News, Couples Who Choose Not To Have Children Are 'Selfish,' Pope Says (belief, priests)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Back at that time it was alright to have more than one wife.
Back at that time women were considered chattel. That could never be acceptable to God. It was entirely the result of our ancestors' savage and barbaric ignorance . . . as most such nonsense from that era. The failure of religious teaching to evolve with our ever increasing knowledge and understanding is the major failing of religions. Retaining ancient ignorance as a sign of faith in God is a travesty and the religious leaders carry a heavy burden.
hope this helps:
"..anyone who would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me..." Matt. 11:29 and Luke 9:23
"be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect" Matt. 5:48
Back at that time women were considered chattel. That could never be acceptable to God. It was entirely the result of our ancestors' savage and barbaric ignorance . . . as most such nonsense from that era. The failure of religious teaching to evolve with our ever increasing knowledge and understanding is the major failing of religions. Retaining ancient ignorance as a sign of faith in God is a travesty and the religious leaders carry a heavy burden.
I think in most places that ancient ignorance has been thrown out, well not in the parts that accept Islam as their religion though.
the greatest commandments may indeed solve many questions BUT the interpretation and application of those has not yet (and maybe never will be) agreed on some would say that "loving" the sinner does not in any way mean accepting whatever sin they may be doing as o.k. and in no way forbids them to not tell the "sinner" that what they may be doing is indeed a sin and to stop it---Jesus didn't allow the woman caught in adultery to be stoned (as was the penalty in those days) BUT he told her bluntly to "sin no more".
apparently it was the practice of the early church to publicly "reprove" (expose) sinful acts (Ephesians 5:11) including acts of sexual immorality and to not associate with those who perform them (1 Corinthians 5:9). no doubt Christians need to show charity to all sinners (if nothing else because they should realize that we all are sinners in some way) and certainly they should not physically harm or allow to come to harm, or stop who they may regard as sinners from living their normal lives as they see fit. However, the Church also has a right to admonish, counsel, and if necessary separate from those of it's followers who no longer want to follow those counsels in how they live their Christian lives. once they leave the building so to speak those who are separated from the Church have a civil right to live safely and exercise such rights as they legitimately have. their true spiritual situation is always ultimately Gods call---just as it is with each of us in a Church or not in.
He did not forbid the stoning, He simply shamed them into not stoning her by reminding them that NO one was perfect. The crowd was so confused and worried what might happen if they stoned her, THEY chose not to stone her.
Hmmmmm..
Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.---------Matthew 5:48
And again, proving flaws in a rule by identifying "exceptions to the rule" is just circular reasoning...we either BELIEVE in what Jesus said or we do not. PERIOD.
If the two greatest commandments to LOVE GOD and LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR are ambiguous, perhaps our reading comprehension is below average and we just have difficulty with authority?
Back at that time women were considered chattel. That could never be acceptable to God. It was entirely the result of our ancestors' savage and barbaric ignorance . . . as most such nonsense from that era. The failure of religious teaching to evolve with our ever increasing knowledge and understanding is the major failing of religions. Retaining ancient ignorance as a sign of faith in God is a travesty and the religious leaders carry a heavy burden.
Serious response and not even a smile when it was typed...
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144
I think in most places that ancient ignorance has been thrown out, well not in the parts that accept Islam as their religion though.
The response is serious? REALLY, ancient ignorance REPEATED in the NEW TESTAMENT...NOT JUST FOR ISLAM ANYMORE..Possible Islam took it from the New Testament?
Which religion is really more MISOGYNISTIC?
ANy women popes or priests?
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
1 Timothy 2:12
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.
--1 Corinthians 14:34
Pope Francis is not a hippie. He is not liberal. Where did you get that idea?
There have been many that have suggested that he is not as conservative as Benedict. He's suggested that atheists can go to heaven, that homosexuality is not that big of a sin. He's kind of seen as a "people's pope". I've seen articles waxing on about how down-to-earth he is, how humble he is, etc--stuff like how as a Cardinal he would ride the bus every day! He wouldn't live in a palace, but had a simple apartment.
There have been many that have suggested that he is not as conservative as Benedict. He's suggested that atheists can go to heaven, that homosexuality is not that big of a sin. He's kind of seen as a "people's pope". I've seen articles waxing on about how down-to-earth he is, how humble he is, etc--stuff like how as a Cardinal he would ride the bus every day! He wouldn't live in a palace, but had a simple apartment.
He does not claim omniscience about entrance into heaven. How he lives makes him humble, not liberal.
It seems his papacy concentrates efforts to the poor. A liberal notion? The Pope should be down to earth.
He should know how to ride a bus.
The earlier versions were too caught up in the whole red shoes silliness.
You can reinterpret the "ought to," so that it sounds like you "want to?" And Paul, struggled with the "weaker" vessel, that of his own flesh?
I'll stick with what the Holy Spirit moved Peter to write. I'll let your fight be against Him, along with your charges against Paul. Sorry, can't wish you good luck.
I'll stick with what the Holy Spirit moved Peter to write. I'll let your fight be against Him, along with your charges against Paul. Sorry, can't wish you good luck.
Religious motives lead to solitary confinement, or self-imposed isolation.
Not that I'm aware of. Pope Joan never existed, she was only a figment of historical (hysterical?) imagination.
What I'd like to see though is a pregnant pope. Might considerabley modify a misogynistic theology.
The question is, would the offspring be taken as the return of you know who?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
