The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)

Associated Press ^ | 3/24/01

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Previous Thread

[malakhi]

Nothing. I was going to twist your words, but decided not to. Nevermind.

Dave, you'd better ask the moderator to remove that post before Reggie sees it. ;o)

[Wordsmith]

Well, Mack has said that one of the great things about this forum is that it's not like Sunday coffee hour. And today, that sure is the truth!

[SoothingDave]

How exactly are you "open to procreation" when you use a thermometer to ensure that your sperm never encounter an egg?

Accidents happen. Sperm live. Eggs get released early. Women get colds and infection which give false signs. Women's cycles get erratic.

SD

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You know, I'm surprised that Mack has stayed out of this conversation. ;^)

I'm having a hard time reading the posts, my puter screen is fogged up from heavy breathing. :)

BigMack

[ksen]

Nothing. I was going to twist your words, but decided not to. Nevermind.

Thanks for refraining.

-Kevin

[SoothingDave]

. I think it might actually have been a new topic for us! ;o)

No, once before. You asked too many questions about foreplay and if every session has to end in coitus then too. ;-)

SD

[malakhi]

I do not know if there are many that believe that a woman taking her basal body temperature is part of the act of sex.

Well, you never know... If you're checking to see if today is "safe", it might count as foreplay... ;o)

My point is, if a condom is artificial, then so is a thermometer. The intent and the end result is the same.

From my perspective, I resolve the dilemma by viewing openness to procreation within the context of the marriage as a whole, not within every singular act of sex.

[Wordsmith]

Thank God for Latin, so that we can use words like "coitus." Makes these kinds of discussions so civilized.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Becky is not out riding:)

Is all I have to say on the contraception issue is I have 2 children, I was fruitful and multiplied. I also spent 18 months puking morning, noon, and night, high blood pressure, pre-eclampsia, and c-sections. I was/am not having any more kids. If you have never been there don't judge. Enough said:)

Becky

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You know he's dying to jump in. Maybe if Becky is out riding her horse he could comment and then the moderator can remove his posts before she gets back. :-)

While y'all have been talking, we just finised another "smoke" :)

BigMack

[Havoc]

and Christ is also the Word made flesh, but that doesn't limit Christ to the Book or expand the Book to be Christ.

That's all fine and good; but, nobody is limiting Christ to being merely the scripture - and especially not me. What you have said changes not a word of what I've said. It changes not one scentilla of it's meaning. The confession of Christ is the foundation and Christ as the word is the core of that foundation of faith. If you are building upon anything else, you build on sinking sand. Period.

What then becomes the issue is whether anything you state out of hand as tradition is proveable in scripture - so far it's been shown that is not the case and decidedly so. It's not a matter of interpretation. It's a matter of playing smorgesboard with the scripture - picking and choosing what you'll believe and leaving the rest as though it is of no import. The danger there is that you are responsible for all of it whether you choose to believe any of it at all. As I've said time and again - Jesus stated that the Word will judge you in the end - not tradition, not what you choose to believe of philosophy, not your logical constructs, and not your man made doctrines - the Word.

[SoothingDave]

Thank God for Latin, so that we can use words like "coitus."

Makes it sound like a luxury car. Or a tennis racquet.

SD

[ksen]

Did you notice that in between all of these important posts about birth control and such that people have actually been discussing things like the nature of Christ? The nerve.

-Kevin

[malakhi]

It is not a physical barrier or diversion of sperm.

I have further problems with this, but in the interest of avoiding becoming any more graphic than I already have, I will abstain from replying.

They are hlding back from having sex. They are not holding back while having sex. See the difference?

Frankly, no. If the second impairs the unitive aspect, then so does the first, IMO.

If I admit that NFP is essentially, while "natural," essentially a product of a "contraceptive mentality" what does that get me? An admission that some Catholics use a strange method to acheive the same ends. We are all sinenrs then. I can see that this is a quite logical conclusion. If NFP is sinful, it doesn't make other methods right.

As I said to Fury, I think you can resolve the problem and avoid the kind of nitpicky issues involved by viewing openness to procreation in the broader scope of the marriage as a whole, rather than within each particular act. But this will not be acceptable to Catholics who accept the church's teachings on contraception.

[al_c]

Is all I have to say on the contraception issue is I have 2 children, I was fruitful and multiplied. I also spent 18 months puking morning, noon, and night, high blood pressure, pre-eclampsia, and c-sections. I was/am not having any more kids. If you have never been there don't judge. Enough said:)

Nobody's judging you, Becky. We're just dicussing more of our differences of beliefs. Carry on. :o)

[ksen]

Ok, you ready to continue that discussion on the Sermon on the Mount tomorrow? ;^)

-Kevin

[malakhi]

[ksen]

I feel like I need to go home and take a shower after that last topic. Whew. ;^)

-Kevin

[IMRight]

The confession of Christ is the foundation and Christ as the word is the core of that foundation of faith. If you are building upon anything else, you build on sinking sand. Period.

Well you're certainly getting closer. Christ...Himself...the person... is the foundation. Your previous statement was that is was the Bible. When your error was pointed out you basically said that Christ is the Bible and therefore there is no contradiction. So there was no foundation before the canon? Or if you insist that everyone knew the real Scriptures the moment they were written there was no church before Paul wrote his letters? No foundation?

There is no point in dancing around the terminology. Christ Himself is the foundation.

What then becomes the issue is whether anything you state out of hand as tradition is proveable in scripture

See. There you are restricting Christ to only what you find in Scripture - the original error. The real issue is whether anything is disprovable in scripture. Those are the two definitions of Sola Scriptura and you just put your chips on the one that most NCs claim the RCs improperly attribute to them.

[dadwags]

#3203
That reference to I Kings was just to illustrate that in Jewish society, the mother of the king was always a very respected position . When you read the booke of Kings and Chronicles, it becomes obvious that the mother of the king is usually named .
Also, as angelo frequently reminds us, Judaism is Matrilinial .
Also, in John's Gospel,it is Mary's idea for Jesus to set up the second round of wine .