Protestants: please stop using the label "Bible-believing"

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Can you imagine how silly all this must look to an outsider?

Can you imagine a conversation between Sunni and Shi’i Muslims constantly screaming back and forth about whether Ali ibn Abi Talib was the first Imam or the fourth Caliph? I guarantee you that this conversation is every bit as heated as Protestant-Catholic “conversations”.

We are all Christians. We should all try to behave like Christians. Let us distinguish ourselves with our love for each other. Let us show that our (all of us) Lord transforms our lives (and hence our discourse).

I know I can be guilty of this, but just today, in a posting in another thread, I edited out what may be taken as a dig.

This Protestant-Catholic thing is amazing. Part of the intensity comes about because many of us are of European background, and the Reformation came about and divided Europeans. So maybe it’s a family thing. I just don’t see an intense argument going on between Catholics and Orthodox Christians. Maybe it’s geography.

Maybe Catholics & Orthodox have hated one another too much to talk. Until the Net was invented.​

The trouble with religion is that it makes hatred a sacred obligation - and it sanctifies what is worst in us. As well as giving men who would otherwise get on perfectly happily with their neighbours a reason to see their neighbour as inferior or as enemies. There is no reason why we & the Orthodox should not get on perfectly well - if it were not for the theological positions our respective Traditions have hung around our necks. These enmities are the work of dead men who have poisoned not only their relations with their contemporaries, but the lives of all generations since. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve thought that Christians today need an entirely new Saviour, to renew the work of Christ and this time make it impossible for us to make a mess of. Christianity does not give life - it spreads death The evil in man is so powerful, that it turns the best of gifts into deadly poison - I really can’t think of a worse thing to call a man than “Christian”

STM that we should not, on any account, behave like Christians - that kind of behaviour had done untold damage. Instead, we should put such things behind us, & try to pretend to be decent human beings, rather than devils in human form.

If Christians were looking at Islam & Islam had done all the evils chargeable to Christianity, what’s the likelihood that Islam would have been condemned ? But if so - by what reasoning is Christianity not condemned ?

Life was really so much simpler in the pre-ecumenical days, when we could hate one another with a good conscience, as the apostates & enemies of God & the Gospel we would probably have believed one another to be. Ecumenism makes that attitude far harder - which is great gain. What it also does is relativise Churches - it is not now possible to lump Protestants & heathens together; as it was even as late as 1943. By recognising that a very great deal in Catholicism is also shared with Protestants, the CC has made itself far less different from all other bodies. As for its relations with Orthodoxy - it’s officially given up trying to get them to become the subjects of the Pope: which would have been unthinkable a century ago. Sometimes, ignorance is bliss - it allows men to hate their fellows for not being like them in religion, and to harm them for the sin committed by this. Best of all, it can be commended as admirable zeal for Christ.

Sorry. Rambling. You’re right though: Christian behaviour is yucky.

 

[benedictus2]

No, it is not sick at all. That is in effect what the Apostle Paul was saying. Don’t be hypocritical about it. Sex between married couples can be considered as a two-person worship service (Joshua Harris). Most people see sex as something sick and dirty because our society has corrupted its meaning. There is absolutely nothing immoral, taboo, or wrong with sex between two married individuals (married to each other of course)! Sex within marriage is 100% godly! God invented sex! It is a God-given gift for us to enjoy. .

And I DID NOT SAY OTHERWISE. By all means every married couple should enjoy this great gift from God. But coupled with that great gift is GOD’S prerogative to give allow life to to come out of that union. Contraception is USURPING GOD’S, and GOD’S SOLE PREROGATIVE TO GIVE OR DENY LIFE.

Yes, we cooperate in God’s creative act but that does not mean that we should be forced into having children just because we want to enjoy sex with our spouse. God gave us the ability to exercise our wills within certain parameters, and where the Scripture is silent, it means that we have ample freedom in that area

Scripture is not silent on this as I have shown in another post. And yes we exercise our wills within certain parameters but IT MUST NEVER CONTRADICT GOD’S WILL. ARTIFICIAL CONTRACEPTION IS AGAINST GOD’S WILL!
Contraception is SELFISH whichever way you look at it.

You said it right, only the Roman Catholic Church is against artificial contraception, and that is because it is narrow-minded and stganted in its thinking.

Nope. Artificial contraception is against God’s will. You are trying to justify your sin which makes your sin even worse. So as I said before sick.

What is the logical and essential difference between NFP and artificial means of contraception? There is essentially none! Couples can still have sex without procreating when they practice NFP.

Natural family planning is precisely that. Natural. If you don’t want to have children don’t have sex. But no, you want to play God.

The only difference is the means employed, but the end is the same: To be able to enjoy sex without the possibility of getting pregnant.

Actually no. When you practice NFP YOU DO NOT HAVE SEX when you think you are fertile so you deny yourself that pleasure. BIG DIFFERENCE.

 

[benedictus2]

What Onan did was detestable not because of the act of withdrawal per se, but because he disobeyed the Jewish custom that he should sire a child for his deceased brother, which was his responsibility.

Nope. He was struck dead because he spilled his seed. He was thumbing his nose at God.

Sex is an expression of love between spouses and it would be totally irresponsible of parents to keep on producing children when their financial capability to raise them up is insufficient.

We were very poor. My parents had 10 children. By your standards, my other siblings should have been contracepted away. But thank God for the wonderful parents we have, against all odds, or more correctly, becuase of God’s grace, we were all able to have decent education and are now all gainfully employed members of humanity helping bring about His kingdom.

You do not have faith in God if you think that by obeying His will He will abandon you. Besides, man does not live by bread alone.

Giving your children every material good is not as wonderful as you think it is. You end up raising brats and spoilt me, me, me children because the parents who practices contraception are me, me, me parents.

You are giving a terrible example to your children.

Children are a blessing, that is true, but the parents will not be a blessing to the children if they could not provide for them.

Obviously you do not have any faith in God. Your faith is in yourself. Even with just one child, your situation can change drastically that you cannot even provide for him/her let alone yourself. As I said, it is about me, me, me.
God gave us science to understand the natural world around us, and science observes that there are places on the earth that are heavily populated.

God gave us science not so we can usurp His sole right to decide who lives and who dies. You want to play God.

Contraception was first accepted by protestant groups at the Lambeth conference in 1930. When the issue of gay priests in the Anglican communion was questioned, the Anglican archbishop said: We voted for this in 1930.

The acceptance of contraception paved the way for a lot of moral evils including gay sex and abortion.

So in these areas, there should be population control.

As I have said before. Don’t have sex.

 

[benedictus2]

I was not being emotive. Prohibiting artificial means of contraception is tantamount to “forcing” copulating couples to be open to and careless in having babies, even though at the time, it is unwanted. See post # 710 regarding the female cycle.

Nope. It is about obeying and trusting God. Hhmmm. That is probably a new concept for you.

 

[Bengoshi]

Nope. He was struck dead because he spilled his seed. He was thumbing his nose at God. Not!

We were very poor. My parents had 10 children. By your standards, my other siblings should have been contracepted away. But thank God for the wonderful parents we have, against all odds, or more correctly, becuase of God’s grace, we were all able to have decent education and are now all gainfully employed members of humanity helping bring about His kingdom. Good for you then!

You do not have faith in God if you think that by obeying His will He will abandon you. Besides, man does not live by bread alone.

Giving your children every material good is not as wonderful as you think it is. You end up raising brats and spoilt me, me, me children because the parents who practices contraception are me, me, me parents. Non sequitur again!

You are giving a terrible example to your children. You’re the one giving a bad example of irresponsibility.

Obviously you do not have any faith in God. Your faith is in yourself. Even with just one child, your situation can change drastically that you cannot even provide for him/her let alone yourself. As I said, it is about me, me, me.

God gave us science not so we can usurp His sole right to decide who lives and who dies. You want to play God. Nobody dies if contracepted! Obviously you are greatly misinformed.

Contraception was first accepted by protestant groups at the Lambeth conference in 1930. When the issue of gay priests in the Anglican communion was questioned, the Anglican archbishop said: We voted for this in 1930.

The acceptance of contraception paved the way for a lot of moral evils including gay sex and abortion. Non sequitur.

As I have said before. Don’t have sex.Oh I’m so sorry for not being as pure and ascetic as you. NFP allows couples to have sex during infertile times, which is less pleasurable for the female than when she is fertile and “in heat.” This is scientific, but apparently, the Catholic Church disdains science for tradition just like when they excommunicated and persecuted Galileo.

Still more ad hominem attacks… Anyway, I have said my piece about this issue of contraception. If you still wanna go on being stubborn and judgmental then go ahead, it’s up to you. Just stop forcing your convictions against artificial contraceptio on other people. This is one of the things that really turns me off from the Roman Catholic Church, its closed-mindedness to progress! Just look at most of the latin countries and those which were conquered by Roman Catholicism, they are still POOR and BACKWARD like my country; and be careful in proclaiming something as sinful when it does not expressly say so in Scripture lest you yourself fall into judgment. What we are simply saying is that the Church allow couples leeway in their options to control their family size. I rest my case.

 

[erikd]

Yes, I do adhere to Sola Scriptura. No, there is no scriptural reference to population control nor there is any direct prohibition against artificial means of contraception. Evangelicals do not absolutely reject all forms of tradition and scientific inferences, it is just that we consider the Bible to be the ONLY infallible, inerrant, and authoritative word of God, but that doesn’t mean that tradition has no place for us. It does. It just cannot be equal or superior to Sacred Scripture.

Does this mean that there is a possibility that God does not want to control the population for the sake of population control? If you say there is no passage either way than you must concede to this possibility, right? I ask because if I can show you that certain verses in the Bible refer to contraception, that would force you to review your outlook on God’s willingness to control the population for the sake of not overpopulating the earth. Right?

 

[greggy53]

Obviously that is different. Abortion is murder and hence prohibited by God. You cannot equate contraception to abortion for there is no union between the egg and the sperm yet. I think this should be common sense.

Forced population control, is forced population control by whatever means…Who gets to decide who reproduces and who doesn’t?.. It’s fascism, and anti-Christian.

 

[happilycatholic]

Obviously that is different. Abortion is murder and hence prohibited by God. You cannot equate contraception to abortion for there is no union between the egg and the sperm yet. I think this should be common sense.

Au contraire dear Bengoshi…

Any interferance with the sanctity of life is a sin against God. Murder is not the only sin involved in birth control in the case of abortion. You have also prevented an intended life from entering the world, that is separate from causing a death.

Only God should decide when a life is brought into the world and when it’s not. This is why fertility treatments are a sin. This is one of those things that is a hard pill to swallow, but is Truth nevertheless.

Blessings,

HC

 

[tomarin]

Sorry. Rambling. You’re right though: Christian behaviour is yucky.

I have to say, Gottle, that your rambling is more intellectually stimulating than most people’s on-topic posts (not that I could ever concur with all of it, or even most of it). So do carry on.

 

[steve_b]

I believe you asked me to show you where the Bible speaks of contraception. I said it doesn’t.

I said please show me where the Bible says it’s wrong. You said I ducked the question.

I’m confused. Looks like I answered it.

Yes, finally.
D:

Now it’s your turn to prove me wrong. Remember, you’re the smart one here.

You were the one invoking scripture to support contraception. You’ve admitted after the challange, it is NOT there in scripture.
D:

Levites weren’t celebate, were they? If you think so, please provide Scripture referenses.

Did you not see the definition I posted for the Greek word “touch” used in 1 Cor 7:1? It came from Strongs.

“touch” ἅπτομαι haptomai
Definition
1) to fasten one’s self to, adhere to, cling to
a) to touch
b) of carnal intercourse with a women or cohabitation
c) of levitical practice of having no fellowship with heathen practices. Things not to be touched appear to be both women and certain kinds of food, so celibacy and abstinence of certain kinds of food and drink are recommended.
d) to touch, assail anyone

I merely pulled from the definition
D:

Too bad the RCC misunderstood Paul. Paul would have let the church leaders have wives.

He left marriage as an option.
D:

If the RCC understood Paul’s teaching (inspired by the Holy Spirt) maybe there’d be less sexual problems in the priesthood. Maybe not, sinners are sinner and there are struggles with immorality in Protestant churches from time to time.

Less? Since Protestant clergy can marry, is it good enough to just have less problems? And according to the statistics, Is it true Protestant clergy have less sexual problems than the priesthood?
D:

Speaking of Paul’s teaching, he made it clear that church leaders (pastors and bishops) could have spouses (only one wife). He taught that through his letters to Timothy and Titus.

Does that mean

• could have or does it mean must have a spouse?
• 1 wife at a time (as in not polygamy)? or that there is no divorce and remarriage because remarriage after diivorce is adultery?
• when a wife dies they can’t remarry?

how are you using it
D:

I’m awaiting your verses against contraception.

1 Tim 2:15
women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

therefore,

how is contraception, which is a man made process that is purely designed to prevent children, an act of faith, love, holiness, and propriety?

Gal 6:
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction;

Seems to me that is a rather loaded statement… wouldn’t you agree? Sex without responsibility might please the sinful nature but it has consequences that aren’t good…agreed?

here’s a connection you may not have ever had presented to you.

φαρμακεία pharmakeia G**al 5:20, Rev 9:21 (sorcery witchcraft depending on translation)

*definition (strongs) *
1) the use or the administering of drugs
2) poisoning
3) sorcery, magical arts, often found in connection with idolatry and fostered by it
4) metaph. the deceptions and seductions of idolatry

φαρμακεύς pharmakeus Rev 21:9 (sorcery, witchcraft)
1) one who prepares or uses magical remedies
2) sorcerer

Pharmakeia/pharmakeus administering drugs from the 1st century has ALSO been associated with potions to prevent conception (spermacides etc)
or once conception has taken place, potions that induce abortion. The condemnation of this we see written about in the Didache.

 

[steve_b]

I think his point was to prove that the purpose of marriage is not only for procreation but as an expression of love. And by the way, I do not have a low view of marriage, in fact, it is you who may have a low view on it since you only see it as a means to propagate the species and not as an expression of love and affection between two consenting married adults. Moreover, what I glean from your post above is that you seem to be of the understanding that only men experience sexual desire. Remember, women feel that too! So it goes to say for both genders.

Lastly, science has proven that women are more desirous of sex when they are fertile than when they are not.

Who made it that way? God
B:

So the Catholic Church would only limit sex between married couples who do not want to have children during the infertile times which are not as enjoyable to the woman as when she is fertile. Now that, is selfish!

Who made a women’s cycle? God.

Fertility happens within a short window of time, 2-3 days out of a month… So what is it you’re trying to say?

 

[Christian_Sr]

“Bible believing”–Sola Scriptura–Scripture alone as Luther put it. One of the three ways in which Luther separated himself and countless followers of the Protestant faiths from the true body of Christ. However, scripture alone with no definitive authority creates, what I call, a pretzel theology. Everyone and anyone can pick up God’s Word and decide for themselves what it means. We all have to determine whether or not we believe that the Bible is God’s word. What we cannot and should not do it create our own interpretation of scripture. There are over 33,000 protestant denominations that have made their own claim to the meaning of scripture. I used to, God forgive me, be a part of that. Christ Himself instituted the Church through Peter. The Popes are not Peter, but they are continuing the Church and ministry that Christ began. How can we deny this? All of my life I denied the legitimacy of the Papacy and the Catholic Church. I separated myself from Christ. Through, what I can only describe as a divine intervention, I have seen the errors of my ways and believe in the authority of the Pope.
Some of what I have said may not be considered “politically correct”. That is okay with me. Looking at modern society, Christ Himself is not very PC.

 

[greggy53]

Great testimony, thanks. Hope to hear more from you.

 

[Dokimas]

Au contraire dear Bengoshi…

Any interferance with the sanctity of life is a sin against God. Murder is not the only sin involved in birth control in the case of abortion. You have also prevented an intended life from entering the world, that is separate from causing a death.

HC

When a woman get pregnant, only one sperm makes it to the ovum. Millions die by the body of the woman. Using your logic she murdered millions.

 

[greggy53]

When a woman get pregnant, only one sperm makes it to the ovum. Millions die by the body of the woman. Using your logic she murdered millions.

What?? Your comparison makes no sense. When conception is allowed to take place naturally lots of sperm die, but God alone makes that determination. Many forms of contraception however interfere with that natural event thereby replacing Gods will with our own. Now I’m not opposed nor is the Church to all forms of conception. Just ones that unnaturally interfere or prevent conception, or ones that kill the child after conception.

 

[Dokimas]

What?? Your comparison makes no sense. When conception is allowed to take place naturally lots of sperm die, but God alone makes that determination. Many forms of contraception however interfere with that natural event thereby replacing Gods will with our own. Now I’m not opposed nor is the Church to all forms of conception. Just ones that unnaturally interfere or prevent conception, or ones that kill the child after conception.

Maybe I misread HappyCatholic but it seems she/he likens birth control to murder. If so, using that logic, a woman kills millions of sperm even while getting pregnant.

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Maybe I misread HappyCatholic but it seems she/he likens birth control to murder. If so, using that logic, a woman kills millions of sperm even while getting pregnant.

And natural abortions take place. A woman can naturally abort in the early stages of pregnancy.
Often been suggested the Christian Church should have stayed out of the bedroom.
Buddhism makes life a lot easier.

 

[LRThunder]

Maybe I misread HappyCatholic but it seems she/he likens birth control to murder. If so, using that logic, a woman kills millions of sperm even while getting pregnant.

That logic is misplaced. What happens to the millions of sperm is natural. Birth control, on the other hand, is artificial prevention of pregnancy.

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

That logic is misplaced. What happens to the millions of sperm is natural. Birth control, on the other hand, is artificial prevention of pregnancy.

Affirmation of a position I stated earlier: The Catholic Church rejoices in a Creator God. To willfully destroy anything is negation of life. What is evil? (St Augustine) The absence of good, the negation of life.
Catholics are encouraged to follow the Marian “Yes”: Obedience to the Will of God.

 

[happilycatholic]

When a woman get pregnant, only one sperm makes it to the ovum. Millions die by the body of the woman. Using your logic she murdered millions.

Dokimas:

A woman does not have control over her ovum nor a man’s sperm. That is not the intention of God. It is God’s intention for the life of a soul and the lives and souls of those involved that is compramised in birth control and fertility treatments.

What you are describing is the way in which God prescribed a human being to be conceived. Are you somehow suggesting that God is responsible for the deaths of persons whom fail to be conceived. This sounds illogical and not what you probably intended to say.

Your thoughts on this are notable, but again do not address the intentions of the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,

HC