Why Believe Jesus Never Had Sex?

[Kenny]

How about introducing sex into a relationship before committing to marriage? So long as one properly avoids the likelihood of conception and accepts the risks responsibly in any case. Sexual compatibility is an important dimension for a deeply fulfilling marriage.

I think that is a humanistic approach. Just what is "sexual compatibility"? As far as what it seems like, you either can do it or, for psychological or physical reasons, you can't.

Certainly, in a Christian perspective, you shouldn't but enjoy all you want when you are married. (with the person you are married to)

 

[nPeace]

Great application. I think men create problems and become "religious" when the enact positions that are not Biblical.

Interestingly enough there are two positions that mentions about being married:

1 Timothy 32 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
...
8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, etc ...11 Even so must their wives be grave, notslanderers, sober, faithful in all things. (Emphasis mine)

Neither position says that they must be single or celibate.

Right.
That translation reads funny though.

Likewise must the deacons be grave,... Even so must their wives be grave, notslanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

Of course, it's not saying the deacons should have wives, right?

 

[nPeace]

I think that is a humanistic approach. Just what is "sexual compatibility"? As far as what it seems like, you either can do it or, for psychological or physical reasons, you can't.

Certainly, in a Christian perspective, you shouldn't but enjoy all you want when you are married. (with the person you are married to)

Yup.
Drink water from the well that belongs to you only - yours.

(Proverbs 5:15-21) . . .Drink water out of your own cistern, and tricklings out of the midst of your own well. 16 Should your springs be scattered out of doors, [your] streams of water in the public squares themselves? 17 Let them prove to be for you alone, and not for strangers with you. 18 Let your water source prove to be blessed, and rejoice with the wife of your youth, 19 a lovable hind and a charming mountain goat. Let her own breasts intoxicate you at all times. With her love may you be in an ecstasy constantly. 20 So why should you, my son, be in an ecstasy with a strange woman or embrace the bosom of a foreign woman? 21 For the ways of man are in front of the eyes of Jehovah, and he is contemplating all his tracks.

(1 Corinthians 7:1-3) . . .Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is better for a man not to touch a woman; 2 but because of the prevalence of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband give to his wife her due, and let the wife also do likewise to her husband.

(Hebrews 13:4) Let marriage be honorable among all, and let the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge sexually immoral people and adulterers.

Some think that these sayings are of no value, but how valuable they prove to be.

 

[sealchan]

One would then have to ask, what is fornication, and where is the commitment, and what happened to values... Why change values that were long ago held? Where did these values originate?

The commitment? Where do you not see the commitment? Do you need a marriage contract to have commitment? Is it not something you feel and yearn for in your heart and soul? Doesnt commitment come from ones readiness to commit or does it come from ones fear to fail?

When two people decide to have sex they should have established trust and ensured that they are prepared for the consequences. That is no small task and should reasonably be confused with casual "fornication".

Values corrupt into rules...it is important to remember that human relationships are based deeply on human feeling for better or for worse. Relationships that fail to address the heart become cold comfort for all involved.

Two p

 

[sealchan]

I think that is a humanistic approach. Just what is "sexual compatibility"? As far as what it seems like, you either can do it or, for psychological or physical reasons, you can't.

Certainly, in a Christian perspective, you shouldn't but enjoy all you want when you are married. (with the person you are married to)

Many young people can't distinguish between love and sexual desire. I think that it would be deeply practical and supportive of building strong families that young people have the opportunity to learn the difference. It's not fair to either person let alone to their children for parents to become so under such commonly experienced false pretenses (that ones love is not mainly fueled by the lust of a virgin waiting for his/her first sexual release).

 

[ecco]

All I see is you interpreting the evidence to your belief.

It doesn't need to mention slavery... I don't think that was the object.

Slavery in Egypt wasn't the object? Have you really forgotten the thread conversation?

No mention -- ever -- of large numbers of Hebrew Slaves. In the entire written history of Egypt.

No mention -- ever -- of large numbers of slaves (of any brand) escaping. In all the history of Egypt.

You responded with...

In Your Humble Opinion.

British Museum & Evidence of Israelite Slavery in Egypt

You posted the link to that site to show Bob the Unbeliever he was wrong and you had the evidence to prove it.

Apparently you hoped everyone would just see your link: British-Museum--Evidence-of-Israelite-Slavery-in-Egypt and accept that there must have been Israelite slaves in Egypt. After all, the website link does mention British-Museum.

Apparently you hoped no one would actually take the time to read an article you linked. Well, I did.

I tried to let you off easy by just pointing that the author, a Jewish Rabbi, might be biased.

But you decided to press the issue. So I wrote a detailed review of the article (Post # 253) pointing out that was nothing in the article supporting there were ever Israelite slaves in Egypt.

So now you accuse me of "interpreting the evidence to (my) belief".

Then you make a comment that is ludicrous, even for you:

It doesn't need to mention slavery... I don't think that was the object.
​

• Bob says there were no slaves in Egypt
• You tried to show him wrong by posting an article that implies there were slaves in Egypt
• When shown the article does not support your contention, you try to brush it off and say that "wasn't the object".

Duh.

 

[nPeace]

The commitment? Where do you not see the commitment? Do you need a marriage contract to have commitment? Is it not something you feel and yearn for in your heart and soul? Doesnt commitment come from ones readiness to commit or does it come from ones fear to fail?

When two people decide to have sex they should have established trust and ensured that they are prepared for the consequences. That is no small task and should reasonably be confused with casual "fornication".

Values corrupt into rules...it is important to remember that human relationships are based deeply on human feeling for better or for worse. Relationships that fail to address the heart become cold comfort for all involved.

Two p

This is my personal view, and I believe my view is in harmony with the Bible.

A person can in their heart make a resolve to be committed to someone or something, but who knows whether the person is committed or not? Only that person. Am I correct?

So here you have two persons, who decides within themselves that they are committed to each other, but neither of them knows that the person is committed to them - nor does anyone else.

I think that is different to persons that make a vow of commitment. Everyone knows, and there is an obligation to keep that vow. There is also a clear sign of ownership and belonging (I don't mean like master and slave. I hope you understand).
I think it serves as a protection too.
Could you imagine if Pharaoh had learned that Sarah was Abraham's girlfriend, he would say, "Okay. Hands off." I don't think so.

When a woman says, "I am married", it's a much stronger message than, "I have a boyfriend." .... Or was that two centuries ago.

Apart from that, marriage had an origin, and if God is the one that it originated from, then it's a moral issue. He says it is. Hence, it would be the case that we are on the side of the immoral if we reject those values.

Did you read the link I posted of the girl that sold her virginity for 3 mil. Not that the cost matters, but she is not the first. This has become a trend among young college girls. Isn't that prostitution?

No matter how we sugar coat it, it is all the same.
Actually this is what the Bible says.
(1 Corinthians 6:16-18) 16 What! Do YOU not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body? For, “The two,” says he, “will be one flesh.” 17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit. 18 Flee from fornication. Every other sin that a man may commit is outside his body, but he that practices fornication is sinning against his own body.

In other words there is right and wrong.
This may not exist among unbelievers in the world - until you get on their bad side.
For one following Christ though, there is no fine line - no question.

 

[1robin]

I am not sure what you mean. How is marriage good if we cannot control your lust?

Well, look who is back. Been away myself for a while.

If we do not have the (sexual) self discipline to resist sex then it is better if we go on and get married. Are you still confused?

Yes, but that was so the Catholic Church got everything they had when they died. No wife nor children to claim anything. Business, as usual.

Ciao

- viole

The average Catholic priest has little in the way of riches. Their justification comes from scripture and Christ's example.

New International Version
But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

 

[Kenny]

Many young people can't distinguish between love and sexual desire. I think that it would be deeply practical and supportive of building strong families that young people have the opportunity to learn the difference. It's not fair to either person let alone to their children for parents to become so under such commonly experienced false pretenses (that ones love is not mainly fueled by the lust of a virgin waiting for his/her first sexual release).

With three children now married, I find that if you give the proper instruction, waiting isn't a problem.

 

[1robin]

Actually, no. I think only Paul was and was gifted with that capacity.

I never read anything about the apostles having sexual relationships of any kind.

Remember that the priests in the OT were allowed to get married and that hasn't changed.

I was talking about NT doctrines not OT practices.

Namely, Christ's example and NT scripture.

New International Version
But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.​

 

[Kenny]

Right.
That translation reads funny though.

Of course, it's not saying the deacons should have wives, right?

lol

 

[Kenny]

I never read anything about the apostles having sexual relationships of any kind.

I was talking about NT doctrines not OT practices.

1 Corinthians 9:5 King James Version (KJV)
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? (Speaking of Peter)

Quote: :Tradition has it that Peter’s wife was the daughter of Aristobulus, so that while Mark is described as “sister’s son to Barnabas” he was also brother-in-law to Peter."

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

1 Corinthians 9:5 King James Version (KJV)
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? (Speaking of Peter)

Quote: :Tradition has it that Peter’s wife was the daughter of Aristobulus, so that while Mark is described as “sister’s son to Barnabas” he was also brother-in-law to Peter."

Interesting. It's been too many years, now, since I really studied the NT, and I would have bet a small sum (no more than $10-- the amount I'm willing to lose if wrong) that there simply wasn't anything of personal note, about the majority of the Apostles.

It's kind of a personality-hole, IMO. Filling in personal details would have brought these men to life, really.

The way they are mostly depicted, kind of presses them into a flat-mold, with no real depth of character.

Oh well-- Mythic Tales are so often like that-- they get re-told so many times, all the really Interesting-with-an-I details are stripped out, little by little, with each re-telling.

Meanwhile the Magical Bits get embellished more and more to the point of ... becoming unbelievable.

 

[1robin]

1 Corinthians 9:5 King James Version (KJV)
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? (Speaking of Peter)

Quote: :Tradition has it that Peter’s wife was the daughter of Aristobulus, so that while Mark is described as “sister’s son to Barnabas” he was also brother-in-law to Peter."

This is intriguing so I dug in to it a little deeper and found this.

St. Matthew recorded in the Gospel, “Jesus entered Peter’s house and found Peter’s mother-in-law in bed with a fever. He took her by the hand and the fever left her” (Mt 8:14-15). Note that the passage does not mention St. Peter’s wife, but only his mother-in-law. The Gospels, however, make no mention of St. Peter’s wife, living or nonliving. Therefore, St. Peter’s wife must have died before Jesus called him to be an apostle.

For full disclosure, Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, III) (c. 202), said St. Peter was married, had children and witnessed his wife’s martyrdom in Rome. These terse points were recorded, citing Clement, in St. Eusebuis’ The History of the Church. Given the silence of other church fathers about St. Peter’s wife and children (who would have had some prominence in the history of the early church), and the lack of any archaeological evidence of ancient Rome, which holds the burial sites of St. Peter and so many other early martyrs, one would conclude St. Peter’s wife died before he had been called as an apostle.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/was-saint-peter-married/

Or
Did Peter Have a Wife? | Catholic Answers

 

[Hockeycowboy]

If this ... ahem ... "intelligent life" is undetectable, does not cause anything that can be recorded or noted consistently?

Interesting that you add the modifier, “consistently”.

So you are aware apparently that people, like paranormal investigators, have discovered anomalies on their EM devices, although never consistently.

But see, that’s the thing....these beings don’t want to provide definitive proof of their existence...if they did that, revealed themselves to be alive and more powerful than humans, it might scare you and other skeptics into taking the Bible more seriously and begin searching for Jehovah God, and that’s the last thing they want! (Searching for Jesus alone is fine to them.)

They’re content in keeping the world in confusion and divided, religiously and politically. They are accomplishing their purpose, for the most part. But for the little time they have left (Revelation 12:12), they won’t rid the Earth of Jehovah’s people. Individuals maybe, but not as a group. We’ll keep preaching, and enlightening others to the Devil and his demons’ (many) conspiracies. — Revelation 12:9.

You know, one of his biggest conspiracies — or should I say the most pervasive — is actually fostering the idea that when people die, they go on to another plane of existence. It’s easy to promote, because humans want to believe that. (However, the Bible says when you’re dead, you’re dead (Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalms 146:4.) But still, they promote the idea, by impostering dead loved @ seances and other times. Or giving people visions, like NDE’s.

It’s because of these experiences, that ancestor worship has become so entrenched in many cultures.

It’s hard to teach people the truth about the condition of the dead, that they are not alive somewhere, when people think they have evidence to the contrary. But we JW’s persist.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So your Satan is the more powerful deity, then? In that your god was unable to stop Satan's activities?

Okay-- that means that Satan will likely win in the end, what with Satan having all the *real* powers here.

In fact, by your description, your god is something of a wimp, and rather negligent too...

I know this wasn’t addressed to me, but I feel I should respond. Jehovah has stayed out of human affairs, due to the issues raised in the Garden of Eden. (Genesis 3:1-6) Issues dealing with sovereignty, ie., who has the right and ability to rule mankind? (The book of Job chapters 1 & 2 also reveals other were raised.)

For these issues to be settled, it required that Jehovah let men rule themselves, without His interference. (He has interfered, at times fervently, when it comes to protecting His people.) He has provided a 1500-page letter for those willing to accept it, teaching us about Himself and how we should treat each other. (Ex: Philippians 2:2-3) Even about truths regarding death, and our past, and how this world became alienated from Him.

But, for all the pain mankind has endured, and still does — and it’s been a lot, Jehovah knows that each individual only suffers 70 to 80 years (If there’s much suffering, even less time); then, they ‘RIP’, until the Resurrection comes. - John 5:28-29; Acts of the Apostles 24:15.

Take care.

 

[ecco]

nPeace. Patience is a virtue. Patience is a virtue.

That's twisted thinking. It is also twisted reasoning. You name it - it's twisted.

I call killing almost every human being genocide.
I call killing all animals because His humans didn't turn out like He, with the power of omniscience, wanted them to, sick. Just plain sick.

You believe this petty, sick genocidal entity deserves worship and praise. That's really twisted.

 

[Deeje]

When two people decide to have sex they should have established trust and ensured that they are prepared for the consequences. That is no small task and should reasonably be confused with casual "fornication".

According to the Bible, a couple can only have sex within the marriage arrangement. The word "fornication" used by Jesus in Matthew 5:32 is "porneia" which according to Strongs, means......

"illicit sexual intercourse

1. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.

It is the word from which we get "pornography" in English, so it doesn't just mean casual sex. It means any kind of sexual activity with someone to whom you are not married. It would also include pornography according to Jesus. Since a man can commit adultery in his heart. (Matthew 5:28)

Many young people can't distinguish between love and sexual desire.

This is sadly true. But not surprising. In Greek there are four words that mean "love"...but in English we only have one word and it is very inadequate.

In Greek we have storgé, philéo, agápe and éros.

storgé is the love among blood relatives and family members.

philéo is brotherly love felt for close friends and spiritual brothers.

agápe is love based on principle, IOW this is the love we can feel even for an enemy in the sense of not hating a person for any reason. We can hate the sin, but not the sinner.

éros is the love in love songs, and expressed romantically and sexually.

Interestingly the words used for love in the Greek scriptures, are missing "eros". Yet that is all today's youth understand "love" to mean.

The purer forms of love, especially "agape" (as is used in 1 Corinthians 13 when it says that "love never fails") are what the Bible speaks of...."eros" isn't even mentioned once in the NT. True love is what you feel above your navel.

 

[Kenny]

Interesting. It's been too many years, now, since I really studied the NT, and I would have bet a small sum (no more than $10-- the amount I'm willing to lose if wrong) that there simply wasn't anything of personal note, about the majority of the Apostles.

It's kind of a personality-hole, IMO. Filling in personal details would have brought these men to life, really.

The way they are mostly depicted, kind of presses them into a flat-mold, with no real depth of character.

Oh well-- Mythic Tales are so often like that-- they get re-told so many times, all the really Interesting-with-an-I details are stripped out, little by little, with each re-telling.

Meanwhile the Magical Bits get embellished more and more to the point of ... becoming unbelievable.

Actually, there is quite a bit of information about the Apostles... but the storyline is more about Jesus.

 

[Kenny]

This is intriguing so I dug in to it a little deeper and found this.

St. Matthew recorded in the Gospel, “Jesus entered Peter’s house and found Peter’s mother-in-law in bed with a fever. He took her by the hand and the fever left her” (Mt 8:14-15). Note that the passage does not mention St. Peter’s wife, but only his mother-in-law. The Gospels, however, make no mention of St. Peter’s wife, living or nonliving. Therefore, St. Peter’s wife must have died before Jesus called him to be an apostle.

For full disclosure, Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, III) (c. 202), said St. Peter was married, had children and witnessed his wife’s martyrdom in Rome. These terse points were recorded, citing Clement, in St. Eusebuis’ The History of the Church. Given the silence of other church fathers about St. Peter’s wife and children (who would have had some prominence in the history of the early church), and the lack of any archaeological evidence of ancient Rome, which holds the burial sites of St. Peter and so many other early martyrs, one would conclude St. Peter’s wife died before he had been called as an apostle.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/was-saint-peter-married/

Or
Did Peter Have a Wife? | Catholic Answers

Great job!!!!!