The richest pastors

Radiant1

Soul Probe
1 Timothy 4:1 ¶ Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

1 Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

The Catholic forbids priests to marry and abstains from meat on Ash Wednesday, Good Friday and all the Fridays of Lent.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

A bishop must be the husband of one wife.

Paul calls these practices the doctrines of demons.

These verses are in direct reference to Gnostic sects that declared marriage and meat evil and forbade it for it's followers. Catholicism, on the contrary, has made marriage a sacrament and does not force celibacy on anyone.

St. Paul himself was celibate and said in 1 Corinthians 7 (emphasis mine): 7Indeed, I wish everyone to be as I am, but each has a particular gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 Now to the unmarried and to widows, I say: it is a good thing for them to remain as they are, as I do, 9but if they cannot exercise self-control they should marry, for it is better to marry than to be on fire. 10 To the married, however, I give this instruction (not I, but the Lord): A wife should not separate from her husband 11—and if she does separate she must either remain single or become reconciled to her husband—and a husband should not divorce his wife. 12To the rest I say (not the Lord): if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she is willing to go on living with him, he should not divorce her; 13and if any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he is willing to go on living with her, she should not divorce her husband. 14For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through the brother. Otherwise your children would be unclean, whereas in fact they are holy. 15If the unbeliever separates, however, let him separate. The brother or sister is not bound in such cases; God has called you to peace. 16For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband; or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?

Jesus Himself said in Matthew 19 (emphasis mine):1 When Jesus finished these words, he left Galilee and went to the district of Judea across the Jordan. 2Great crowds followed him, and he cured them there. 3 Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?” 4 He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.” 7 They said to him, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]?” 8He said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” 10[His] disciples said to him, “If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” 11He answered, “Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted. 12Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it.”

If neither Jesus or Paul condemned celibacy and actually practiced it, then you probably shouldn't either. But hey, if your bigotry leads you to cherry pick scripture and believe things contrary to Jesus, then there isn't much we can say to you.
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
These verses are in direct reference to Gnostic sects that declared marriage and meat evil and forbade it for it's followers. Catholicism, on the contrary, has made marriage a sacrament and does not force celibacy on anyone.

Does that mean that Catholic priests can now marry?

Catholicism was influenced by Gnosticism as well as Calvinists:

"The Gnostic Origins of Roman Catholicism" Paperback – November 1, 2013

by Ken Johnson (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Gnostic-Origi...782196&sr=8-2&keywords=gnosticism+catholicism

I believe you got it from the Gnostics.
 

cheezgrits

Thought pirate
Do you have an original thought? Can you respond to ANYTHING without cut and paste quotes?

If you were such a scholar, you wouldn't have to rely on the internet as your credibility.
 

Radiant1

Soul Probe
Does that mean that Catholic priests can now marry?

It depends on if they're already married or not. Did you know that there were married priests? Celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma. Its a calling by God. There is no forcing of anything.

So, are you still denying the words of Jesus about celibacy, or are you still clinging to falsehoods because it suits a hateful agenda that you've been taught?

Catholicism was influenced by Gnosticism as well as Calvinists:

"The Gnostic Origins of Roman Catholicism" Paperback – November 1, 2013

by Ken Johnson (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Gnostic-Origi...782196&sr=8-2&keywords=gnosticism+catholicism

I believe you got it from the Gnostics.

:lmao:

At the risk of getting personal, we got it from Jesus, you dumb ass.

Have you even read that book or did you just Google something that sounded good to you? If it's on the internet it must be true, right? I'm quite comfortable when I say that Ken Johnson is a moron and you're even more of a moron if you believe him over and above the scripture that was clearly laid out for you.

I think it's become obvious that youre getting in way over your head here.
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
Do you have an original thought? Can you respond to ANYTHING without cut and paste quotes?

If you were such a scholar, you wouldn't have to rely on the internet as your credibility.

No Cheezgrits,

I already own the E-book. The link is for your reference.

"According to the Gnostic Gospel of Philip and Gospel of the Egyptians, there were five sacraments, or seas, which are essentially necessary for salvation or ascention into Christhood."

"According to the church fathers, the Gnostic Marcus was the first to teach the heresy of transsubstantiation. [ix] Others taught forms of sacramentalism which became known as spiritual baptisms, spiritual marriage, and last rites. [x]

"Valentinus said his followers were guaranteed to be saved, but others still had a chance to be saved if they performed enough good works. [xi]"

"The Gnostic Basilides taught that after baptism, God forgave involuntary sins but followers must pay for all voluntary sins in order to be purged from them. This paved the way for concepts like penance, purgatory, and cardinal and venial sins. [xii]"

-The Gnostic Origins of Roman Catholicism, page 15 of 125 / 13%

It sounds a lot like the Catholic church to me.
 

Amused_despair

New Member
No Cheezgrits,

I already own the E-book. The link is for your reference.

"According to the Gnostic Gospel of Philip and Gospel of the Egyptians, there were five sacraments, or seas, which are essentially necessary for salvation or ascention into Christhood."

"According to the church fathers, the Gnostic Marcus was the first to teach the heresy of transsubstantiation. [ix] Others taught forms of sacramentalism which became known as spiritual baptisms, spiritual marriage, and last rites. [x]

"Valentinus said his followers were guaranteed to be saved, but others still had a chance to be saved if they performed enough good works. [xi]"

"The Gnostic Basilides taught that after baptism, God forgave involuntary sins but followers must pay for all voluntary sins in order to be purged from them. This paved the way for concepts like penance, purgatory, and cardinal and venial sins. [xii]"

-The Gnostic Origins of Roman Catholicism, page 15 of 125 / 13%

It sounds a lot like the Catholic church to me.

So, Chuckt, if celibacy is such a bad thing, what was the name of Paul's wife? Answer the question. In case you have trouble Googling it, Radiant1 already showed you what Paul said about celibacy. But go ahead and twist his words or simply ignore them, you do the same for the words of Jesus, so Paul's should not be a problem for you.
 

Radiant1

Soul Probe
No Cheezgrits,

I already own the E-book. The link is for your reference.

"According to the Gnostic Gospel of Philip and Gospel of the Egyptians, there were five sacraments, or seas, which are essentially necessary for salvation or ascention into Christhood."

"According to the church fathers, the Gnostic Marcus was the first to teach the heresy of transsubstantiation. [ix] Others taught forms of sacramentalism which became known as spiritual baptisms, spiritual marriage, and last rites. [x]

"Valentinus said his followers were guaranteed to be saved, but others still had a chance to be saved if they performed enough good works. [xi]"

""The Gnostic Basilides taught that after baptism, God forgave involuntary sins but followers must pay for all voluntary sins in order to be purged from them. This paved the way for concepts like penance, purgatory, and cardinal and venial sins. [xii]"

-The Gnostic Origins of Roman Catholicism, page 15 of 125 / 13%

It sounds a lot like the Catholic church to me.

First, not all that the Gnostics taught was heresy, but some of it certainly was (just like we think of Protestants quite frankly). If the Catholic Church was so heavily influenced by Gnosticism, then the Church would have included the Gnostic Gospels in that bible you hold so dear and wouldn't have spent so much time combating it. Catholicism stresses unity and that God become man and in so doing so became a part of His creation. Gnostics believed in duality in which God would NEVER sully Himself to become a part of His creation. This is a HUGE fundamental difference.

Second, do you think John the Baptist was Gnostic too? After all, he did perform a sacrament (and so do some of your Protestant brethren). Purification and initiation was a part of Judaism (mikveh and bris for examples). If you want to say that the Catholics got that from the Gnostics then so be it, but if so, I'm still going to call you a dumb ass. the majority of Gnostics didn't believe sacraments were even necessary so all of this is a huge grasp. In fact, now that I think about it, an anti-sacramental stance is far more Gnostic than a sacramental one is. You might want to think about that.

Third, regarding Church Fathers and transubstantiation, you're going to have to cite your sources sources please and thank you. Marcus believed the Holy Spirit put a drop of "her" blood in the wine. That's not even how Catholics understand transubstantiation. And I'm not sure that what Marcus believed could even be called transubstantiation except by Protestants that are looking for straw men.

Fourth, it should be obvious that if Catholics don't believe that salvation is guaranteed, then it's not related to the Gnostic belief that it is. That sounds more like your doctrine, once saved always saved or assurance of salvation, doesn't it.

Fifth, as for Basilides, that's pure convenient opinion from the author with no substantiation so it's not even worthy of addressing.

It's good for you to be wary of Gnosticism, chuckt, but please do direct it honestly and appropriately. Since you're studying these things and of course you want a good rounded education on it, you might also want to also read: http://www.amazon.com/Against-Protestant-Gnostics-Philip-Lee/dp/0195084365 The author has a great grasp on Gnosticism and it's influences throughout the ages and he's a Protestant himself (an honest one) so you should have no qualms about polemic or agenda.

protty gnostics.jpg
 
C

Chuckt

Guest
So, Chuckt, if celibacy is such a bad thing, what was the name of Paul's wife? Answer the question. In case you have trouble Googling it, Radiant1 already showed you what Paul said about celibacy. But go ahead and twist his words or simply ignore them, you do the same for the words of Jesus, so Paul's should not be a problem for you.

You had to be married to be a member of the Sanhedrin and some scholars say that Paul was divorced because his wife left him when he found Jesus.
Scholars are divided on the issue. The Bible does not specifically say he was married. A lot of people don't really know.

I am of the opinion he was once married:

King James Bible
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/3-5.htm

If you are a priest who is not married then you would be a hypocrite to tell the church how to be a father, how to raise children, etc.
 

Amused_despair

New Member
You had to be married to be a member of the Sanhedrin and some scholars say that Paul was divorced because his wife left him when he found Jesus.
Scholars are divided on the issue. The Bible does not specifically say he was married. A lot of people don't really know.

I am of the opinion he was once married:

King James Bible
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/3-5.htm

If you are a priest who is not married then you would be a hypocrite to tell the church how to be a father, how to raise children, etc.

Paul says himself that he is celibate. So was Paul a hypocrite?

What priest TELLS someone how to live? They provide counsel, advice, guidance. Are you saying a man can not give advice or counsel to a woman since he is a man and not a woman? So men should not be involved in the abortion debate whatsoever? You agree with the pro-Choice crowd? Good to know. The priest can tell the father seeking guidance what the Bible says to him. Provide insight into how the father's problems may be reflected in the Bible and Church teachings. The priest can also provide a fresh perspective not constrained by preconceived notions, a fresh look, so to speak. To say that a celibate man who seeks to provide guidance to a married man is a hypocrite is once more proof on how delusional you are and how you actively seek to misguide others.
 

Radiant1

Soul Probe
You had to be married to be a member of the Sanhedrin and some scholars say that Paul was divorced because his wife left him when he found Jesus.
Scholars are divided on the issue. The Bible does not specifically say he was married. A lot of people don't really know.

I am of the opinion he was once married:

The bible clearly says he was celibate, but I suppose you're entitled to take big extra-biblical guesses on whether he was previously married or not. You have no scriptural basis to believe Paul was married. For a so-called bible Christian you sure have no problem going beyond it, and that's ok but you should at least own it.

King James Bible
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/3-5.htm

If you are a priest who is not married then you would be a hypocrite to tell the church how to be a father, how to raise children, etc.

A priest runs an entire parish family, which would include far more experience than running a smaller household family. The verse you quoted above from 1Timothy doesn't say a man has to be married to rule a household. On the contrary, it only says one must know how to rule it. Considering the extended families of Paul's time it wouldn't be unlikely for an unmarried brother or uncle to run a household and become the patriarch of the family if the father (or grandfather, or great-grandfather etc) was no longer present.

Once again you are performing eisegesis on the scriptures as opposed to exegesis due to your own misguided (and sometimes deluded) preconceptions. You're putting into it what you want to hear instead of taking from it what it says. But hey, according to your own doctrine you're entitled to interpret it anyway you want, right? Heh.
 
Top