(02-08-2013 10:08 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 09:01 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  They were vilified because they supposed to be celebate (which is against nature and the will of their own God, who said be fruitful and multiply).

The Apostle Paul was celibate.

No one would submit that there are not those in the faith that are perfectly capable of being celibate and adhering to the Catholic tenets. It is quite obvious though that a small number can not.

(02-08-2013 10:20 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 10:08 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 09:01 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  They were vilified because they supposed to be celebate (which is against nature and the will of their own God, who said be fruitful and multiply).

The Apostle Paul was celibate.

No one would submit that there are not those in the faith that are perfectly capable of being celibate and adhering to the Catholic tenets. It is quite obvious though that a small number can not.

Well, bitcruncher was submitting just that. He went so far as to say being celibate was against the will of God. It's not.

I agree that if you have not been given that gift, as Paul said, you should not attempt to be.

(02-08-2013 10:29 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 10:20 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 10:08 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 09:01 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  They were vilified because they supposed to be celebate (which is against nature and the will of their own God, who said be fruitful and multiply).

The Apostle Paul was celibate.

No one would submit that there are not those in the faith that are perfectly capable of being celibate and adhering to the Catholic tenets. It is quite obvious though that a small number can not.

Well, bitcruncher was submitting just that. He went so far as to say being celibate was against the will of God. It's not.

I agree that if you have not been given that gift, as Paul said, you should not attempt to be.

God commanded man to be fruitful and multiply (if you believe the Bible to be the Word of God, which I don't) in the Book of Genesis. Or do you not believe in the Old Testament?

Celibacy is against the Will of God, as well as being contrary to human nature. The natural order of things is that we are put here to create more people, and priests are no exception. Almost every church recognizes this fact, except Catholics...

I see a lot of people bitching about the BSA being "forced" to do this, but who is forcing them? The government is not involved, it's their own board of directors. And the current proposal is simply to allow local troops to decide on their own. No one from super conservative christian bigot baptist church troop 8845 is going to be forced to allow anyone in they don't want to, but why should a troop from a less backasswards state be forced to exclude a group from their community they don't want to?

(02-08-2013 11:20 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  God commanded man to be fruitful and multiply (if you believe the Bible to be the Word of God, which I don't) in the Book of Genesis. Or do you not believe in the Old Testament?

I firmly believe the Old Testament. Where you make your mistake is to assume that God's command is all encompassing and without exception. Jesus was never married. Sort of difficult to believe Jesus was outside the will of God.

Quote:Celibacy is against the Will of God,

No, it isn't.

Quote:7 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. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

8 Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

If it were against the will of God to not be married then Paul would not have stated it was fine for someone to remain unmarried, if they had the gift as he did.

It's clear it's God's will for most to be married, but clearly not all. Ergo celibacy in and of itself cannot be contrary to the will of God as he clearly called certain people to remain so. Paul for example. It's also illogical to assume people who don't multiply are outside the will of God. Especially given some biologically can't procreate.

And finally we have the words of Jesus himself.

Quote:8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

(02-08-2013 10:08 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 09:01 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  They were vilified because they supposed to be celebate (which is against nature and the will of their own God, who said be fruitful and multiply).

The Apostle Paul was celibate.

If only your dad was.

Ninerfan1, Jesus was also very friendly with a prostitute. Or have you forgotten about Mary Magdalene? How much of his relationship with her was put in the Bible? I'd be willing to bet it was only the part that made him look good in the eyes of his followers, and not the ENTIRE truth...

(02-08-2013 12:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Ninerfan1, Jesus was also very friendly with a prostitute. Or have you forgotten about Mary Magdalene? How much of his relationship with her was put in the Bible? I'd be willing to bet it was only the part that made him look good in the eyes of his followers, and not the ENTIRE truth...

Wow...reach much?

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

(02-08-2013 12:32 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Ninerfan1, Jesus was also very friendly with a prostitute. Or have you forgotten about Mary Magdalene? How much of his relationship with her was put in the Bible? I'd be willing to bet it was only the part that made him look good in the eyes of his followers, and not the ENTIRE truth...

Wow...reach much?

Are you always this gullible?

(02-08-2013 12:34 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:32 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Ninerfan1, Jesus was also very friendly with a prostitute. Or have you forgotten about Mary Magdalene? How much of his relationship with her was put in the Bible? I'd be willing to bet it was only the part that made him look good in the eyes of his followers, and not the ENTIRE truth...

Wow...reach much?

Are you always this gullible?

Are you? "Tom Hanks said it so it must be true"......gotcha.

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

(02-08-2013 12:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Ninerfan1, Jesus was also very friendly with a prostitute. Or have you forgotten about Mary Magdalene?

There is zero, nada, zip, zero in scripture to even imply Jesus and Mary were lovers. She was a follower of his, like other women were. I realize the Last Temptation of Christ may have been very real to you, but it's not based on anything that's backed up by evidence.

Quote:How much of his relationship with her was put in the Bible? I'd be willing to bet it was only the part that made him look good in the eyes of his followers, and not the ENTIRE truth...

Well, you can bet and have conjecture all you want. You're trying to argue something in the bible to back up your claim, so if you want to defend your claim you have to rely on, you know, what's actually written. You can't have one standard of evidence for your claim and a different one for your counter points.

I listed actual scripture that definitively proves your assertion that celibacy is against the will of God is not true. How bout you address what I said instead of diverting to something else that employs different rules of evidence and discssion?

(02-08-2013 12:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Ninerfan1, Jesus was also very friendly with a prostitute. Or have you forgotten about Mary Magdalene?

There is zero, nada, zip, zero in scripture to even imply Jesus and Mary were lovers. She was a follower of his, like other women were. I realize the Last Temptation of Christ may have been very real to you, but it's not based on anything that's backed up by evidence.

Unlike you, I know the Bible was written over thousands of years, and many of the books of the New Testament were written hundreds of years after the death of Jesus. It's been edited and translated many times, and no longer holds any relevance to the words originally written...

(02-08-2013 12:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:29 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  How much of his relationship with her was put in the Bible? I'd be willing to bet it was only the part that made him look good in the eyes of his followers, and not the ENTIRE truth...

Well, you can bet and have conjecture all you want. You're trying to argue something in the bible to back up your claim, so if you want to defend your claim you have to rely on, you know, what's actually written. You can't have one standard of evidence for your claim and a different one for your counter points.

I listed actual scripture that definitively proves your assertion that celibacy is against the will of God is not true. How bout you address what I said instead of diverting to something else that employs different rules of evidence and discssion?

You can quote scripture until you're blue in the face. It's a bunch of bogus crap IMO. It's certainly not the Word of God, written by Devine Inspiration. It's words from men with an agenda...

I've had better arguments from family members, a couple of whom are ministers. IMO none of it holds water...

I agree with George Carlin. Religion is BS...

Wow...wrong again. The Bible is more than 99.99% accurate when compared to the oldest surviving texts. This isn't even up for debate. Even most atheists acknowledge the historical accuracy and significance of the Bible.

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

(02-08-2013 12:54 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Wow...wrong again. The Bible is more than 99.99% accurate when compared to the oldest surviving texts. This isn't even up for debate. Even most atheists acknowledge the historical accuracy and significance of the Bible.

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

Thump that Bible IMATY!

(02-08-2013 12:54 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Wow...wrong again. The Bible is more than 99.99% accurate when compared to the oldest surviving texts. This isn't even up for debate. Even most atheists acknowledge the historical accuracy and significance of the Bible.

And I'm supposed to take your word for this? It's like the rest of your argument - bull...

(02-08-2013 12:50 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Unlike you, I know the Bible was written over thousands of years, and many of the books of the New Testament were written hundreds of years after the death of Jesus.

I've forgotten more about scripture than you know bub. If you want to get into an apologetics discussion I'm happy to oblige.

Quote:It's been edited and translated many times, and no longer holds any relevance to the words originally written..

Based on the rules of academia, from a strictly historical text standpoint, the bible is the most accurate of any books. More accurate than the Iliad, which is next on the list. The time between copies, the number of differences in variant texts etc. bare this out.

And again, your little tantrum is a cute diversion from the original discussion. My guess is you can't defend your point anymore so you've gone into d0*che mode. As is your custom.

Quote:I've had better arguments from family members, a couple of whom are ministers. IMO none of it holds water...

Interesting that their arguments are so much better than mine yet you've taken to not addressing mine and being a jerk. That's far more telling than anything you type while pretending you're so intellectually superior.

Niner, does your knowledge of how the Bible works exceed you knowledge of how polls work?



And what does the Bible say about those who boastfully claim to be superior in knowledge than others?

All I have to do is read the King James Version, and then look at new Bibles being released today. They aren't the same book...

(02-08-2013 12:59 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:54 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Wow...wrong again. The Bible is more than 99.99% accurate when compared to the oldest surviving texts. This isn't even up for debate. Even most atheists acknowledge the historical accuracy and significance of the Bible.

And I'm supposed to take your word for this? It's like the rest of your argument - bull...

No, use the fancy Google machine and look for yourself.

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

(02-08-2013 12:59 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(02-08-2013 12:54 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Wow...wrong again. The Bible is more than 99.99% accurate when compared to the oldest surviving texts. This isn't even up for debate. Even most atheists acknowledge the historical accuracy and significance of the Bible.

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

Thump that Bible IMATY!

You again reveal yourself to be a complete waste of life. Please explain which doctrine I was advocating. After all bible thumping is more than stating historical facts. Be specific.

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.