Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: aMorePerfectUnion; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; boatbums; caww; CynicalBear; daniel1212; dragonblustar; ...

The marriage bed is undefiled.

Sex between a husband and wife is good and proper.

Denying each other is what’s wrong.

Mary was already betrothed to Joseph. She was already his wife when the angel visited her.


17 posted on 03/12/2016 10:02:21 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: metmom

This again?


18 posted on 03/12/2016 10:04:14 AM PST by Mark17 (Thank God I have Jesus, there's more wealth in my soul than acres of diamonds and mountains of gold)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: metmom; Mark17

Just another unBiblical idea made dogma.


85 posted on 03/12/2016 11:59:17 AM PST by Gamecock ( Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul...Matthew 10:28)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: metmom
The marriage bed is undefiled. Sex between a husband and wife is good and proper. Denying each other is what’s wrong.

But we are told we are to look to so-called church fathers for what Scripture means, while no less than Augustine taught that marital relations "cannot be effected without the ardour of lust," Heb. 13:4 notwithstanding, and which "carnal concupiscence" is the "daughter sin, and thus "whatever comes into being by natural birth is bound by original sin" " but which carnal concupiscence is "no longer accounted sin in the regenerate"(“On Marriage and Concupiscence: Book I, cp. 27; http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15071.htm

Even more extreme is Jerome, who asserts on First Corinthians 7:

It is good, he says, for a man not to touch a woman. If it is good not to touch a woman, it is bad to touch one: for there is no opposite to goodness but badness. But if it be bad and the evil is pardoned, the reason for the concession is to prevent worse evil. (Against Jovinianus (Book I, v. 7)

And is another RC who compels Scripture to support his false doctrine:

this too we must observe, at least if we would faithfully follow the Hebrew, that while Scripture on the first, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth days relates that, having finished the works of each, “God saw that it was good,” on the second day it omitted this altogether, leaving us to understand that two is not a good number because it destroys unity, and prefigures the marriage compact. Hence it was that all the animals which Noah took into the ark by pairs were unclean. Odd numbers denote cleanness. St. Jerome, Against Jovinianus Book 1 http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.vi.vi.I.html

So much for 2 x 2 evangelism!

Then we have Tertullian, who argued that second marriage, having been freed from the first by death, "will have to be termed no other than a species of fornication,'' partly based on the reasoning that such involves desiring to marry a women out of sexual ardor. ''An Exhortation to Chastity,'' Chapter IX.—Second Marriage a Species of Adultery, Marriage Itself Impugned, as Akin to Adultery, ANF, v. 4, p. 84.]

247 posted on 03/13/2016 7:00:31 AM PDT by daniel1212 ( Turn to the Lord Jesus as a damned and destitute sinner+ trust Him to save you, then follow Him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson