According to what Paul taught, it's better to be celebate if you can, but not everyone has that gift. What Paul was saying is that if you have the gift of celibacy, then you should use it. But if you don't have that gift, you should marry. Paul taught that to be married is a good thing, to be celebate and dedicate your life to the Lord is a better thing. I don't see that Paul took a negative stance towards marriage, but he did teach that those who could be celibate would be better off that way. I think it boils down to this: Marriage is good, but Celibacy is better.

Hey Spider- how does this fit in with the seemingly *much* more commonly embraced "be fruitful and multiply" doctrine?

As you can see from the scripture, "be fruitful and multiply" isn't a command, it's a blessing. God is blessing Adam and Eve to have fertility and many children. I commonly see people say that this is a commandment, but read in context, it's clearly a blessing.

Good question.

Well, the bulk of your last post to me seems to have been centered on women being hurt by having greater expectations than the men who seemed to have only been interested in sex.

I have no doubts that this is a very commonplace scenario. But again, I feel that it misses the point of divinity that I’m trying make.

If God says that pre-marital sex is a sin, then it must be true for all people, not just for women who have high hopes and men who are selfish uncaring pigs.

Do you see my point? It’s wasn’t the pre-marital sex that was the cause of pain and disappointment in your scenarios but rather it was the difference in expectations between the couples involved. Actually this same scenario applies to a lot of married couples!

I can show you plenty of will who will say about their husbands, "I've been acting like a wife, and he's been acting like a boyfriend.''

So that kind of disappointment really has no bearing on whether the relationship has been consummated through marriage.

Also, has it ever occurred to you that there are women who are more than willing to have sex with the man but they are the ones who aren’t interested in moving in with him to become a lifemate?

But, then again, Paul was a misogynist. What would you expect from him?

I imagine Paul was that and much much more... in the worst possible sense. I can't for the life of me understand why Christians think Paul was such nice guy.

On what do you base this? On the fact that Paul had female missionaries? On the fact that Paul called Junia, a woman, an apostle? I'm willing to bet that you are basing this statement on a few verses in the New Testament, which you think you understand. All the while ignoring Pauls teaching that women will preach. That women are equal to men, but have different roles.

So you seriously believe that Adam was only a couple of hours old? Literally?

There is nothing scientific about that. Unless he was a clone and had just been evicted from the green slime of the test tube they (His creator and other scientists) had grown him in.

I am astonished at what people are capable of believing.

jeannie

Upon further reflection (since it is highly unlikely that he wrote any of the content attributed to him, with the exception of Galatians, and all of the anti-female quotes are in Cor, 1 Tim, Tit, Eph & Col), I will tentatively withdraw the mysogyny charge; however, I will hold staunchly to: Overzealous, schizophrenic, opthalmiac, delusional, manic-depressive, OCD impaired, and just generally insane.

Again, as I have mentioned in an earlier post, Paul had no authority to make anyone an Apostle, since not even he was an Apostle.

If anyone would truly like to understand or find an explanation of all miracles and other strange unexplained phenomena they should purchase a book called "The holographic Universe."

Quantum physics has proven that all things are connected.

We are all one body. (many have this belief, to include me)

The worlds were created within the mind of Universal consciousness. We live in a holographic dream-like reality.

Even our bodies are holograms, powered by our true essence, our higher selves, which is further connected to the body of God.

All religions are deceptions. Our illusion of being separate from each other is a deception in order that God may live and experience life in may different ways and from many different points of perception.

These ideas are being proven with quantum physics, and quantum physics is being linked to science and soon everyone will know the whole of the structure of reality.

Check out the links at the bottom of this page:
http://www.queenofcoins.com/reality.html

Jeannie

Most of the letters are signed "from Paul". They were written during a time period when Paul was alive and teaching. What makes you believe that they weren't written by Paul? What about the other comments you have to make about Paul, on what do you base those?

And Paul did meet Jesus on the road, so Paul was an apostle. And I didn't say that Paul made Junia an apostle, I said he called her one. Like I couldn't make my mother a saint, but I could call her one as a compliment. Some thing. Paul held Junia in very high regard, that's the point you should take away.

One of many (but one of my favorites):

http://www.theologica.net/paul.html

I wonder why celibacy was prized at the time anyway? Seems like there would not have been a big population problem... was it to prevent the spread of venereal disease?

I have heard it said that celebacy helps one be closer to the christian god. But why would that be so? Wouldn't one be doing god's will more by raising children within the same religious tradition?

Let's see now... I will try to say that so as not to offend someone....

Probably impossible.

Anyway... celibacy...

1.The Christian God is a jealous God.
2.Men who get a taste of sex, tend to worship it.

"Thou shalt not have any other Gods before me." and all that...

Also sexual frustration makes for better soldiers in the field to slaughter the heretics and pagans.

Jeannie

We all have different gifts. Some people have the ability to remain celebate for their entire life, with no negative mental or emotional effect. That's a gift that God desires them to use. One person, who has no attachments to this world, can make huge changes. Mother Theresa is a great example.

When you aren't trying to be everything to one other person, you can more fully serve the Lord.

Everyone is different. If want to call that a ‘gift’.

The Christian preachers I knew when I was young use to talk about this quite often. They actually found it to be troublesome. It was a struggle for their faith to understand it fully.

I’m not talking about sex or celibacy here necessarily, but rather the desire to do bad things in general. The bible talks a lot about the needed to resist temptation. The preacher in my family use to wonder why everyone doesn’t experience the same degree of temptation. They never felt temptation to do bad things.

The problem is that if this is a ‘gift’ then it can only be viewed as a ‘curse’ to those who felt great desires to do bad things.

This comes back to the same idea of crediting God with everything good, and shoveling all the bad stuff under the carpet as being someone else’s fault.

But the problem is, that if God is giving certain people the ‘gift’ of being a nice person, then isn’t he basically abandoning those people that he failed to give this ‘gift’ to?

That’s where the problem comes in.

I recognize that I was born a highly moral person. I just naturally enjoy good things, and don’t enjoy doing bad things. It’s as simple as that. I’m no more responsible for my good-nature than I am for having blue eyes. It’s just the way I am.

So you might ask, “So what are you complaining about?”. I’m not complaining, I’m just pointing out the fact that if some people are inherently good and others are inherently bad through no fault of their own, then the idea of judging them is absurd. They can’t help being how God created them.

In fact, this is the pantheistic view. The people who have evil dispositions in this world really don’t have much choice in the matter. I actually had a very sick friend when I was growing up. He was mentally ill and he knew it. Unfortunately I don’t think he was ever officially recognized for it medically. But he used to do bad things, and he would come to me and confess them, only because he had to tell someone and I was someone that he trusted. He told me how he actually enjoyed hurting other people, especially woman, as well as being mean to animals. He enjoy being in fights all the time too and was seriously out to put his opponents in the hospital with facial damage whenever he could. He actually enjoyed doing that.

Yet at the same time he was troubled by the fact that he enjoy this. He fundamentally knew that what he was doing was wrong, he didn’t even like the idea that he did it, he would have serious remorse after the fact, but then he would just turn around and do the same kinds of things all over again. He was like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and he knew it. He was a Christian, in fact he was even a member of the choir in his church.

I was young at the time and not fully understanding life myself. I did suggest to him that he should seek professional help, but he was afraid to do that. He progressively became worse as he grew older and fell into some really bad situations with serious drugs and other things.

The bottom line in all of this is that everyone isn’t sick like that. I certainly never had the urge to hurt other people and actually enjoy it. If I ever hurt someone it would be in self-defense, or possible short-term immediate anger because of something they were doing toward me or someone I love. But the idea of hurting someone just for enjoyment, or even hurting an animal just to see it in pain is not something that I would even remotely have a desire to do.

So how does this all fit in with your view of Christianity? It doesn’t even address these kinds of issues in the Bible, other than to possibly suggest that the man was possessed by evil spirits. But I personally don’t believe that. I believe that he just had a biologically defective brain. He was cursed with a bad brain at birth. How could he be responsible for that?
And even if you buy into being possessed by evil spirit that would still relive him of any responsibility if evil spirits are making him do bad things. He clearly didn’t want to do those bad things, and he was deeply troubled by his own inability to control himself and his own thoughts.

The basis of Christianity (or any religion that has a judgmental God) must be that all men are created equal,… meaning that they are all given the same levels of temptation and the same ability to resist them. Only in that context can a judgmental God be fair. It would make no sense to a judgmental God to be creating men that all have different desires to sin.

The premise that all men are created equal is foundational to a God that bases everything on judgment. Yet it is naïve to seriously believe that all men are created equal or have the same desire to sin. So the whole premise of the religion falls apart. The bible says that all men are inherently sinful but clearly that’s not true.

The above verse is accepted by many Christian theologians as proof that children are without sin. It also is proof that those who are mentally handicapped are judged fairly according to their cognitive abilities. Many people have mental disorders due to the fallen nature of this universe. They will be judged fairly, according to what they knew.



That's not true. All men are equally loved and valuable to God, but all men are not tempted equally. Everyone has their burdens to bear and God judges all fairly, based on their cognitive abilities. Someone who is mentally ill will be judged for those sins commited while they were lucid. If someone had Tourrets syndrome used the Lords name in vain involuntarily, that wouldn't be Blaspheme. God is fair and just.

The idea that all men are created equal is not one that came from the Bible.

From Wikipedia:

The quotation "All men are created equal" is arguably the best-known phrase in any of America's political documents, as the idea it expresses is generally considered the foundation of American democracy. Thomas Jefferson first used the phrase in the Declaration of Independence. None of Jefferson's biographers or studies of the Declaration accept the claim that the phrase was suggested by Philip Mazzei, although this claim has been made by non-scholars.[1] [2]

The opening of the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776, states as follows:
“ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

*************

I know for a fact that all men are NOT created equal. Some are nicer than others. (and some are more well endowed by the creator.)

Well, being that you are an absolutists I’m not surprised at your response. Unfortunately the real world is not so black and white. As I say, this was very troublesome for many preachers I know. We’re not just talking about mental illness, we’re talking about anyone who is tempted to do bad things versus people who are not.

Given that life is supposedly a one-shot deal. No second chances. And it’s a judgmental scheme. Then men who have absolutely no desire to do bad things are getting a free ride. Whilst men who have to constantly fight against strong urges to do bad things are being given a very rigorous tests.

In short, it would be an extremely unfair system. Anyone who does bad things and is judged by God to be a sinner could just point over at me and say to God, “Well this isn’t fair because you didn’t give that many any temptations! He got a free ride! Why didn’t you make me like you made him?”

Do you see the problem Spider? If anyone gets a free ride through life than all those who don’t will have a legitimate right to claim foul. It wouldn’t have been fair to them that they were created with such great desires to do bad things. Had they not had that desire in the first place they would have never done them.

I’m, I’d have to agree with them! If a man is raping women, or molesting little children, I’m prepared to automatically say that he must be mentally ill. I certainly don’t have any desire to do those things. I can only imagine that people who do those things are mental ill.

We could actually carry that over to apply to any imaginable bad act. No one in their right mind would commit a bad act. Therefore all sin can be excused on grounds that the person who committed it couldn’t have possibly be thinking lucid.

So now we’re at an impasse that no one can ever be guilty of committing a sin whilst thinking clearly. All sin is a result of ignorance, stupidity, and/or mental illness and thus it is all excusable.

Of course I know you are talking about the statement Spider made that an insane person would be judged by acts committed when he was lucid. Where did he get this idea anyway? I doubt if it is in the Bible.

If you are insane, you are responsible for your insane acts and you will pay the price. There is no mercy under the laws of cause and effect which are the laws that God (Universal body) created.

Christianity does not have room for justice because they are limited in that they claim that you only live one single life. My belief says that we are eternal beings and we manifest on this plane and planet in order to live many lives. Thus some of them may be spent as murderers, priests, insane people, etc. Death is not the end. Hell itself could be the earth. Who really knows these things for sure? Only fools are positive that their "authority" is flawless. They are not logical beings.

Once science and quantum physics and logical thinkers get together, everything will fit together like a perfect machine and be understood by some. Not all. Because small children can not understand these things. They were not meant to. They are here to live and grow and learn. But they are no less than the Gods who run this universe. Some day they will grow and be able to contribute to the running of this holodeck.

Jeannie