Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Campion, sitetest
It says "Must be ... the husband of one wife". You are adding words into the Scripture in order to match your beliefs. If church leaders were required to be celibate single men, why would it say "must be...the husband of one wife"? It doesn't say "should be". It doesn't say "Optionally.". "Must be"

The Catholic Church allowed married priests at one time. They based that on Scripture. Now you reject that Scripture. If the Church begins ordaining married men, will you drop your opposition to married priests? I think you need to consider this since a new Pope is just around the corner.

50 posted on 06/14/2002 6:33:34 PM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: AppyPappy
Dear AppyPappy,

Just for you, I'll repeat it only once more. You are now misquoting Scriptures. It isn't "must be the husband of one wife", but "must be the husband of but one wife".

As the overwhelming majority of Christians believe this to be an upper limit on the number of wives (whether in total or concurrently - depends on who you ask), and not a requirement to be married, your assertion that your interpretation is correct is not only, at this point, unsupported, but also largely unbelieved by professed Christians throughout the world.

A bare assertion isn't even an argument. And even if you were able to muster an argument for your assertion, you still haven't told me the source of your peculiar authority to interpret Scripture.

Thanks for all your efforts,

sitetest

55 posted on 06/14/2002 7:24:28 PM PDT by sitetest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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