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

  • Thread starter Thread starter excelsus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
erikd said:
You still have not addressed your interpretation of the story of Onan. I showed you why Onan was slain, not just humiliated. Can you address this issue before we move on to the next one?
Click to expand...
Okay. First, the penalty of public humiliation was passed as law after that of the story of Onan, meaning, after Genesis.

“But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so he put him to death also.” (Gen. 38:9-10)

Tamar was his brother’s wife in the first place and not originally his. We have to recognize that fact. He took pleasure in his brother’s wife without fulfilling his responsibility of siring children FOR HIS BROTHER. There is nothing in the text that prohibits coitus interruptus between true and exclusive spouses. Moreover, in the olden times, most people viewed sex as a carnal act and as a necessity to procreate than also for the expression of marital unity and love. However, if we just read Song of Songs, Solomon vividly gives us a picture of how pleasurable and wonderful sex can be. He even described it as in a way intoxicating! A lot of Bible readers try to deny this kind of interpretation because they could not believe that the Bible could contain such graphic romantic scenes, but that is exactly how God intended sex to be, GLORIOUS!
 
KEVIN_WILCOX said:
I am a Catholic (one of the RCC), what you have written reads very similar to what I have written elsewhere.
Surprisingly,occasionally I do try to stay on the thread.
Click to expand...
I agree. I can’t even remember how this thread spun off to a discussion of contraception! 😃
 
greggy53 said:
Maybe I misunderstood your original post. I thought you were speaking of forced birth control in over-populated countries. The way you worded it made it sound that way.
Here is your previous post:
Originally Posted by Bengoshi
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. So in these areas, there should be population control.

The implied statement here is that “science” should decide. Am I right?

Even if you didn’t mean forced population control. It would still be a matter of God’s will vs human will. Catholics believe that our life does not belong to us. It is a gift from God, and starting it, as well as ending it is his prerogative alone.
Click to expand...
No, I’m not forcing it. I just want couples to have more choices in planning their family size. I already addressed this issue of God’s will vs. human will in a previous post. I just find it so frustrating that the RCC is so closed-minded and medieval when it comes to this issue. The fact of the matter is, there are many poor countries and peoples who still have a lot of children in spite of their disability to care and provide for them. And I think that in itself is selfishness! Further, during the olden times, their economy was agricultural, and having lots of children who can help out in farming, fishing, etc. is seen as an asset, but no longer today. We live in the post-industrial age where in the urban areas, the main source of livelihood is corporate office work. Children cannot help their parents until they have finished school and have grown up. That is the difference.
 
Libertarian_FL said:
Ephesians 5

22 For wives, this means submit to your husbands as to the Lord.23 For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the Savior of his body, the church.24 As the church submits to Christ, so you wives should submit to your husbands in everything.
25 For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up his life for her26 to make her holy and clean, washed by the cleansing of God’s word.*27 He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault.28 In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man who loves his wife actually shows love for himself.29 No one hates his own body but feeds and cares for it, just as Christ cares for the church.30 And we are members of his body.
31 As the Scriptures say, “A man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.”*32 This is a great mystery, but it is an illustration of the way Christ and the church are one.33 So again I say, each man must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
[NLT]

Now I ask this if women are just for breeding children since Birth Control in the main is evil then is it right for a man to force his wife to have children if it might be a medical issue for one?

Also since conception occurs when the egg meets a sperm and there is interaction starting life, any method that prevents that should not be sinful. Before then they are cells not life that is simple science.

My mother of blessed memory had medical issues my father and her were Catholic at the time and he had a vasectomy because he loved my mother and it would have been cruel to harm her. And why should they refuse natural loving realtions as husband and wife which is a gift from God.
Click to expand...
Finally, a reasonable post! Catholics refuse to see the practical implications of their position against artificial birth control! Again, God gave us intellect for us to use and not to just be fatalistic in our attitude towards life.
 
Bengoshi said:
No, I’m not forcing it. I just want couples to have more choices in planning their family size. I already addressed this issue of God’s will vs. human will in a previous post. I just find it so frustrating that the RCC is so closed-minded and medieval when it comes to this issue. The fact of the matter is, there are many poor countries and peoples who still have a lot of children in spite of their disability to care and provide for them. And I think that in itself is selfishness! Further, during the olden times, their economy was agricultural, and having lots of children who can help out in farming, fishing, etc. is seen as an asset, but no longer today. We live in the post-industrial age where in the urban areas, the main source of livelihood is corporate office work. Children cannot help their parents until they have finished school and have grown up. That is the difference.
Click to expand...
My wife and I both come from large Irish American Catholic families. Our parents were poor, and sacrificed any comfort they may have had to see to the welfare and education of all their children. It was their faith and their choice. And I thank God for them.
 
Bengoshi said:
Finally, a reasonable post! Catholics refuse to see the practical implications of their position against artificial birth control! Again, God gave us intellect for us to use and not to just be fatalistic in our attitude towards life.
Click to expand...
You are merely expressing your ignorance of Catholic teaching.

Contraception is acceptable if it is life saving.

God gave us an intellect. We can use it to follow his will or we can use it to follow our own prideful desires.

Your choice.
 
Libertarian_FL said:
Ephesians 5

22 For wives, this means submit to your husbands as to the Lord.23 For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the Savior of his body, the church.24 As the church submits to Christ, so you wives should submit to your husbands in everything.
25 For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up his life for her26 to make her holy and clean, washed by the cleansing of God’s word.*27 He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault.28 In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man who loves his wife actually shows love for himself.29 No one hates his own body but feeds and cares for it, just as Christ cares for the church.30 And we are members of his body.
31 As the Scriptures say, “A man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.”*32 This is a great mystery, but it is an illustration of the way Christ and the church are one.33 So again I say, each man must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
[NLT]

Now I ask this if women are just for breeding children since Birth Control in the main is evil then is it right for a man to force his wife to have children if it might be a medical issue for one?

Also since conception occurs when the egg meets a sperm and there is interaction starting life, any method that prevents that should not be sinful. Before then they are cells not life that is simple science.

My mother of blessed memory had medical issues my father and her were Catholic at the time and he had a vasectomy because he loved my mother and it would have been cruel to harm her. And why should they refuse natural loving realtions as husband and wife which is a gift from God.
Click to expand...
LOL! the lack of education and thaught protestants put into these post! You are not to have sex unless it is to reproduce. That is how god made us, that whats happens! that does not mean we force them to have babies! you sound so foolish and deceitful! seriousely go back and read what you wrote, you should be emberrased! obviousely you justify sins for your own personal convenience just as you interpret scripture to do the same. grow up and start taking christ seriousely for you words show that you absalutely do not!
 
benedictus2 said:
By SOME in the heirarchy. SOME in the heirarchy IS NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.🙂

True. But they DO NOT MAKE UP the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church through all that remained Holy because it is THE BODY OF CHRIST.👍
Click to expand...
What!? The church is ceratinly NOT the body of Chirst!
 
Dokimas said:
I agree with you. That’s why I con’t think it’s murder when sperm die through contriception.
Click to expand...
…sperm is a simple nutrition deposit that dissolves in the egg, just like suger in water. It is not alive dispite the fact that it appears to be “swimming”.
 
Dokimas said:
Several posts back someone seemed to liken all contraception to murder, the killing of sperm. If that is what the person believes (which doesn’t make sense), then that person must account for the millions of sperm that die within a women. If one is murder, the other is too, IMO.
Click to expand...
Well no, not statistically. That would be death by natural causes. Did you know that God killed a man in the old testament for wasting his sperm and diliberately not impregnating his wife? 😉
 
Zundrah said:
Well no, not statistically. That would be death by natural causes. Did you know that God killed a man in the old testament for wasting his sperm and diliberately not impregnating his wife? 😉
Click to expand...
The man, Onan, disobeyed the law of God. The law he broke was that if a brother of a brother died without an heir, the second brother must take the dead man’s wife and (name removed by moderator)regnate her giving the dead man an heir. It had nothing directly to do with Onan’s sperm hitting the ground.
 
BTW, those who think contraception is a sin because it is murdering sperm, is it sin for a male to expell sperm while sleeping?
 
Dokimas said:
The man, Onan, disobeyed the law of God. The law he broke was that if a brother of a brother died without an heir, the second brother must take the dead man’s wife and (name removed by moderator)regnate her giving the dead man an heir. It had nothing directly to do with Onan’s sperm hitting the ground.
Click to expand...
Well… it partly was! :D;)

The world is already ridiculously over populated anyway! So what are we suppose to do? I personaly am not bothered, since I am celebat. 😛
 
excelsus said:
The Bible establishes Peter as the head of the true Church. The Popes are the modern-day Peters. Please explain how you can deny this truth and still say you are “Bible-believing”.
Click to expand...
We seem to have wandered a bit from original entry.
We now seem to be wandering about in a maze of morality about sex.
Does anyone want to return to original topic?
 
True, true. As PO18Guy once wrote: The Holy Spirit Unites, the Devil divides. 😃

Check it out K-mart shoppers, Jesus says in the new testament that he has come not to bring peace on earth but to create a division in all mankind, and to set fire to the earth and how he wishes it were already ablaze…remember that? Jesus came to create a division. (someone needs to brush up on scripture before telling someone that the teachings of the catholic church WERE universal for about 1500 years, then someone wanted a divorce…so…honestly, some of you are making unfounded claims. If you disagree just for the sake of disagreeing, then really, your purpose here is moot unless you’re trying to gain a better understanding.
 
excelsus said:
The Bible establishes Peter as the head of the true Church. The Popes are the modern-day Peters. Please explain how you can deny this truth and still say you are “Bible-believing”.
Click to expand...
**The Bible establishes the Apostolic College and later the Episcopal College as the joint head of the true Church!
The Popes are simply the Patriarchs of the Western Church, the Bishops of Old Rome! There is nothing else,
Where is there any mention of the papacy or the popes in scripture?

**
 
Dokimas said:
BTW, those who think contraception is a sin because it is murdering sperm, is it sin for a male to expell sperm while sleeping?
Click to expand...
That is not why contraception is sin.

Contraception is sin because it separates that act of sex from God’s plan.

God gave us the gift of enjoyable sex as part of his plan for humanity to be fruitful and multiply.

Contraception is a willful blocking of God’s plan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top