1 Corinthians 7:26 (KJV)
I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, [I say], that [it is] good for a man so to be.
It was only advice in a temporary situation.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
- Status
I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, [I say], that [it is] good for a man so to be.
It was only advice in a temporary situation.
Some of my anti-Paul/Missionary friends would say this is wrong as we should ONLY follow Christ and Him alone, Paul is placing himself where he doesn't belong.
My anti-Paul/Missionary friends would say this is a direct violation of the command of...
(Genesis 1:28 KJV) And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
to condemn Paul.
I never saw it that way?! Just that Paul was saying basically 'if I or anyone else preaches another gospel' ... or, to put it another way, 'follow me as long as / only if I'm following Christ'..
I could be wrong? But it seems to fit and makes sense with the rest of scripture. [Right?!]
EDIT: re-thinking my first sentence here. Of course I never saw it that way because I'm not anti-Paul.
Maybe a better wording is: I would have never came up with that ... or something to that effect.
I get what you are saying and agree, but what I pointed out is real and happening as we reply to each other's posts.I never saw it that way?! Just that Paul was saying basically 'if I or anyone else preaches another gospel' ... or, to put it another way, 'follow me as long as / only if I'm following Christ'..
I could be wrong? But it seems to fit and makes sense with the rest of scripture. [Right?!]
EDIT: re-thinking my first sentence here. Of course I never saw it that way because I'm not anti-Paul.
I understand...
Prophets were often told to do 'unusual' things to make His point...from lying on your side for a long time (Ezekiel), to marrying a whore (Hoshea) to joining sticks, buying a lot...
(YermeYahu had a tough road ahead.)
...but a 'rabbi' (teacher, high-ranking Pharisee, etc) would almost by default have been married. Maybe that explains the bias of your friends; it would've been an issue then, too. But, again, would explain why he might have given such a get. Scripture is by and large silent on those details.
PS> My point here was certainly not to condemn Shaul/Paul, or his Writings. He was (and he said so!) a consummate Torah scholar. But it was to point out the hypocrisy of those who not only "pick and choose", but have to take them out of context to do so. (I Peter 3:15-16). Worse still, turn them on their head (as has been observed above) to preach "another jesus, whom we have NOT preached." (II Cor. 11:4) Even before Nicea (325 AD) Paul was warning about what they would do. (And were arguably already up to, even then.)
Oh, yeah - and speaking of 'pick and choose'; note that the same guy who recommended celibacy, but NOT from YHVH, also said (twice, even) that an "overseer" (elder, bishop - pick yer translation) should, at minimum, be MARRIED. Hmm...
He also said younger widows should marry.
I realised something interesting the other day. The word "Holy", by definition, means "Set apart". Something dedicated solely to God is said to be "Holy".
So someone who truly takes a vow of celibacy, and decides to be 100% devoted to God and not to a spouse, they are truly "set apart" for God. That is, by definition, a "holy" calling.
It is however a calling that very few people should try to follow, only those truly called to it by the Holy Spirit, as we have all seen in the negative examples from the Catholic church what happens when people take such vows who are incapable of or who have no intention of keeping them. But we can also see historical good examples of people who have lived this life well. It is a high and narrow calling for a very select few. And Paul is right to hold it up as a good thing for that select few.
The majority of people cannot keep this, and should marry - as Paul also teaches. Marriage is not "holy", it is common, normal - just the natural way that people live whether religious or not. We should live our lives in the way that God teaches us to, but doing that is not especially "holy", just what is normal and expected. The post-Trent Catholic idea of "holy matrimony" is contradictory.
While sinful behaviour (which I won't list) is sin.
So there you have choices in this area clearly broken into the three categories which we are to discern between - the holy, the common, and the sinful.
So someone who truly takes a vow of celibacy, and decides to be 100% devoted to God and not to a spouse, they are truly "set apart" for God. That is, by definition, a "holy" calling.
It is however a calling that very few people should try to follow, only those truly called to it by the Holy Spirit, as we have all seen in the negative examples from the Catholic church what happens when people take such vows who are incapable of or who have no intention of keeping them. But we can also see historical good examples of people who have lived this life well. It is a high and narrow calling for a very select few. And Paul is right to hold it up as a good thing for that select few.
The majority of people cannot keep this, and should marry - as Paul also teaches. Marriage is not "holy", it is common, normal - just the natural way that people live whether religious or not. We should live our lives in the way that God teaches us to, but doing that is not especially "holy", just what is normal and expected. The post-Trent Catholic idea of "holy matrimony" is contradictory.
While sinful behaviour (which I won't list) is sin.
So there you have choices in this area clearly broken into the three categories which we are to discern between - the holy, the common, and the sinful.
I couldn't help but think of this thread, and this verse, of course, in the last day or so:
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...
I know a place
where people will post that, then berate others for even suggesting that 'some Scripture is more equal than others.' Then they'll move some of those "others" to the Misinformation Ghetto because it might offend those who don't really think Yah actually means what He Wrote. Especially now.
Evidently they'd rather condemn people to death than risk having them hear the Truth. And maybe be "offended."
How's that for "love"?
BTW - no, it's not TwoFacebook, although they do it with other things designed to get people killed...from hiding the truth about the Zyklon B 'vaccines' to the death penalty for gender mutilation of innocents. Nor is it Twitter. Not YouTube, either. Not that they're not all havens for hypocrisy and censorship.
No, this is a site that offers 'support' to those who have come to realize the harm that is done by suppressing OTHER parts of Scripture that the same High Priests for the Secular Whore Church don't want them to know.
Funny, isn't it. It's just those Other Verses that don't matter. Evidently some Scripture really IS more equal than others.
No wonder that Savior they don't REALLY seem to follow called 'em all "Hypocrites". They pick and choose, but try to hide it. Wasn't there something in there, too, about the "blind leading the blind"? *
Oh, BTW, the REST of that verse concludes thusly:
...so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (II Tim 3:16-17)
But only in the ghetto, mind you.
We still have a choice: Between "life and blessing, or death and cursing."
Choose life.
-----------------------------
* Matthew chapter 15. The whole first 20 verses just hit too close to home to post here...
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...
I know a place
where people will post that, then berate others for even suggesting that 'some Scripture is more equal than others.' Then they'll move some of those "others" to the Misinformation Ghetto because it might offend those who don't really think Yah actually means what He Wrote. Especially now.Evidently they'd rather condemn people to death than risk having them hear the Truth. And maybe be "offended."
How's that for "love"?
BTW - no, it's not TwoFacebook, although they do it with other things designed to get people killed...from hiding the truth about the Zyklon B 'vaccines' to the death penalty for gender mutilation of innocents. Nor is it Twitter. Not YouTube, either. Not that they're not all havens for hypocrisy and censorship.
No, this is a site that offers 'support' to those who have come to realize the harm that is done by suppressing OTHER parts of Scripture that the same High Priests for the Secular Whore Church don't want them to know.
Funny, isn't it. It's just those Other Verses that don't matter. Evidently some Scripture really IS more equal than others.
No wonder that Savior they don't REALLY seem to follow called 'em all "Hypocrites". They pick and choose, but try to hide it. Wasn't there something in there, too, about the "blind leading the blind"? *
Oh, BTW, the REST of that verse concludes thusly:
...so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (II Tim 3:16-17)
But only in the ghetto, mind you.
We still have a choice: Between "life and blessing, or death and cursing."
Choose life.
-----------------------------
* Matthew chapter 15. The whole first 20 verses just hit too close to home to post here...
Passive aggressive theology
Thank you for this conversation. I have often in my own studies had trouble with Paul. I guess my one hang up is when the words of Paul directly contradict the words of Jesus Christ. How do you reconcile both being scripture when they are black and white opposites? I was always taught to choose the words written in red over the words of Paul. But if both can legitimately be scripture how do you reconcile the two?
What would be an example of contradiction or disagreement? Often, I find it is because we either misunderstand Paul, or do not know the Torah well enough.
That's the central point. But I will contend that it's TWO things: Consistency. and Who Wrote it to begin with.
I suggest that it's almost ALWAYS a 'twisting' or mis-translation of Paul.
I often refer to Galatians as the 'most twisted Book'. After 1:9-10 where he warns twice about those 'preaching another gospel,' and let them be accursed, there's chapter 3, which gets twisted to pieces.
My personal fave, BTW, is the twisted Gal. 4:24-25, which some claim makes the "law done away with" case. My long-time response has been my "flight instructor story," and first solo:
Once the flight instructor had me pull off to the side of the runway, got out, and told me to take it around the pattern, and I took off...
"I was NO LONGER under a tutor."
The right seat was empty.
But if I was stupid enough to think that this suddenly meant the "law was done away with," and I could forget everything I had learned about the Laws of Gravity, Aerodynamics, flight, and even traffic patterns...
...I'd never have survived my first solo landing.
I would also like an example of where you believe the teachings of Paul directly contradicts the words of Jesus Christ.
I would also argue that whoever taught you to prefer the "red letter" text of Scripture over the "black letter" text of Scripture was somewhat mistaken. It was all breathed out by the Holy Spirit.
The book of Galatians is also the book that teaches me to be exceedingly careful around those who might be "false brethren secretly brought in who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage".
I'm not saying you fit that category, but I'm also not saying that you don't.
- Status