Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
2,500,000 members. Thank you!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-27-2008, 08:13 PM
 
980 posts, read 1,138,771 times
Reputation: 158

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by forest beekeeper View Post
Could you possibly provide a bible passage to support this theory?

When the Bible supports something it is usually very clear about it you know.

I would of thought that was obvious, for example, if pleasure was God's primary purpose for sex, then He wouldn't have made so many rules preventing the search and maximization of that pleasure
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-27-2008, 08:18 PM
 
980 posts, read 1,138,771 times
Reputation: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShanaBrown View Post
What was said by conconcurrence--not command? I look at the context. In vs 1, 2 Paul is telling them that it is good for a man not to touch a woman, but because of immoralities, let each man have his own wife and let each woman have her own husband. Then he talks about the marital duties. Later in vs. 7, he says that he wishes that all men were as hs was, however, each has his own gift from God. This means to me that he did not command that all men have a wife or that all women have a husband. Later he says that it is good for the unmarried widows to remain as he was but... if they they did not have self control, they were to marry. God bless.
I think you are misreading the passage, by implying, that's all he meant

Last edited by Chef Boyardee; 11-27-2008 at 08:31 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 08:32 PM
 
Location: God's Country
22,995 posts, read 34,245,644 times
Reputation: 31627
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShanaBrown View Post
I believe that it is an allegory about the love of God for His chosen people. God bless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlemur View Post
I believe it has a two fold meaning: one regarding the love between a man and woman and also about Jesus and His church.
I agree with you. The Song of Songs was written to affirm the sanctity of marriage and to picture God's love for His people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 08:43 PM
 
Location: New York
321 posts, read 676,780 times
Reputation: 79
So let's say I have never read the Bible and grew up in a home where Christianity was never taught or encouraged. One day I visit a friend's house and sit down next to one on his coffee table. My friend's neighbor pays him a visit and he goes to the door for, say, 24 minutes. I get bored and pick up the Bible and by divine providence, I open up to the Songs of Solomon. Would I, at first, second or the eighteenth reading ever come away with the idea that the verses are speaking about "God's love for his church?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 08:49 PM
 
Location: God's Country
22,995 posts, read 34,245,644 times
Reputation: 31627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Condemned View Post
So let's say I have never read the Bible and grew up in a home where Christianity was never taught or encouraged. One day I visit a friend's house and sit down next to one on his coffee table. My friend's neighbor pays him a visit and he goes to the door for, say, 24 minutes. I get bored and pick up the Bible and by divine providence, I open up to the Songs of Solomon. Would I, at first, second or the eighteenth reading ever come away with the idea that the verses are speaking about "God's love for his church?"
Depends on how long it takes the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth to you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 09:12 PM
 
Location: NC
14,630 posts, read 16,972,240 times
Reputation: 1497
Quote:
I think you are misreading the passage, by implying, that's all he meant
Maybe we are understanding it differently, Chef Boyardee. I am looking at the context. He could have also meant that it was not a command to stay single. I am reading as a note in my Bible that some ancient manuscripts have translated vs7 as "for I wish that all men were even as I myself am.." (single, at least at the time that he wrote this), meaning that he says by way of concession not command vs. 2 "Because of immoralities, let each man have his own wife..." He would like for all to be as he is (vs7), but if they do not have self control, it is okay for them to marry. God bless.

Last edited by ShanaBrown; 11-27-2008 at 09:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 09:17 PM
 
Location: southern california
61,290 posts, read 87,036,020 times
Reputation: 55549
its about love. its about life. its about joy in love.
well written and meant to be sung.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 09:21 PM
 
Location: New York
321 posts, read 676,780 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA View Post
Depends on how long it takes the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth to you

Would this involve going to church so the Holy Spirit can reveal it to me there through some guy in a bad suit with even worse hair?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 09:25 PM
 
Location: God's Country
22,995 posts, read 34,245,644 times
Reputation: 31627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Condemned View Post
Would this involve going to church so the Holy Spirit can reveal it to me there through some guy in a bad suit with even worse hair?
No, the Holy Spirit can do that while you are alone at friends house.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2008, 10:09 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
37,202 posts, read 60,889,160 times
Reputation: 30067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chef Boyardee View Post
I would of thought that was obvious, for example, if pleasure was God's primary purpose for sex, then He wouldn't have made so many rules preventing the search and maximization of that pleasure
God made rules restricting the search for pleasure?

Priests offering sacrifice could not marry widows, or non-Judeans.

Otherwise a man could marry any female, and as many females as he could afford.

Once married there is no restriction upon what happens. The marriage bed remains undefiled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:59 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top