A vow of celibacy

[Enlightenedtruth]

I wasn't sure if this was the right thread, but theology is about belief's (but I'm not Catholic). The story I will tell was not something I did witness; but I trust the one who gave me this information.

There was a Cardinal who did covet the wife of an underling (clerk or secretary). He could not kill the man, and take the wife; because the man came from a wealthy and powerful family. He could not send the man away, and keep the wife for himself. So this Cardinal decided to speak to the Pope; he told him that God Himself had spoken to him during his Prayers and told him that clergy who served God must be pure of body, heart and mind; and all clergy below the rank of Cardinal needed to immediately take a vow of celibacy. For those who were married, they must abandon their wives and stop all sexual activity. The Cardinal did have that mans wife for a brief time; until he saw another woman to lust after.

For more than fifteen hundred years, thousands of men (monks) and women (nuns) have disobeyed God's Command to "be fruitful"; all because a single man did covet the wife of another, and claimed that "God did say it to him". Father does not contradict Himself, He does not mislead; He does however expect all of us to obey Him, and to seek the truth.

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

The morale of this story.......

How one "mere human being" can twist "a Faith" (Catholic's) to meet his own ends, without any regard to Father's (God's) Word; such as it is. Father did Command "be fruitful" for a reason; we all did need to be born onto this earth.

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

Some might say....that is not what was written down in history. But you have to remember, the average person could not read or write back then.....history was actually written by the rich and powerful; what they wanted the people to know didn't always have anything to do with the truth. Of course, I doubt even the Pope back then had any idea what the truth was on this subject.

 

[Alfred Persson]

I wasn't sure if this was the right thread, but theology is about belief's (but I'm not Catholic). The story I will tell was not something I did witness; but I trust the one who gave me this information.

There was a Cardinal who did covet the wife of an underling (clerk or secretary). He could not kill the man, and take the wife; because the man came from a wealthy and powerful family. He could not send the man away, and keep the wife for himself. So this Cardinal decided to speak to the Pope; he told him that God Himself had spoken to him during his Prayers and told him that clergy who served God must be pure of body, heart and mind; and all clergy below the rank of Cardinal needed to immediately take a vow of celibacy. For those who were married, they must abandon their wives and stop all sexual activity. The Cardinal did have that mans wife for a brief time; until he saw another woman to lust after.

For more than fifteen hundred years, thousands of men (monks) and women (nuns) have disobeyed God's Command to "be fruitful"; all because a single man did covet the wife of another, and claimed that "God did say it to him". Father does not contradict Himself, He does not mislead; He does however expect all of us to obey Him, and to seek the truth.

To me that "story" appears to be baseless smear, a fabrication. What is the Cardinal's name, or Pope? When did it happen, where and who was the witness that recorded it?

Paul recommended celibacy for those who could do it, otherwise people should get married and not burn with passion:

7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am;
9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. (1 Cor. 7:7-9 NKJ)

A wise man will never vow, especially about celibacy:

4 When you make a vow to God, do not delay to pay it; For He has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you have vowed--
5 Better not to vow than to vow and not pay.
6 Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin, nor say before the messenger of God that it was an error. Why should God be angry at your excuse and destroy the work of your hands? (Eccl. 5:4-6 NKJ)

21 "When you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay to pay it; for the LORD your God will surely require it of you, and it would be sin to you.
22 "But if you abstain from vowing, it shall not be sin to you. (Deut. 23:21-22 NKJ)

If celibacy is thought doable, then do it without vowing, just in case the "right woman" comes along, and you cannot remain celibate: "no longer have the gift" as Paul put it.

33 "Again you have heard that it was said to those of old,`You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.'
34 "But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne;
35 "nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.
36 "Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.
37 "But let your`Yes' be`Yes,' and your`No,'`No.' For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.
38 "You have heard that it was said,`An eye for (Matt. 5:33-38 NKJ)

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

To me that "story" appears to be baseless smear, a fabrication. What is the Cardinal's name, or Pope? When did it happen, where and who was the witness that recorded it?

I do apologize if you feel that way. And I am sorry I cannot prove how the Bible was assembled; and then how monks (Roman) would spend hours every day printing (copying) the Scriptures that were given to them in what was the first mass production of the Bible. I also cannot prove how the Roman soldiers would slaughter entire families, if the parents did not bend knee fast enough to those Roman priest in accepting their version of the "one true God".

God did Command, "be fruitful" right off the bat in Genesis. For Paul, or any other man to contradict His Command is plain nonsense.

For the witness who did record it; believe it or not all things are recorded in Heaven. Father (God) and all who do command in His name; have access to all that has been recorded, from the very beginning.

 

[Alfred Persson]

I do apologize if you feel that way. And I am sorry I cannot prove how the Bible was assembled; and then how monks (Roman) would spend hours every day printing (copying) the Scriptures that were given to them in what was the first mass production of the Bible. I also cannot prove how the Roman soldiers would slaughter entire families, if the parents did not bend knee fast enough to those Roman priest in accepting their version of the "one true God".

God did Command, "be fruitful" right off the bat in Genesis. For Paul, or any other man to contradict His Command is plain nonsense.

For the witness who did record it; believe it or not all things are recorded in Heaven. Father (God) and all who do command in His name; have access to all that has been recorded, from the very beginning.

Thought so. Baseless smear.

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

Thought so. Baseless smear.

I do apologize if you are offended; and you can consider it a smear if that is what you need to do.

But I do have a question; Christ says the Scriptures cannot be broken John 10:35. God said be fruitful and multiply Genesis 1:22. How can Paul, or any other man; change what God said?

 

[miamited]

Hi Enlightenedtruth

While I agree that the story may not be accurate in describing the idea of celibacy for the pastors and teachers, we do all know that Peter had a wife. I find it amazing that there is a branch of the faith that claims Peter to be the beginning of their faith, and then go and make rules that would condemn him because he was married.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Alfred Persson]

I do apologize if you are offended; and you can consider it a smear if that is what you need to do.

But I do have a question; Christ says the Scriptures cannot be broken John 10:35. God said be fruitful and multiply Genesis 1:22. How can Paul, or any other man; change what God said?

Creation changed. Not all can multiply. This isn't the perfect world God created, its a fallen world where death and birth defects etc exist. God permits we make a choice, according to Jesus our Teacher:

9 "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery."
10 His disciples said to Him, "If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry."
11 But He said to them, "All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:
12 "For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it."
(Matt. 19:9-12 NKJ)

 

[miamited]

Hi Alfred Persson

and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it."
(Matt. 19:9-12 NKJ)

Just a point of order, that is saying that for the individual that is ok with celibacy, then they should practice celibacy. What the RCC teaches is that those who want to be their leaders 'have to' be celibate. The telling that someone must be celibate is not in God's word.

However, there are times that God does ask that His people refrain from sexual relations for a short time.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

Creation changed. Not all can multiply. This isn't the perfect world God created, its a fallen world where death and birth defects etc exist. God permits we make a choice, according to Jesus our Teacher:

9 "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery."
10 His disciples said to Him, "If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry."
11 But He said to them, "All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:
12 "For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it."
(Matt. 19:9-12 NKJ)

That didn't actually answer my question; does Paul or any other man have the Authority to change God's Word?

I actually feel sorry for those poor men (and women). All that we know and see, is God's Creation; and there is a Purpose for all things. Do you really believe God would allow anyone (or thing) to change His Creation; if such did not serve His Purpose. It is the "choices" men have made here on this earth which has led us to this point; but it all serves God's Purpose in what He plans to do with the lot of us.

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

However, there are times that God does ask that His people refrain from sexual relations for a short time.

God does not "ask", He doth Command. There is a reason God did say "be fruitful".

I am curious, where in the Bible does it state that men should refrain from such relations for a short time? I do not recall ever reading that, of course I haven't read every version of the Bible either.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Hi Alfred Persson

Just a point of order, that is saying that for the individual that is ok with celibacy, then they should practice celibacy. What the RCC teaches is that those who want to be their leaders 'have to' be celibate. The telling that someone must be celibate is not in God's word.

However, there are times that God does ask that His people refrain from sexual relations for a short time.

God bless,
Ted

I'm not Roman Catholic, the papacy is unscriptural. There's a lot of legit scriptural reasons to reject Roman Catholicism, without resorting to baseless smear.

I never said one must be celibate. Its odd you see that in my responses, or see me agreeing with Catholics requiring it of others. My responses gave the scriptural view, against Roman Catholic dogma.

Try reading them again.

 

[Alfred Persson]

That didn't actually answer my question; does Paul or any other man have the Authority to change God's Word?

I actually feel sorry for those poor men (and women). All that we know and see, is God's Creation; and there is a Purpose for all things. Do you really believe God would allow anyone (or thing) to change His Creation; if such did not serve His Purpose. It is the "choices" men have made here on this earth which has led us to this point; but it all serves God's Purpose in what He plans to do with the lot of us.

I reject your premise, that Paul or Jesus changed God's Word. Perhaps you need to review who Jesus is, the prophet after Moses everyone is commanded to heed. The "change" to Christ from law, is foretold in the OT.

 

[miamited]

Hi Enlightenedtruth

God does not "ask", He doth Command. There is a reason God did say "be fruitful".

I'm fine with your claim that in the few times that God did tell His people to abstain from sexual relations, that it was a command.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

I reject your premise, that Paul or Jesus changed God's Word. Perhaps you need to review who Jesus is, the prophet after Moses everyone is commanded to heed. The "change" to Christ from law, is foretold in the OT.

Could you give me a Scripture to that effect, please; the "change" from God's Law. Christ did say clearly in John 10:35 that the Scriptures could not be broken. And while I cannot recall the passage, I'm pretty sure Christ did at one point state that he was not here to "break" the law. But God's Law; and the law men added to that Torah are not quite the same thing.

The point of my OP was not to smear the Catholic's or their "belief's"; it was about how one man can claim to speak for God, to suit his own desire (which had nothing to do with God); and change so many people's lives for the worse. I believe in theology, such a thing might be considered "false prophecy"; teaching falsely about God, belief's that are "man based".

There were 12 Disciples; the Blessing to Awaken the mind gave each of them the ability to read, write and speak every language known to man. Each were given the instruction to write a testament as to what they did witness; and what they were taught. None of them would have written anything to contradict God's Law or Will; it would serve no Purpose for God to confuse or mislead us.

Why would God allow "men" to mislead any of us by contradicting His Word here on this earth, the answer to that is a bit complicated; but I might have a simple explanation that would suffice. Satan mislead a whole lot of Angel's in his uprising; and a lot of them made no attempt to discern the truth for themselves, they just accepted his "honeyed words" as being true. And Satan did twist Father's (God's) Word to his own narrative then.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Could you give me a Scripture to that effect, please; the "change" from God's Law. Christ did say clearly in John 10:35 that the Scriptures could not be broken. And while I cannot recall the passage, I'm pretty sure Christ did at one point state that he was not here to "break" the law. But God's Law; and the law men added to that Torah are not quite the same thing.

The point of my OP was not to smear the Catholic's or their "belief's"; it was about how one man can claim to speak for God, to suit his own desire (which had nothing to do with God); and change so many people's lives for the worse. I believe in theology, such a thing might be considered "false prophecy"; teaching falsely about God, belief's that are "man based".

There were 12 Disciples; the Blessing to Awaken the mind gave each of them the ability to read, write and speak every language known to man. Each were given the instruction to write a testament as to what they did witness; and what they were taught. None of them would have written anything to contradict God's Law or Will; it would serve no Purpose for God to confuse or mislead us.

Why would God allow "men" to mislead any of us by contradicting His Word here on this earth, the answer to that is a bit complicated; but I might have a simple explanation that would suffice. Satan mislead a whole lot of Angel's in his uprising; and a lot of them made no attempt to discern the truth for themselves, they just accepted his "honeyed words" as being true. And Satan did twist Father's (God's) Word to his own narrative then.

15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear,
16 "according to all you desired of the LORD your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying,`Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, nor let me see this great fire anymore, lest I die.'
17 "And the LORD said to me:`What they have spoken is good.
18 `I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him.
19 `And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him. (Deut. 18:15-19 NKJ)

22 "For Moses truly said to the fathers,`The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you.
23 `And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.' (Acts 3:22-23 NKJ)

The law with its sacrifices were fulfilled in Jesus. We are under the New Covenant in His Blood, not the old covenant:

26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28 "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
(Matt. 26:26-28 NKJ)

15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. (Heb. 9:15 NKJ)

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

The law with its sacrifices were fulfilled in Jesus. We are under the New Covenant in His Blood, not the old covenant:

Thank you for taking the time in quoting the Scriptures; but I still didn't read anywhere in them where it says "the old law is overwritten by the new law". To me, "transgressions under the first covenant"; would amount to people violating the law, by making their own; and thereby holding themselves above God's Law. That is what the Israelites did; they allowed their "religious leaders" to say and do whatever they wanted, and they just accepted it as being the truth. The Law's given in that first Covenant, the 10 Commandments as an example; would still apply.

If the writings of Paul or Luke (as an example) are the "correct" interpretation of God's Word as the "new covenant" which replaced the "first covenant"; then why is there even an OT included in the Christian Bible? If the Old Testament covers the "first covenant" which was "replaced"; then nothing in that would serve any purpose.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Thank you for taking the time in quoting the Scriptures; but I still didn't read anywhere in them where it says "the old law is overwritten by the new law".

Elementary deduction is required to read scripture with understanding. The Old Covenant was replaced by the New, therefore the "old law" was replaced by the "new law". Not overwritten, it has no more force.

Christ predicted the Temple would be destroyed. God did that to end all possibility the Law of Moses could be practiced.

Christ alone is the way and the truth to eternal life. Not the law of Moses:

15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear,
16 "according to all you desired of the LORD your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying,`Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, nor let me see this great fire anymore, lest I die.'
17 "And the LORD said to me:`What they have spoken is good.
18 `I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him.
19 `And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him. (Deut. 18:15-19 NKJ)
I recommend learning "critical thinking", without it one cannot rightly divide God's Word of truth:

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (2 Tim. 2:15 KJV)
There are Study Bibles that guide students to ask the main questions one must answer to understand the text they are reading:

Regarding the existence of evil:

 

[Enlightenedtruth]

Christ predicted the Temple would be destroyed. God did that to end all possibility the Law of Moses could be practiced.

So I just reread Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.....I did not find any reference to a specific "Temple", I did not see any thing which said the Law of Moses (the 10 Commandments, as an example) no longer applied.

Thank you for the video links, but I don't need "men" to tell me anything about God. I do understand, and accept, that a whole lot of Christians are not going to survive this. While I wish I could change that, obedience to God will not be forced; those who will not do so of their own free will, will be destroyed.

Thank you for this conversation, but I'll not post to this topic again.