Simple question?

Quote: FrGamble

Again you are deeply flawed in your interpretation by not knowing the Lord Jesus personally

Again, YOU are deeply flawed and deeply
troubled for being duped into thinking you
have a personal relationship with a guy
who died a couple thousand years ago.
Like I've said before, if you thought you had
a personal relationship with any other dead
man, somebody would have you committed.
But because Jesus falls under the heading
of religion, people look the other way when
you say preposterous things.

If I had picked a viewpoint that hardly is supported by any Christians I think you could use the scriptural reference on me to discredit me. I read up on that as well.

I'm not quoting it because of its length, but:

Well said, Face.

Quote: FrGamble

You are free to follow the advice. It is pretty clear that Paul is speaking just his opinion and recommendation, as he says "not as a command". There are many other places where Paul and others extol the beauty of marriage, including Jesus Himself. If he would have said stay single because the Lord commands it and only get married if you can't do that then I could see what you are getting at. This whole chapter is couched in the apostle giving us his fatherly advice to a community who had some serious issues with lust and marriage. I have visited Corinth and it had a huge number of ruins that were temple prostitutes and brothels. I think Paul was worried about this community's problem with controlling their lust and couple that with his idea that the Lord was coming back next week or so led him to give the clearly labeled advice he gave.

That brings us to another problem. Is the bible the word of god or not? Are the words of the apostles lessons to be learned or not?
Who decides which advice is "binding" as a lesson, and which is just the opinion of one man?

And then, more importantly, are any of these opinions now used as laws of the church, the instructions on how we are supposed to live, while others are set aside? I think they are.

I don't think the church is ready to cross out all of the words of the bible that didn't come directly from Jesus' mouth, or are directly attributable to him.

What it means is you are treating some of the words of the apostles as the word of god, and some of them as mere opinion, based on the opinions of men centuries later.

How can you say that the words of Peter are just opinion, as he became the first Pope, divinely selected, the setter of policy, the leader of the movement?

So yes, I find it disturbing when stories which can not be true are labeled as allegory and metaphors later, and now the lessons of an apostle are being labeled as an opinion.

I've heard sermons quoting from Corinthians in church. It is certainly presented as more than a matter of opinion. Now, it was a Presbyterian church, or perhaps a Methodist church if I heard that particular sermon at my wife's church, but I think they are teaching fundamentally the same things.

Quote: Face

"Do unto others" was good advice then, it's good advice now. Probably was 10,000 yrs ago and likely will continue to be 10,000 yrs from now.

It's pretty good, but imagine if they had come up with "Live and let live."

Nope, not the same as "Thou shalt not kill."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_and_Let_Live

Quote: Dalex64

That brings us to another problem. Is the bible the word of god or not? Are the words of the apostles lessons to be learned or not?
Who decides which advice is "binding" as a lesson, and which is just the opinion of one man?

The Bible is the Word of God. The words of the Apostles are lessons to learn from. As for deciding which advice is "binding" sometimes, as in this case it is pretty clear from the text itself. I think you keep overlooking that the verses you are harping on come from a chapter when Paul makes it clear he is giving his personal opinion. It still has value and can be used to reflect upon and preach about, but it is abundantly clear that Paul has chosen celibacy and is advising others who can do so for the Kingdom of God to do the same.

Quote:

And then, more importantly, are any of these opinions now used as laws of the church, the instructions on how we are supposed to live, while others are set aside? I think they are.

The majority of the NT is not prefaced by the clear distinction that this is just the opinion of one of the Apostles. Much of it is instructions inspired by the Holy Spirit as to how we are to live and set the laws and teachings of the Church.

Quote:

I don't think the church is ready to cross out all of the words of the bible that didn't come directly from Jesus' mouth, or are directly attributable to him.

Of course not, I don't even know why you bring this up.

Quote:

What it means is you are treating some of the words of the apostles as the word of god, and some of them as mere opinion, based on the opinions of men centuries later.

What it means is I am reading the Scriptures paying attention to its context. Some of it is written as instruction, some as stories, some as opinions, some as reflections on the person of Jesus and His teachings, some as history, etc.

Quote:

How can you say that the words of Peter are just opinion, as he became the first Pope, divinely selected, the setter of policy, the leader of the movement?

I'm not saying that at all.

Quote:

So yes, I find it disturbing when stories which can not be true are labeled as allegory and metaphors later, and now the lessons of an apostle are being labeled as an opinion.

Again it is pretty clear, especially by those who prayerfully read and study the Scriptures what is allegory, metaphors, or opinion.

Quote: Face

I wish you luck. I personally could not reconcile those two ideas and come up with anything that made them make sense.

Thanks again.

First of all I think we have to be careful and tone down the rhetoric about the Church and the history of Christianity. Millennia of oppression, violence, and evil is an outrageous exaggeration. The world was a very violent place before Christ came around. It is still violent and much evil has been done and continues to be done by those who profess a belief in Jesus Christ who taught us to love our neighbor as ourselves and to turn the other cheek. Imagine for a second if these men weren't tempered by such a belief, which they ignored. Actually, you don't have to imagine what humanity might have done to each other if we didn't have the teachings of Christ, look at the bloodlust of the 20th century and the men that caused such devastation and evil. Men are sinful and motivated by selfish desires for fame, power, and control. The Church is not immune to this, nor is any country or group. In the short history of the United States think of what harm has been done, yet I imagine we are proud Americans. I am also proud of the Catholic Church and its role making this world a better place. Yes, there are graphic examples of failures and many more examples of heroic love and goodness. The history of the Church is not made only by its sinners, but more importantly by its saints, lets not forget that.

I appreciate your respect for the teachings of Jesus Christ and I agree as would I think most of us that there are many things He said that are extraordinarily wise and words to live by. However, I don't think of Jesus like a Buddha or some great guru. He is first and foremost a Savior who died to free us from our sins. I too love His teachings but far more I love Him for who He is and what He has done and continues to do for me and so many. I see it every day and experience it anew every morning.

I really don't know much at all about your relationship with Ash, but I am happy for you and it seems like your relationship with her has you said been an unexplainable blessing to you. This comes from your love for her and that is always a good thing. I would never condemn you for that, nor would I do so for a gay couple in a similar relationship. However, God does not want to take away your love for her only add blessings upon blessings. I imagine it might be hard for you to imagine anything greater than what you have had and continue to have with her. Let me say that I have walked with many, many people that might have been in similar situations. God did not condemn them but only added to their joy through the gift of marriage or through helping them to love each other even more completely and selflessly. Again, I am happy for you and I believe in the deepest part of my soul and with all my strength that opening your relationship to the Gospel of Jesus Christ would only add to your already unbelievable happiness.

I had to laugh a little bit when you called me a liberal priest. It is a sad state of affairs and the work of the devil that the message of the Jesus and the Church has been so poorly taught to people or twisted by the media and others that you would think that I am saying anything that any Catholic and any Christian would or should tell you. God and the Church want nothing more than you supreme happiness in this life and the life to come. If I for an instant thought that by following God you would be less happy or receive an iota less of a boon to your life I would give it all up in a heat beat. Never, ever, have I seen a couple or a person fall in love with Jesus Christ and follow His teachings that left them miserable or unhappy. Sure I know plenty of people have been hurt by the Church and mislead by it. In every instance it was a failure of man and not of God. Please believe me that I have a choice in towing the Church line or not and you have a choice in remaining an atheist or not. I too hope something I have said has been helpful and perhaps the next time you are up for some good old fashioned sinning, that through God's goodness and mercy has helped you to grow in many ways you might be open to the possibility that God wants even more happiness for you and those you love.

I wish you more than luck, I wish you and everyone here every blessing from our God who loves you more than you can ever imagine.

Genesis is a mess.

Quote:

Genesis 8:13 describes the earth as being dry on the first day of the first month. But Genesis 8:14 informs us the earth was not dry until the twenty-seventh day of the second month.

Genesis 8:4 reports that, as the waters of the flood receded, Noah’s ark rested on the mountains of Ararat in the seventh month. The very next verse, however, says the mountaintops could not be seen until the tenth month.

According to Genesis 6:19-22, God ordered Noah to bring "of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort . . . into the ark." Nevertheless, Genesis 7:2-3 relates that the Lord ordered Noah to take into the ark the clean beasts and the birds by sevens, and only the unclean beasts by twos.

Genesis 1:20 says the fowl were created out of the waters; Genesis 2:19 alleges they were formed from the ground.

Genesis 1:2-3 claims that God created light and divided it from darkness on the first day; but Genesis 1:14-19 tells us the sun, moon, and stars weren't made until the fourth day.

Chapter 1 reports that the fruit trees were created before the man, while chapter 2 indicates they were made after him

Genesis 1:2-3 claims that God created light and divided it from darkness on the first day; but Genesis 1:14-19 tells us the sun, moon, and stars weren't made until the fourth day.

Genesis chapter 1 says the first man and woman were made at the same time, and after the animals. But Genesis chapter 2 gives a different order of creation: man, then the animals, and then woman

http://americanhumanist.org/humanism/Some_Reasons_Why_Humanists_Reject_the_Bible

Quote: FrGamble

Again it is pretty clear, especially by those who prayerfully read and study the Scriptures what is allegory, metaphors, or opinion.

Mud is clearer than what's in the NT. My brother
has a old friend who's a minister. He says it's
very clear from scripture that Catholics are
full of crap and have a cult of idolatry. He says
that scripture is very clear on his branch of the
religion having the proper understanding. Of
this he's 100% certain.

Can you see how crazy this all looks to the rest
of us? I know I keep insulting you, but you all,
including my wife, look like a bunch of nutjobs.
Because it's CRYSTAL CLEAR to atheists like
Face and me and I think Nareed and hopefully
Dalex, that the NT says anything you damn well
want it to say, and is therefore completely useless
as anything other than a paperweight.

Ok, focusing on the first four verses of 1 Corinthians 7

Quote:

1 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”

2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.

3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband.

4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.

Verse 1 you have told me is clearly just an opinion.

What about the other 3? Also opinion?
Or is it just opinion where it contradicts other parts of the bible, so you have to select one of them as opinion?

For instance, "wife submit to your husband" by itself is in the bible alone more than it is paired with statements about the husband not having authority over his body and yielding it to his wife.

This is either a contradiction, or a case of "filling in the blanks" as you see fit in the other verses by lifting, in this case from an opinion piece, and inserting them into a lesson elsewhere.

The whole point of all this is to point out the contradictions and inconsistencies in the bible, and the editorial decisions and opinions about interpretation that are made by people centuries later to try to "fix" it or cast it to the rules of society that they now want to live by.