General Chat

" Again, sorry that you seem to think I am being all those words- patronising, condescending etc. I am not - I really am not. And am not sure what keys to press to prevent you thinking I am. Honestly never had that thrown at me before I began Genes chat - and I do love to debate subjects like Christian celibacy vs Christian marriage. "


yes you are patronising, the keys to press are either delete or back space preview would help as well , once again you have totally taken over a thread with what you want to debate what you think you simply do not have the gift to debate you can not hear you only want to speak.

Paul was the first early Christian to write that "men and women are equal" in the eyes of God. He was brave to say that from his Hebraic background. He was a Hebrew of the Hebrews (8 generations could be proven on both mother and father's side).

And I feel that the reason he laid down roles for women and men was very much because his early churches comprised a mixture of Greeks and Jews. And he was trying to avoid schism and keep them together. The Greeks would have wanted to include women more, I think. I doubt Greek worship of their many gods was as male-domionated a religion as Judaism had become by then.

So I surmise that Paul struggled to keep everyone together (men, women, slaves, free). In the same way that church leaders like the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury struggle to keep people together today.

Again, sorry that you seem to think I am being all those words- patronising, condescending etc. I am not - I really am not. And am not sure what keys to press to prevent you thinking I am. Honestly never had that thrown at me before I began Genes chat - and I do love to debate subjects like Christian celibacy vs Christian marriage.

O would some power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us.
(O would some power the gift to give us to see ourselves as others see us.)
Burns.

John can you not help yourself, you couldnt resist could you, Cythia has been nothing but a good supportive friend to you on GR she has taken a lot of stick defending you and even defending her faith and she has asked you very nicely to calm it down, but you have totally ignored her very polite requests I know you love to wum John we all know you love the attention and reaction, you say so often but to do it on ones own friend is unforgivable. :-( :-( :-(

I'm glad it wasn't just me Guinevere...

If some posters had to deal with the problems within small and disparate churches that Paul dealt with, or had to deal with the problems that Popes, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops and church leaders faced today keeping people together, they might just approach the subject of thread differently.


....That paragraph made my teeth itch.

It's the underlying patronising tone that put my hackles up....

Sorry to veer off topic but some stuff is too daft to just ignore.

"Just that I have spent quite a lot of time researching the Bible - particularly when people say St Paul said that or St Paul was a mysogonist. And he didn't, and he wasn't." said John

You aren't the only one who has researched the Bible, John. In your opinion Paul wasn't a misogynist - in mine he was. I quoted chapter and verse (in Paul's own words) on another thread about this, and you ignored it, and I really can't be bothered to do it again. Greater brains than mine or yours have the same opinion as I do, so don't be so dismissive. It's open to debate and not a "fact".

Will try to keep any sermons off threads. Just that I have spent quite a lot of time researching the Bible - particularly when people say St Paul said that or St Paul was a mysogonist. And he didn't, and he wasn't.

If some posters had to deal with the problems within small and disparate churches that Paul dealt with, or had to deal with the problems that Popes, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops and church leaders faced today keeping people together, they might just approach the subject of thread differently.

Have had this inner feeling since some Catholic leaders raised this issue of married priests some years ago that RC church was changing because of recruitment problems, not because they have re-studied what Paul and Jesus meant. That would be a wrong reason for change imho.

And Protestants (who claim to be Bible led) should accept Paul's teaching more on this point. All Christians need to celebrate celibacy in the 21st century, I think. Not celebrate celebrities.

I do try very hard to be "normal" and not preach. None of my work colleagues know. I was on threads on GR for several weeks before I admitted I was a preacher. Then it was "John a preacher lol" all the time.

Hope you will all understand that after 14 years of unpaid preaching about 40 times a year in various denominations, it is quite central to who I am and how I think. Sorry, I really don't mean to upset anybody at all.

I'm not sure that we need a 'Press Censor' on these threads. It would be a pity to put up a barrier on some entertaining posts. There is usually no shortage of goodwill hereabouts.

'It is not only what we say, but also what we do not say, for which we are accountable'. (Apologies to Molière.)

No.

In answer to the OP

Amen to that Cythia :-D

Good morning.... :-)

I'm quite happy with the fact that my post from another thread was copied onto here.


JOHN - a word.

It may be better if you kept your past preachments on the Christian thread for the most part.


Whilst I am happy to glance through them, because you do make some interesting points, it seems as though not everyone wants to read them.


I too, have many Christian experiences and stories I could share with people on here and, at times it's very tempting but, as my mother would say......there is a time and a place!


Like you, I find faith topics absolutely fascinating and can usually natter away for England without falling out with anybody.

Hope this helps.



Thank you for your post Sue Maid.........very succinct and interesting.


Busy day ahead. :-)

Muffy I did once make a sermon based on Bob chapter 76 verse 343 in front of a trillion people.

They walked out before I had even reached the 97th minute of the sermon for some reason.

As has been established the push for celibacy doesn't come from the bible So I'm beggared if I'm going to look up Bob chapter 76 verse 343 or whatever to double check on it's meaning when we know it's not relevant to this discussion as the need for celibacy is a man made direction.

To be honest I've ploughed through quite enough of it involuntarily to try keep abreast of the thread in case i miss something pertinent...but after Suemaid's posting I think it's a waste of time......priests used not to be celibate..then the catholic church..not god decided they needed to be...for purely financial purposes most likely..no scripture needed.

**slightly edited because it read wrong.

I do see your point, Errol.

I think the point could have been made without saying, once again, "I was preaching".
Yes the content may well be relevant and would love to know the general thrust of the sermon as part of forming an opinion.

I thought it was relevant to the thread tbh.

I posted that last post, Errol, because I thought it was relevant to thread. Sorry you were not happy with it

sheesh John - people really don't want to hear about your constant sermons. I am sure they are wonderful and the large congregations appreciate your guidance and knowledge but we don't all need to know how many sermons you have preached.

Might I suggest a sermon thread where you can tell us about your selected texts and how you interpreted them so that we can keep this thread on a focus

I just think this is such a fascinating subject.

Many years ago, I was preaching in a large chapel in Buckinghamshire and took "marriage" as my theme. So I had to study relevant Bible passages quite closely. And I could not avoid the conclusion that celibacy was a good thing and marriage was second best. That was Pauls point in 1 Cor Chapter 7 verses 8-9 (sorry to sound like Dot Cotton). It is also the "make yourself a eunuch for Christ" point.

I truly think that churches should encourage celibacy if it right for the priest of whatever denomination. But also all churches should welcome married priests if they have a calling and family is supportive. I think both the Protestant tradition and the Catholic tradition are misinterpreting scriptural guidance. But I am sure I am missing something and, as usual, being too simplistic.:-)

yes, we have a Buddhist temple like that across the river from us.

I must say that, here, the Asian religions (Buddhist, Sikh, etc) seem to include the outside community in their churches / temples much more than do the various Catholic ones.


Or it may just be that we live closer to the former than we do to the latter.



Just incidentally, we have a Baptist church across the street from us .............. there are 3 congregations that share it. The Canadian Baptists own the church, while the Filippino and the Chinese Baptists each rent space ...........................


............ they've given up on us :-D