Is Jesus merely a temptation to people who are lonely?

Page 6 of 8 [ 123 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

02 May 2009, 2:07 pm

sinsboldly wrote:

Paul said that when the sexual element was removed from the equasion then those traditional roles were no longer in effect and as long as no one acted in a sexual role, then they were equal.

Merle

He didn't say that, and I don't know why you think he did. I looked over the Corinthians bit and the Galatians bit, and I didn't find anything to support your theory.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

02 May 2009, 2:56 pm

Ancalagon wrote:

sinsboldly wrote:

He didn't say that, and I don't know why you think he did. I looked over the Corinthians bit and the Galatians bit, and I didn't find anything to support your theory.

how about 2000 years of where equality between people and relationships were NOT part of the Christian equasion? It seemed that spoke for itself.

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

02 May 2009, 4:03 pm

sinsboldly wrote:

how about 2000 years of where equality between people and relationships were NOT part of the Christian equasion? It seemed that spoke for itself.

Merle

Equality between persons has always been part of Christianity, from the start. You quoted one famous verse about this, and it isn't the only one.

Christians are human beings, however, and haven't always lived up to this to different degrees at different times.

I'm not quite clear on what you mean by equality between relationships. If you're referring to gay marriage, keep in mind that this concept didn't exist 2000 years ago.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

02 May 2009, 6:56 pm

Ancalagon wrote:

sinsboldly wrote:

how about 2000 years of where equality between people and relationships were NOT part of the Christian equasion? It seemed that spoke for itself.

Merle

I am not referring to gay marriage.

My whole point is that if the woman, who is a sexual being, does not have inclinations to contain her sexuality within the closely defined terms of Paul, then she is not equal in the promise of baptism.

I am not talking about equality BETWEEN relationships. I am saying that Paul's idea of what constitutes equality by baptism is only if those people remain celebate after baptism. Jews, Greeks, slaves or free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

But the moment one experiences their (Jews, Greeks, slaves or free) sexuality, they are no longer equal, but subject to gender roles.

is what I was getting at.

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

02 May 2009, 10:11 pm

sinsboldly wrote:

My whole point is that if the woman, who is a sexual being, does not have inclinations to contain her sexuality within the closely defined terms of Paul, then she is not equal in the promise of baptism.

Men are sexual beings as well, and would fall under the exact same limitations. You might not approve of the limitations, but that's a different argument.

Quote:

I am not talking about equality BETWEEN relationships. I am saying that Paul's idea of what constitutes equality by baptism is only if those people remain celebate after baptism. Jews, Greeks, slaves or free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

I don't see where you get the celibacy condition from.

Twice in this post, you grouped the Jew/Greek and slave/free pairs together and left the male/female pair separate. All three pairs are treated the same in this verse. (I don't know if you meant that to be part of your argument or if it was coincidental.)

Quote:

But the moment one experiences their (Jews, Greeks, slaves or free) sexuality, they are no longer equal, but subject to gender roles.

I don't see how gender roles are incompatible with equality.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

02 May 2009, 11:28 pm

Ancalagon wrote:

Twice in this post, you grouped the Jew/Greek and slave/free pairs together and left the male/female pair separate. All three pairs are treated the same in this verse. (I don't know if you meant that to be part of your argument or if it was coincidental.)

I figured there were male and female Jews, male and female Greeks, male and female slaves, male and female free. Don't you?

Quote:

But the moment one experiences their (Jews, Greeks, slaves or free) sexuality, they are no longer equal, but subject to gender roles.

Ancalagon wrote:

I don't see how gender roles are incompatible with equality.

oh. well, no wonder you don't get what I am talking about. :roll:

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

03 May 2009, 1:33 am

Sand wrote:

Does it strike anyone as psychologically very weird to assume something wrong with participation in conventional sexual activity?
After all, it seems to approve of species suicide and set that as a goal of some sorts.

if you control the wild thing, then you control nature.

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

03 May 2009, 1:41 am

Ancalagon wrote:

I don't see how gender roles are incompatible with equality.

Separate but equal, right? :roll:

Make me a sandwich!

_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 May 2009, 1:51 am

sinsboldly wrote:

Sand wrote:

if you control the wild thing, then you control nature.

Merle

Dropping an atomic bomb on a natural phenomenon is, of course, a form of control, but is it sane?

MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,052
Location: MO

03 May 2009, 2:26 am

Orwell wrote:

Ancalagon wrote:

I don't see how gender roles are incompatible with equality.

Separate but equal, right? :roll:

Make me a sandwich!

Correction... :shameonyou:

Make me a manwhich and while you're at it a beer!!

And on the double or I'll miss my game!!

_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan

sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

03 May 2009, 2:37 am

Sand wrote:

sinsboldly wrote:

Sand wrote:

if you control the wild thing, then you control nature.

Merle

Dropping an atomic bomb on a natural phenomenon is, of course, a form of control, but is it sane?

were are not talking about sanity, Sand. We are talking about religion.

Merle

_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 May 2009, 4:11 am

sinsboldly wrote:

Sand wrote:

sinsboldly wrote:

Sand wrote:

if you control the wild thing, then you control nature.

Merle

Dropping an atomic bomb on a natural phenomenon is, of course, a form of control, but is it sane?

were are not talking about sanity, Sand. We are talking about religion.

Merle

Your confidence in being able to separate the two is dismaying.

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

03 May 2009, 9:55 am

sinsboldly wrote:

I figured there were male and female Jews, male and female Greeks, male and female slaves, male and female free. Don't you?

Sure. I was trying to figure out what you were trying to say, and apparantly read too much into it.

Quote:

But the moment one experiences their (Jews, Greeks, slaves or free) sexuality, they are no longer equal, but subject to gender roles.

Ancalagon wrote:

I don't see how gender roles are incompatible with equality.

oh. well, no wonder you don't get what I am talking about. :roll:

Merle

We're talking about equality in value, not exact sameness. In the same verse, they talk about slaves and free people -- you don't think they might have had some slight difference in their circumstances?

Or are you really saying that Paul was wrong because he didn't advocate modern feminism in words that modern feminists would find sufficiently politically correct in the first century AD?

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 May 2009, 10:07 am

Ancalagon wrote:

sinsboldly wrote:

I figured there were male and female Jews, male and female Greeks, male and female slaves, male and female free. Don't you?

Sure. I was trying to figure out what you were trying to say, and apparantly read too much into it.

Quote:

But the moment one experiences their (Jews, Greeks, slaves or free) sexuality, they are no longer equal, but subject to gender roles.

Ancalagon wrote:

I don't see how gender roles are incompatible with equality.

oh. well, no wonder you don't get what I am talking about. :roll:

Merle

Do I take it then you are advocating current adoption of the morality of the first century AD?

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

03 May 2009, 10:13 am

Sand wrote:

Do I take it then you are advocating current adoption of the morality of the first century AD?

No. I am advocating taking things said in the first century in the context of being said in the first century.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 May 2009, 10:18 am

Ancalagon wrote:

Sand wrote:

Do I take it then you are advocating current adoption of the morality of the first century AD?

No. I am advocating taking things said in the first century in the context of being said in the first century.

Very well. that neatly throws a good deal of Bible morality out the window.

Page 6 of 8 [ 123 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

Is Jesus merely a temptation to people who are lonely? Post Reply New Topic

Is Jesus merely a temptation to people who are lonely?