents because you’re an adult is completely alien from the culture of the Bible. Your brother is right on that much.

Does that mean that this concept is wrong, or is this simply a factor of ancient society that the Bible accepts without making it binding on us. That’s a tough one. But I wouldn’t just take for granted that you are an autonomous person. Complete independence is very American but very un-Biblical (and totally un-Catholic, I might add).

Edwin
 
40.png
Valtiel:
Well the arguments go none stop between me and my brother, he’s still convinced that all children are to obey their parents no matter what age, complete obediance. I’ve told him it’s common sense that once you reach adult hood the kind of authority they have over as a child is gone, but he says the knoldege of man is wrong or something, some verse he says in is in the bible. 1) How do I combat the logic if it’s not in the bible then it’s wrong and 2) is there any biblical referance to refute his claims???
Click to expand...
Is your brother then arguing that if your parents told him to jump off the top of the Empire State Building he has to obey them?? Even he can’t be that stupid!!
 
40.png
MikeinSD:
Cats are not mentioned in the bible. But whether cats are wrong is…hard to tell.
Click to expand...
Are you getting Catholics mixed up with cats (animal)? I’m pretty sure that no Catholic on this forum likes to be called cats. I know I don’t like it. Could you please stop using cats when refering to Catholics. Thank you.
 
This issue of obedience is a great example of taking an isolated verse of scripture out of its proper context. If this verse was in any way absolute then Paul could not have said the following:

Eph 5:23-24
For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be **subject in everything to their husbands. **

Please notice that this verse is not an absolute either, and yet it also has been misconstrued by many. A thorough reading of scripture can help untangle the misconceptions. I hope this will help your brother.
 
Valtiel
Well the arguments go none stop between me and my brother, he’s still convinced that all children are to obey their parents no matter what age, complete obediance. I’ve told him it’s common sense that once you reach adult hood the kind of authority they have over as a child is gone, but he says the knoldege of man is wrong or something, some verse he says in is in the bible. 1) How do I combat the logic if it’s not in the bible then it’s wrong and 2) is there any biblical referance to refute his claims???
Click to expand...
The husband is the spiritual head of the household. “Give way to one another in obedience to Christ. Wives should regard their husbands as they regard the Lord, since as Christ is head of the Church and saves the whole body, so is a husband the head of his wife, and as the Church submits to Christ, so should wives to their husband, in everything. Husbands should love their wife** just as Christ loved the Church and sacrificed himself for her to make her holy.** (this is ignored by many and just read the part about wife submitting to their husbands) He made her clean by washing her in water with a form of word, so that when he took her to himself she should be glorious, with no speck or wrinkle or anything like that, but holy and faultless. **In the same way husbands must love their wives as they love their own bodies; for a man to love his wife is for him to love himself. A man never hates his own body, but he feeds it and look after it; and that is the way Christ treats the Church, because it is his body—and we are its living parts. FOR THIS REASON, A MAN MUST LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO WILL BECOME ONE BODY.” **(Eph 5:21-31)
Once a man and woman marry, they start their own family. Does this mean that they completely ignore their parents? No, the father can give advice and share his wisdom with his children, and in honoring their parents they should listen to wisdom, but parents no longer have control over their children. They are now one and a new family. If your brother says that no matter what, the children are to be obedient under all circumstances, does that mean that if a man has a child and is bringing him up according to what he feels is best, if that man’s father tell his something different, that man MUST be obedient to his father and not bring him up the way he feels is best? If that man gets an offer for a better job in another city and this mans father tell his not to go, should that man obey his father and miss on an opportunity to better provide for his family? No, that man is now HEAD of his own household. Yes, the man can take his fathers advise under consideration, but **he **still makes the final decision.
 
On my way:
Are you getting Catholics mixed up with cats (animal)? I’m pretty sure that no Catholic on this forum likes to be called cats. I know I don’t like it. Could you please stop using cats when refering to Catholics. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Sorry On My Way. I’m talking cats. Felines. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Cat Four footed slit eyed critters with attitude, God given sense of balance and style. The only mammal who successfully domesticated human beings. Yowling, stalking, sneaky, eternally shedding domestic purr machines who can hear a can opener at 1/2 mile away. A species that can sprint 30 mph but manages to nap 16 hrs a day.

Cats.

Point being cats are one of the few domestic animals not mentioned in the bible. According to this thread, not being mentioned in the bible = bad. I think cats tend to be morally ambiguous. Part of their charm.

How does something mentioned or not mentioned in some rendition of the bible mean anything anyway?
 
On my way:
Are you getting Catholics mixed up with cats (animal)? I’m pretty sure that no Catholic on this forum likes to be called cats. I know I don’t like it. Could you please stop using cats when refering to Catholics. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Lessons learnt from felines: never jump to a position from which you cannot jump back.

There was no implication that anything other than four-pawed, curly-tailed, bewhiskered, befurred and purring felines were being referred to there.
 
40.png
MikeinSD:
Cats are not mentioned in the bible. But whether cats are wrong is…hard to tell.
Click to expand...
Cats cannot be ‘wrong’, because that would involve cats being subject to a human moral system, which, as any feline will tell you, is singularly untrue.

As for what issues lie between cats and the All-Purring One in the Sky, I do not know, although I would suggest that they might have long debates on how the Problem of Dogs impacts upon the concepts of the All-Purring One’s omnipotence and benevolence (and taste).
 
40.png
MikeinSD:
Sorry On My Way. I’m talking cats. Felines. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Cat Four footed slit eyed critters with attitude, God given sense of balance and style. The only mammal who successfully domesticated human beings. Yowling, stalking, sneaky, eternally shedding domestic purr machines who can hear a can opener at 1/2 mile away. A species that can sprint 30 mph but manages to nap 16 hrs a day.
Click to expand...
One day, the Man met the Dog. He took the Dog in, and gave him shelter and food, and so the Dog sat and thought, “Wow! You must be a god!”

One day, the Man met the Cat. He took the Cat in, and gave her shelter and foor, and so the Cat sat and thought, “Wow! I must be a god!”
I am not sure who the original author was, but I think that it is quite accurate, concerning the attitudes of the creatures in question and also concerning the human process of assigning divinity to things.
 
40.png
Mystophilus:
Cats cannot be ‘wrong’, because that would involve cats being subject to a human moral system, which, as any feline will tell you, is singularly untrue.

As for what issues lie between cats and the All-Purring One in the Sky, I do not know, although I would suggest that they might have long debates on how the Problem of Dogs impacts upon the concepts of the All-Purring One’s omnipotence and benevolence (and taste).
Click to expand...
Of course cats are not bound to a merely human moral system. Cats were actually once worshipped by a human moral system. encyclopedia.com/html/section/Egyptn-rel_EarlyBeliefs.asp

Cats haven’t gotten over it yet. Since dethroned from their divine status in Egypt, cats have tirelessly instructed their domesticated humans that they (felines) are indeed worthy of worship or at least being fed several times a day, a ready lap, and petting on demand. All this despite not being mentioned in the bible.
 
I also do not appreciate the constant reference to Catholics as “cats”, nor do I enjoy the continued contrast between “cats” and “dogs”, which I can only take as an abbreviation for “Dogmatists”, or those Catholics who are completely fathful to the Magisterium. Simply because some cafeteria Catholics choose to ignore the teachings of the Church, I cannot justify the pejoritive “cats”. Similarly, I will not tolerate anyone using the term “ants” as slang for Protestants, nor “ox” or “oxen” as shorthand for the Orthodox. The separation between the Catholics and the Orthodox is the lack of Petrine Primacy, which I won’t allow to be called “Pet”. We are all members of God’s family.

In summation, and using the terms of this thread,
All Cats should be Dogs, all Ants are Cats if you pour water on them correctly (even though they may still think they are Ants), and if you took the Pet away from a Dog, you would have an Ox.

God Bless,
RyanL

God Bless,
RyanL
 
40.png
RyanL:
I also do not appreciate the constant reference to Catholics as “cats”, nor do I enjoy the continued contrast between “cats” and “dogs”, which I can only take as an abbreviation for “Dogmatists”, or those Catholics who are completely fathful to the Magisterium. Simply because some cafeteria Catholics choose to ignore the teachings of the Church, I cannot justify the pejoritive “cats”. Similarly, I will not tolerate anyone using the term “ants” as slang for Protestants, nor “ox” or “oxen” as shorthand for the Orthodox. The separation between the Catholics and the Orthodox is the lack of Petrine Primacy, which I won’t allow to be called “Pet”. We are all members of God’s family.

In summation, and using the terms of this thread,
All Cats should be Dogs, all Ants are Cats if you pour water on them correctly (even though they may still think they are Ants), and if you took the Pet away from a Dog, you would have an Ox.

God Bless,RyanL

God Bless,
RyanL
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

Ox=Orthodox?!?! Are you implying that St. Thomas Aquinas didn’t accept Petrine Primacy!?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top