Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: ealgeone
You’re taking a far broader interpretation of verse 10 than any Protestants took before 1930, my friend.

Read the verse again: “But what he did...”

He was slain for a positive act; there’s no statement asserting that his death was due to disobedience.

But see the question I put to Dartoid; you’re free to take a stab at it as well. (I hope he didn’t disappear. The Protestants seem to always disappear when I put a direct question to them.)

Were the Protestants who shunned birth control from the time of Martin Luther to the time of the 1930 Anglican Lambeth Conference also incorrect in their interpretation of this passage? (Were they too, “living under the Old Testament”?)

27 posted on 12/06/2019 6:08:11 PM PST by Captain Walker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Captain Walker
Disobedience was the problem.

Read the passage again.

The Roman Catholic lives under the false presumption that every sex related act has to have a chance at child birth.

NFP attempts to get around that.

It's contraception just under another name.

28 posted on 12/06/2019 6:12:20 PM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | 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