Skip to comments.Two popes, two Palm Sundays (a visual contrast)
Posted on 03/24/2013 2:39:36 PM PDT by NYer
click here to read article
I am not ignoring your point. According to scripture, Paul was not married. He chose celibacy. There is nothing in scripture to suggest that he had ever been married.
Somebody in this board asked at what age did Paul marry? I don't know, but we can see what was the common marriage age at the time since Paul set himself forth as an example of Pharisaical piety (Phil. 3:5; Gal. 1:14; Acts 22:3). In the rabbinical tradition it was said that "he who is twenty years of age and is not married spends all his days in sin". I don't agree with that, but it shows what the thought was at the time. I'll be shocked if one day I find out that Paul was not married!
The Greek word used by Paul in 1 Cor., agamos, includes both bachelors and widowers. So, it does not say anything about whether or not Paul had been married.
Not everybody has the gift of celibacy. I DO NOT expect the Catholic church to change its stance on celibate priests. All I'm trying to do is to show that it is not a requirement to dedicate one's life to God. What did Paul say, exactly? "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". So, even he acknowledged that not everybody was called/gifted to be celibate!
Now, of all the things we believe on as Christians, celibacy is not at the top of the list. Let us agree on what really matters, such as the virgin birth, substitutionary death on the cross, resurrection..., and stop fussing at each other about man-made traditions. There's nothing wrong with Catholic priests being celibate, just like there's nothing wrong with my Southern Baptist pastor being married!
At the time of writing his letters, Paul was not married. The Bible does not mention if he once had been or not. Some think it is likely that he once could have been because he appeared to be, or was about to become, a member of the Sanhedrin and a Rabbi (Galatians 1). Qualifications for those positions were that a man had to have been at least 40 year old, married, and with a minimum of one son. Paul also held some degree of power to persecute (Acts 26). However, the main point is that he was not married at the time he wrote and neither do we know definitively one way or another if he ever was.
There is absolutely no evidence from the New Testament that Paul was ever married or that he had a son, another pre-requisite.
In total charity, I truly fail to comprehend why it is so difficult for anyone who believes so strongly in scripture to challenge Paul's own words. Perhaps you should go back to the individual who posed the question on Paul's marriage and direct them to the scriptural proof that he was not.
That sometimes needs to be saluted. "Honor to whom honor is due!"
The Greek text does not have a word corresponding to "single." Rather, St. Paul says "I wish for all persons to be as I am myself" which in the context means unmarried.
I am sorry, you lost me. The inscription talks about evil not apples!
Yes, I know. I was just playing with the fact that the Latin word for apple is spelled the same as the word meaning evil.
Old Latin class verse:
Malo I would rather be
Malo in an apple tree.
Malo than an evil man
Malo in adversity!