[annatar1914]

Art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you. But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;

— 1 Corinthians 7:27-29

What happened to "Go forth and multiply".


:?:

The Apostle isn't denying that part of married life at all; it's just that not everyone is called to it, marriage or having children. And that even within marriage there are times of withdrawal of conjugal relations, and that for some there is the possibility of celibacy within marriage.

[ingliz]

The Apostle isn't denying that part of married life at all

A simple reading of the text says he was.

"they that have wives be as though they had none".

St. Paul's teachings on sex are perverse.

God's command (Genesis 9:7)

And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

[annatar1914]

A simple reading of the text says he was.

"they that have wives be as though they had none".

St. Paul's teachings on sex are perverse.

God's command (Genesis 9:7)

And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

A false reading of the text, you mean. It's not perverse, the Lord Himself was celibate, and st. Paul is pointing out that celibacy is a higher calling, not a negation of the calling of marriage.

[SpecialOlympian]

Well, you see, guy, some of us have the intelligence and the wit to hold down our side of the discourse. We don't need to hysterically shriek "nazi" at every bigoted opinion on the internet and we don't need to go larping through the streets at garden variety wingnuts. We can just beat them in the court of public opinion by demonstrating how flawed and misguided their thinking is with good arguments, real facts, and better ideas.

This is the most liberal thing I've ever read. For a moment I thought I was reading an Aaron Sorkin script.

That is suspect, sure. But here's the thing (and it makes evil tricky to deal with); even a broken clock is right twice a day. The Fascists will say things that are correct on the face of it, in order to rope people into their Ideology and buy into those things which are wrong. This is true of evil in any case, universally. There comes a time to talk, and a time to avoid, and a time to fight.

I asked you if you were fine with people posting black murderporn and you couldn't answer that simple question for some reason. Shove your useless religion up your ass.

[Pants-of-dog]

The original issue was whether or not you can be Christian and homosexual.

There is nothing in the Nicene Creed that is inconsistent with being gay.

[ingliz]

It's not perverse

Go forth and multiply.

Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.

Matthew 19:11-12

Jesus's sexuality is not discussed in the Bible. But celibates, "eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven", were admonished.

"Let anyone accept this who can."

"who can" - They have no impediment that would stop them obeying God's command.

[annatar1914]

I asked you if you were fine with people posting black murderporn and you couldn't answer that simple question for some reason. Shove your useless religion up your ass.

Where did you ask me if I was fine with people ''posting black murderporn'', as you say? Why are you changing goalposts here? Let me see;

''shove your useless religion up your ass''

A double insult, and meaningless because it is you who refuse to trust enough to have a decent one-on-one conversation. But I'll forget and forgive that. I don't like people posting gratuitous video images of violence anyway, and if it's obviously racist that's wrong.

You're talking to a guy who thinks John Brown was a hero and practically a saint, here. I literally have not the slightest ''racist'' bone in my body, in fact I'd probably be married to a wonderful black woman today for decades now, if she hadn't rejected me for reasons having nothing to do with race at all...

[annatar1914]

Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.

Matthew 19:11-12

Jesus's sexuality is not discussed in the Bible. But celibates, "eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven", were admonished.

"Let anyone accept this who can."

"who can" - They have no impediment that would stop them obeying God's command.

You're seeing something there that doesn't exist. Christ is saying that those who can accept celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven, should enter into that life, not prohibiting marriage for those who don't have that calling.

[SpecialOlympian]

I pointed it out to you directly in the Coronavirus thread. Thank you for finally taking the brave step of saying that reveling in the murder of black people is wrong. I'm glad your religion has helped you so.

Also "I fucked a black chick" shows an amazingly deep level of understanding and empathy.

[ingliz]

Christ is saying

No, he is not.

You are confusing Christ's words with Church doctrine - A Pauline Church's doctrine.

[annatar1914]

No, he is not.

You are confusing Christ's words with Church doctrine - A Pauline Church's doctrine.

Obviously we part company here and there's nothing further to say, as there's no false split between the two.

[ingliz]

the Lord Himself was celibate

There is a description of Jesus participating in a sex act (homosexual) and it is to be found in the separate and non-canonical "Secret Gospel of Mark"—fragments of which were contained in the controversial Mar Saba letter by Clement of Alexandria, which states that Jesus during one night taught 'the mystery of the kingdom of God' alone to a youth wearing only a linen cloth. The same lad, presumably, that followed Jesus into the Garden, who wore a linen cloth that kept falling off to reveal his nakedness.

[annatar1914]

There is a description of Jesus participating in a sex act (homosexual) and it is to be found in the separate and non-canonical "Secret Gospel of Mark"—fragments of which were contained in the controversial Mar Saba letter by Clement of Alexandria, which states that Jesus during one night taught 'the mystery of the kingdom of God' alone to a youth wearing only a linen cloth. The same lad, presumably, that followed Jesus in the Garden who wore a linen cloth that kept falling off to reveal his nakedness.

Insane garbage. Obviously you are not having a discussion in good faith, so I'm terminating my end of it.

[ingliz]

I'm terminating my end of it.

Do as you please but Clement of Alexandria's letter is not a figment of my imagination.

[annatar1914]

Do as you please but Clement of Alexandria's letter is not a figment of my imagination.

St. Clement of Alexandria, a Church Father, obviously thought it was insane and devilish Gnostic garbage and I tend to agree with him.

[SpecialOlympian]

There is a description of Jesus participating in a sex act (homosexual) and it is to be found in the separate and non-canonical "Secret Gospel of Mark"—fragments of which were contained in the controversial Mar Saba letter by Clement of Alexandria, which states that Jesus during one night taught 'the mystery of the kingdom of God' alone to a youth wearing only a linen cloth. The same lad, presumably, that followed Jesus in the Garden who wore a linen cloth that kept falling off to reveal his nakedness.

I am definitely more down with Jesus now that I know he likes to fuck. I don't care how he does it but it's cool that he does. Like whatever, Jesus can be a big homo if he wants to be. I forgive him.

[Pants-of-dog]

If people are going to disregard the Gnostic gospels and other books that were excluded for political reasons, then those people are implicitly supporting the position that the current historical context is important when interpreting the Christian message.

[annatar1914]

If people are going to disregard the Gnostic gospels and other books that were excluded for political reasons, then those people are implicitly supporting the position that the current historical context is important when interpreting the Christian message.

They were disregarded for theological reasons not political ones

Nor could any of these accounts be historically traced to actual Apostles and followers of the Lord. Much of this however, was traced to characters like Simon Magus...

[Pants-of-dog]

They were disregarded for theological reasons not political ones

Not according to my research.

Nor could any of these accounts be historically traced to actual Apostles and followers of the Lord. Much of this however, was traced to characters like Simon Magus...

The same can be said for the Gospels in the Bible: that they cannot be historically traced to actual Apostles.

[annatar1914]

Not according to my research.

Well you know what you can do with your ''research'', which I reject on the face of it.

The same can be said for the Gospels in the Bible: that they cannot be historically traced to actual Apostles.

Baloney, we have plenty of evidence of that from the patristic fathers. I'm not buying into your biased and godless ''research'', with biased and godless ''experts'', to the Devil with them. So, I think we're done here