What is the one true Church?

[RLT63]

Precisely. A man must be called by God to the celibate life, and the calling is not easy to discern. No lightening bolts, no voices from heaven, no pizzazz. That's why we have specialists called Vocation Directors to help a man through the spiritual and psychological discernment process leading up to final vows. This screening process can take up to 7 years or more. Everyone has a get-out-free card they can use at anytime before ordination.
Mandatory celibacy (only for the Latin rite) didn't begin until the 10th century, but that does not mean there were no priestly or monastic celibates before that time, beginning with Paul. That includes women. 1 Tim. 5:9-12 – Paul recommends that older widows take a pledge of celibacy. This was the beginning of women religious orders.
Non-Catholic Christians have no business criticizing the practice, who offer no biblical warrant for a mandatory married clergy.
Celibacy exists only because Jesus was celibate, married to His Church.

Married clergy with kids have problems that celibacy avoids.

After a rebellious youth, Graham found a straight and narrow path that took him to the pulpit and the helm of his father’s Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.​

But for every Franklin Graham, there’s a Friedrich Nietzsche, the atheist philosopher whose father was a Lutheran minister. For every Condoleezza Rice, there’s an Alice Cooper, the heavy-metal singing, fake-blood spouting son of a preacher man.​

Beneath the stereotypes of preacher’s kids as either goody two-shoes or devilish hellions lies a tense and sometimes taxing reality, the children of clergy say. Studies show that many PK’s, as the lingo goes, struggle with issues of identity, privacy and morality. There’s even a support group, Preacher’s Kids International, dedicated to the “celebration and recovery of those who grew up in the parsonage.”​

​

Beyond Stereotypes, A Stressful Life For Preacher's Kids

Beyond Stereotypes, A Stressful Life For Preacher's Kids

www.huffpost.com

Well, just saying—- 1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

 

[Ziggy]

Yeap you are definitely sanctified....where do we place the stamp!

I don't know what this means LOL
Hugs

 

[Grailhunter]

I don't know what this means LOL
Hugs

First off it is a joke.
You have been through a lot.....and hope for the better for you.
Sometimes life is a struggle....and sometimes we think marriage is the answer and sometimes it is not.

 

[Grailhunter]

Well, just saying—- 1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

There is a lot to this verse.
You could not be a Jewish religious leader without being married or a widower. This is even true to this day.
In the Jewish culture if a man was not married by the time he was 20, it was assumed he was homosexual, if not 30, it was a disgrace on him and his family....like I said in the Jewish culture choosing to be celibate was like a Christian spiting on the cross.

In light of this, scholars cannot explain why the Jewish religious leaders would ever talk to Christ or the unmarried Apostles. The first thing out of their mouths should have been, Why aren't you married? You do not like women?

But we know they did talk to them so there is an answer.....we just do not know it.

 

[Illuminator]

Well, just saying—- 1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

husband of one wife, not husband of second wife. Logically, Paul is saying married bishops can't marry a second time. This has always been the case. And he never said a bishop MUST be married.
just saying-

 

[amigo de christo]

There is a lot to this verse.
You could not be a Jewish religious leader without being married or a widower. This is even true to this day.
In the Jewish culture if a man was not married by the time he was 20, it was assumed he was homosexual, if not 30, it was a disgrace on him and his family....like I said in the Jewish culture choosing to be celibate was like a Christian spiting on the cross.

In light of this, scholars cannot explain why the Jewish religious leaders would ever talk to Christ or the unmarried Apostles. The first thing out of their mouths should have been, Why aren't you married? You do not like women?

But we know they did talk to them so there is an answer.....we just do not know it.

Rest assured the answer was not and will not be found in the false satanic gospel of thomas
which claimed JESUS was married to mary magdalene . its BUNK .
JESUS was single . HIS BRIDE is the church . Now lift those hands and let all praise and thank the glorious Lord .

 

[Grailhunter]

husband of one wife, not husband of second wife. Logically, Paul is saying married bishops can't remarry. And he never said a bishop MUST be married.
just saying-

Since you bring this up, it means a couple things. The verse is not addressing divorce.....for one the Christians did not adopt the Jewish process of divorce....letter of divorcement.

Secondly it can be referring to the requirement for one wife, not five wives. Not all Christians were monogamous....there were Christians with multiple wives and concubines in the Middle Ages. And there is no indication in the Bible that a Jew with five wives would have to divorce four of them to be a Christian.

 

[RLT63]

There is a lot to this verse.
You could not be a Jewish religious leader without being married or a widower. This is even true to this day.
In the Jewish culture if a man was not married by the time he was 20, it was assumed he was homosexual, if not 30, it was a disgrace on him and his family....like I said in the Jewish culture choosing to be celibate was like a Christian spiting on the cross.

In light of this, scholars cannot explain why the Jewish religious leaders would ever talk to Christ or the unmarried Apostles. The first thing out of their mouths should have been, Why aren't you married? You do not like women?

But we know they did talk to them so there is an answer.....we just do not know it.

Where in the Bible does it specify that the Apostles were single? Didn’t Peter have a mother in law.?

 

[Ziggy]

Do you think when we leave this life and go into the next, that God is going to judge us by what denomination we joined?

Isn't it rather a person's own character as to whether they bare the very fruit his Spirit in us brings?
Does God really worry about the rites and the rituals, the cups and the plates, how many times we pray?
Whether one is married or single, rich or poor?

What is God looking at when we stand before him? Is it not our heart and whether we care for eachother the way he cares for us?

All of this arguing back and forth, I don't find very fruitful. I hear anger, frustration, bitterness, even hostility one towards another.
I think if a new born again christian were to walk into this thread, they would turn around and say, I want nothing to do with this.
If I want to be attacked for my beliefs, I can just as easily do it in the world.

And no one is willing to budge. Everybody's right and everybody's wrong.
I don't think it's going to matter what religion one follows.
I think everyone's character is what will be judged.

Whether you honour God in this manner or that manner, I don't think it will make a difference, material wise.
All these things that we use to represent our adoration, these are all going to disappear.
The only thing remaining will be YOU and only YOU facing the one who gave his life for you.

It doesn't have to be this complicated.

If you are a Catholic and your heart is right with God, God will judge your heart.
If you are a protestant and your heart is right with God. God will judge your heart.
If you are x denomination and your heart is right with God. God will judge your heart.

And what comes from the heart matters more than how we show it on the outside. It's what's on the inside that counts.
We put more faith in what we do than who we are.

Everyone belies the way that they believe. Every shows it in different ways.
But when this life is over and all these things are gone, we will al be standing naked before the Mercy seat.
And what we will have to answer for is how we treated one another.

sorry, just rambling..
I get sad sometimes
Hugs

 

[Grailhunter]

Where in the Bible does it specify that the Apostles were single? Didn’t Peter have a mother in law.?

You are right....it is a matter of tradition that most of the Apostles were single.....some scholars say at the direction of James who was not an apostle but the leader of the Christians at the time.

Put Paul talks about it....

1 Corinthians 9:5 — The New International Version (NIV)​

5 Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?

​

 

[Taken]

Then the Holy Spirit who inspired Paul to write 1 Cor. 7 is "ridiculous"??
Good luck telling HIM that . . .

No. Clearly ridiculous is your posts.

 

[Grailhunter]

Do you think when we leave this life and go into the next, that God is going to judge us by what denomination we joined?

Isn't it rather a person's own character as to whether they bare the very fruit his Spirit in us brings?
Does God really worry about the rites and the rituals, the cups and the plates, how many times we pray?
Whether one is married or single, rich or poor?

What is God looking at when we stand before him? Is it not our heart and whether we care for eachother the way he cares for us?

All of this arguing back and forth, I don't find very fruitful. I hear anger, frustration, bitterness, even hostility one towards another.
I think if a new born again christian were to walk into this thread, they would turn around and say, I want nothing to do with this.
If I want to be attacked for my beliefs, I can just as easily do it in the world.

And no one is willing to budge. Everybody's right and everybody's wrong.
I don't think it's going to matter what religion one follows.
I think everyone's character is what will be judged.

Whether you honour God in this manner or that manner, I don't think it will make a difference, material wise.
All these things that we use to represent our adoration, these are all going to disappear.
The only thing remaining will be YOU and only YOU facing the one who gave his life for you.

It doesn't have to be this complicated.

If you are a Catholic and your heart is right with God, God will judge your heart.
If you are a protestant and your heart is right with God. God will judge your heart.
If you are x denomination and your heart is right with God. God will judge your heart.

And what comes from the heart matters more than how we show it on the outside. It's what's on the inside that counts.
We put more faith in what we do than who we are.

Everyone belies the way that they believe. Every shows it in different ways.
But when this life is over and all these things are gone, we will al be standing naked before the Mercy seat.
And what we will have to answer for is how we treated one another.

sorry, just rambling..
I get sad sometimes
Hugs

Christian arguing or debating about beliefs? Was there ever a time that this was not true? They call them Protestants and they call themselves Protestants for a reason......Protest churches.

But I can understand if all this offends you or upset you....it they do, don't read these debates.

And it is above our paygrade to know what measure Christ will use on Judgment Day.....we can only speculate. As far as I am concerned religions that blaspheme God or incite sin will be judged accordingly.

 

[Grailhunter]

Rest assured the answer was not and will not be found in the false satanic gospel of thomas
which claimed JESUS was married to mary magdalene . its BUNK .
JESUS was single . HIS BRIDE is the church . Now lift those hands and let all praise and thank the glorious Lord .

There is no indication in the Bible that Yeshua was married.

 

[Illuminator]

You are right....it is a matter of tradition that most of the Apostles were single.....some scholars say at the direction of James who was not an apostle but the leader of the Christians at the time.

Put Paul talks about it....

1 Corinthians 9:5 — The New International Version (NIV)​

5 Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?

Why Peter’s Marriage Doesn’t Disprove Catholicism: A Dialogue​

 

[Ziggy]

Christian arguing or debating about beliefs? Was there ever a time that this was not true? They call them Protestants and they call themselves Protestants for a reason......Protest churches.

But I can understand if all this offends you or upset you....it they do, don't read these debates.

And it is above our paygrade to know what measure Christ will use on Judgment Day.....we can only speculate. As far as I am concerned religions that blaspheme God or incite sin will be judged accordingly.

I'm not offended or upset concerning debates. It's the attitudes behind them.
While each side defends itself it becomes the very thing it accuses the other side of being.
The sad thing is, is that neither side can see it.

James and John were so angry at a city because they would not listen to what Jesus had to say, they wanted to call fire down from heaven and burn them up alive.
Jesus rebuked them and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
Luk 9:51
And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem,
Luk 9:52
And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him.
Luk 9:53
And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.
Luk 9:54
And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?
Luk 9:55
But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
Luk 9:56
For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

Do you believe that with confrontation you can change another's way of life?
I don't believe tossing fireballs at each other is going to acomplish much if anything.
It only makes them stronger in their resolve. Adamant even, like a stone.
If you yourself adamantly believe that you are right and they are wrong,
why not rather shake the dust from your feet and leave the conversation.
Why stay and have a fruitless argument that you know neither side is going to win.
Isn't it better to use your energy reaching out to people that will listen, rather than those who have their ears closed?

I speak to the Catholics as well. If you know that no matter what you say will not make one iota bit of difference, why bother?
Jesus didn't bother he just moved on to the next village.
He didn't go into the village saying my way or the highway. He simply walked on by.

And if it is above our paygrade to know what measure Christ will use on Judgement day, what makes us think we know how to judge others better than He?

There are a lot of distractions in this life. A lot of stumblingblocks for people to trip over.
And I believe they have a purpose. That when we choose to judge others, that it's the perfect opportunity for us to judge ourselves.
It's not about what the other guy is doing or not doing, it's about how we react to what is done.

Life is a parade and we are all spectators. And it is the spectators that will be judged more so than those in the parade.
God is in charge of the parade to see how we react to it.

Hugs

 

[David in NJ]

You need to read that in context. Paul, as all the other apostles and many church fathers, could not see a future of 2000 years until Christ returns.

KJV 1 Corinthians 1:1-9
1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:
3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

The entire letter was written in the context of time being short.

And no-one here is saying that being a single person in service to Jesus isn't a sanctified ministry, nor is anyone claiming that a single person may not better focus his talents and services to the gospel as opposed to a married person.
The issue here, as it so often is, that one comment and view of Paul which was not necessarily inspired, was taken by the Catholic Church, over emphasized, and institutionalized and bore much rotten fruit. No-one here is disagreeing with Paul, we are disagreeing with how the Catholic Church misused his counsel.

RCC is not for me
it used to be, before i could SEE
but now i have the Holy Spirit
it is HE that guides me
do you SEE

 

[Grailhunter]

And if it is above our paygrade to know what measure Christ will use on Judgement day, what makes us think we know how to judge others better than He?

Exactly why I said it.
I stay away from the phrase..."You are going to Hell!"
Debating is one thing and judging is another....

You will find very few on this forum as tolerant of religious beliefs as I am. Why? Because they are all wrong, so I am not looking for the right ones. I am looking for good Christians in a Church that worships the Lord.

I fellowship with the Baptists, the Lutherans, the Pentecosts, the Catholics, the Glad Tidings Assembly of God, the Mormons, the Moravian Church and nearly a dozen non-denominational churches and I have had Jewish friends from the time I was a kid. I go to Mega Churches and little churches in the woods.....all in all I favor Holy Ghost churches.

 

[Grailhunter]

Why Peter’s Marriage Doesn’t Disprove Catholicism: A Dialogue​

I do not know....
I never took the religious attraction to celibacy seriously because I knew it was not workable.
And because I know the real reason the Catholic Church started requiring priests to be unmarried and then celibate....funny that it did not happen at the same time.

This occurs around 1123....long story.....but long story short of it....
The Church did not want to pay to support and house a priest, his wife, and their kids.
It started with telling the Priests they had to divorce their wives.....not really....just send them away.....no divorce courts in this era LOL.
So the Priests started hiding their wives. Then the Church started looking for their wives....and harassing them.
Well this is a Church decree so the Church saw the wives as defying the Church....that usually did not go well....
So then Priests started to categorizing them as concubines. A war of word and threats ensued and since the Church had already ruled that these women were defying the Church decree, they saw the women as defying God and declared them as witches and rounded some of them up and tortured and burnt them at the stake.
Well that mostly did the trick....fewer women wanted to get involved with Priests or the Priests hid them better.

Now some believe that the Nuns and Priests have sex. Is that true? How do you prove that? Pregnancies and babies. I do know that Nuns that get pregnant were treated harshly by the other Nuns. But the orders of Nuns exist effectively in closed societies so the stories of torture, deaths, and forced abortions, hiding the Nuns until the baby was born and giving the baby up for adoption are hard to prove. Personally I do not think that this is that common for one thing there are a number of birth control measures now.

Does the Church kick them out because they are pregnant? Usually not because then you have a living story of how they got pregnant by a priest by consent or by rape....most often or not they get an abortion in secret or they are sent somewhere to have the baby and the baby is given up for adoption. Again proving all this is not easy and again I do not think it is that common....

 

[Taken]

Jesus also clarified that HE was speaking about his words = John 6:56-64

Aware that His disciples were grumbling about this teaching, Jesus asked them, “Does this offend you? Then what will happen if you see the Son of Man ascend to where He was before?

The Son of Man was IN Heaven Before He was in MARYS Womb.

Jesus appeared AS a human man Not IS a human man as some Teach He was Both.

 

[Ziggy]

I grew up in Boston Mass. Not far from Salem where they had the Salem witch trials.

Puritans
The Puritans were English Protestants in the 16th and 17th centuries who sought to purify the Church of England of Roman Catholic practices, maintaining that the Church of England had not been fully reformed and should become more Protestant. Puritanism played a significant role in English history, especially during the Protectorate.Wikipedia

The Salem witch trials were a series of hearings and prosecutions of people accused of witchcraft in colonial Massachusetts between February 1692 and May 1693. More than 200 people were accused. Thirty people were found guilty, 19 of whom were executed by hanging (14 women and five men). One other man, Giles Corey, was pressed to death after refusing to enter a plea, and at least five people died in jail.

Arrests were made in numerous towns beyond Salem and Salem Village (known today as Danvers), notably Andover and Topsfield. The grand juries and trials for this capital crime were conducted by a Court of Oyer and Terminer in 1692 and by a Superior Court of Judicature in 1693, both held in Salem Town, where the hangings also took place. It was the deadliest witch hunt in the history of colonial North America. Only fourteen other women and two men had been executed in Massachusetts and Connecticut during the 17th century.

Gender context​

A majority of people accused and convicted of witchcraft were women (about 78%). Overall, the Puritan belief and prevailing New England culture was that women were inherently sinful and more susceptible to damnation than men were. Throughout their daily lives, Puritans, especially Puritan women, actively attempted to thwart attempts by the Devil to overtake them and their souls. Indeed, Puritans held the belief that men and women were equal in the eyes of God, but not in the eyes of the Devil. Women's souls were seen as unprotected in their weak and vulnerable bodies. Several factors may explain why women were more likely to admit guilt of witchcraft than men. Historian Elizabeth Reis asserts that some likely believed they had truly given in to the Devil, and others might have believed they had done so temporarily. However, because those who confessed were reintegrated into society, some women might have confessed in order to spare their own lives.

Quarrels with neighbors often incited witchcraft allegations. One example of this is Abigail Faulkner, who was accused in 1692. Faulkner admitted she was "angry at what folk said," and the Devil may have temporarily overtaken her, causing harm to her neighbors. Women who did not conform to the norms of Puritan society were more likely to be the target of an accusation, especially those who were unmarried or did not have children.

Salem witch trials - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

For All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God.
Hugs