Contentment in singlehood

[RodColeman]

Yes you are. Still, "everyone".

So you're saying it's not, by definition, better for everyone to stay single. OK, then. I would agree!

Because you don't know sex talk is vulgar, it's an avoided taboo topic for a reason.

People can talk in vulgar terms about sex, yes. People can also have calm, civil and constructive discussions about sex. Did your dad never give you the "birds-and-bees" talk? Did you never take a sex ed course in middle school? Have you never read a Christian book on the subject of singleness, dating, or marriage? I've heard and read plenty of civil discussions of that particular topic. It is possible. Crazy, I know!

"Healthy" is just a marketing buzzword, Where does the Bible specifically label it that way?

The Bible nowhere condemns all forms of sex. In Genesis 2 we read: "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed." Both Jesus (Matthew 19:5) and Paul (Ephesians 5:31) later quote this in reference to marriage.

In the Garden of Eden, we also see God looking at everything He made (including human bodies) and calling it "very good." God's first command to newly created humans is to "be fruitful and multiply." Gee, I wonder what that means. Hahaha!

In 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 we see that husbands and wives share mutual authority over each other's bodies and should lovingly fulfill each other's needs. This passage teaches that each spouse “owes” the other “conjugal rights” and commands them not to deprive each other. It even says sex is a mandate in marriage; the only reason for not engaging sexually is when both agree a specific time is needed to seek God in prayer. Mutual physical intimacy is a way for people to bond in a marriage. Crazy, I know! Also, when people have sex, it causes a chemical reaction in the brain (dopamine and oxytocin) that makes you feel "in love" and "attached." That's why it's good for a married couple to have sex, and bad for an unmarried couple to have sex. If you're unmarried and have sex, you can form strong attachments to someone who may not be good for you, or someone you may have little in common with. That's why people date, to evaluate a potential marriage partner. Introducing sex in the dating stage is dangerous for that very reason.

I'm talking about a string of unsubstantiated assumptions only exist in fiction and your idealistic, argumentative mind. It is as realistic as the Sadduccees' tale of "seven brothers and one widow."

Wait. Did you just say the simple concept of two people dating, getting engaged, getting married, and then having sex is completely unrealistic? Huh? Do you live on a different planet or something? LOL.

All speculations, you don't know any of that. Saul of Tartus as a pharisee might have been married, but he surely left after his conversion, and Peter might have followed the same path.

It's not speculation. It's a simple translation of the Greek. Explain to me how someone can have a mother-in-law without ever having a spouse. Also, why did you just write "Peter might have followed the same path"? I thought it was, apparently, 100% impossible for Peter to have ever been married. Isn't that what you argued earlier?

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful."

Getting married is lawful? I agree. Getting married is unhelpful? That might be true for some people, sure. Don't worry, Lovette. I'm not saying you have to ever get married. You're free to avoid that dreadful fate if you so choose, haha.

Are they role models for future Christians to follow or not? Do you wanna be sealed by the Holy Spirit or not, Eph. 1:13? Is that for "tribes of Israel" or all Christians? Is it worth taking the risk of being "defiled by woman" at the cost of your eternal life?

The Bible nowhere commands us to stay single. And nowhere in Revelation is the reader told to emulate the 144,000. And nowhere in Ephesians are we told that you have to be unmarried in order to be sealed with the Holy Spirit. Also, later in Ephesians, we're told how Christian wives and husbands should love each other, and how the husband-wife relationship is an analogy for our relationship with Jesus. But nowhere here does Paul tell the Ephesians to avoid marriage.

And no, I don't believe that a Christian's decision to marry another Christian will necessarily cost you eternal life. Hahaha!

 

[Lynx]

Astonish me with something not repetitive then, genius.

Can do:

Do you absolutely, wholeheartedly promise you are a man? Your about page says you are male, but the arguments you are using are the kind that a militant feminist would use.

TLDR: you claim to be a guy, but you sure do talk like a butthurt girl.

I mean... I have met some militant feminist guys, so I know it's possible. Just checking.

 

[tourist]

The only opinion that i truly value is God's divine providence, throght various sutble signals, anything out of the ordinary.

I'm not sure that God has opinions but rather provides statement of fact.

 

[Lovette]

So you're saying it's not, by definition, better for everyone to stay single. OK, then. I would agree!

That's the disciples' opinion, Matt. 19:10. Are you a disciple?

People can talk in vulgar terms about sex, yes. People can also have calm, civil and constructive discussions about sex. Did your dad never give you the "birds-and-bees" talk? Did you never take a sex ed course in middle school? Have you never read a Christian book on the subject of singleness, dating, or marriage? I've heard and read plenty of civil discussions of that particular topic. It is possible. Crazy, I know!

No.

The Bible nowhere condemns all forms of sex. In Genesis 2 we read: "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed." Both Jesus (Matthew 19:5) and Paul (Ephesians 5:31) later quote this in reference to marriage.

In the Garden of Eden, we also see God looking at everything He made (including human bodies) and calling it "very good." God's first command to newly created humans is to "be fruitful and multiply." Gee, I wonder what that means. Hahaha!

In 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 we see that husbands and wives share mutual authority over each other's bodies and should lovingly fulfill each other's needs. This passage teaches that each spouse “owes” the other “conjugal rights” and commands them not to deprive each other. It even says sex is a mandate in marriage; the only reason for not engaging sexually is when both agree a specific time is needed to seek God in prayer. Mutual physical intimacy is a way for people to bond in a marriage. Crazy, I know! Also, when people have sex, it causes a chemical reaction in the brain (dopamine and oxytocin) that makes you feel "in love" and "attached." That's why it's good for a married couple to have sex, and bad for an unmarried couple to have sex. If you're unmarried and have sex, you can form strong attachments to someone who may not be good for you, or someone you may have little in common with. That's why people date, to evaluate a potential marriage partner. Introducing sex in the dating stage is dangerous for that very reason.

Still, "healthy" is nowhere to be spotted in the bible. And if you post, try to post by yourself instead of dumping AI slop on me.

Wait. Did you just say the simple concept of two people dating, getting engaged, getting married, and then having sex is completely unrealistic? Huh? Do you live on a different planet or something? LOL.

A planet where this is only for the privileged rich people.

It's not speculation. It's a simple translation of the Greek. Explain to me how someone can have a mother-in-law without ever having a spouse. Also, why did you just write "Peter might have followed the same path"? I thought it was, apparently, 100% impossible for Peter to have ever been married. Isn't that what you argued earlier?

His wife might have passed away, so his mother in law required care taking from him. She was not mentioned at all, whether he was married or not could not be 100% confirmed, and it doesn't matter.

Getting married is lawful? I agree. Getting married is unhelpful? That might be true for some people, sure. Don't worry, Lovette. I'm not saying you have to ever get married. You're free to avoid that dreadful fate if you so choose, haha.

Marriage is neutral, dreadful or beneficial soly depends on the partner.

The Bible nowhere commands us to stay single. And nowhere in Revelation is the reader told to emulate the 144,000. And nowhere in Ephesians are we told that you have to be unmarried in order to be sealed with the Holy Spirit. Also, later in Ephesians, we're told how Christian wives and husbands should love each other, and how the husband-wife relationship is an analogy for our relationship with Jesus. But nowhere here does Paul tell the Ephesians to avoid marriage.

And no, I don't believe that a Christian's decision to marry another Christian will necessarily cost you eternal life. Hahaha!

Marriage is for all mankind, Holy Spirit is for Christian alone.

 

[Lovette]

Can do:

Do you absolutely, wholeheartedly promise you are a man? Your about page says you are male, but the arguments you are using are the kind that a militant feminist would use.

TLDR: you claim to be a guy, but you sure do talk like a butthurt girl.

I mean... I have met some militant feminist guys, so I know it's possible. Just checking.

Militant fenimists won't come here in the first place, and they certainly won't use the term "peeing organ". They're obsessed with sex as that guy, I'm disentangling my mind from such obsession with that term.

 

[Lovette]

I'm not sure that God has opinions but rather provides statement of fact.

God spoke constantly in the OT, you determine which was opinion and which was statement of fact.

 

[RodColeman]

That's the disciples' opinion, Matt. 19:10. Are you a disciple?

When Jesus delivers a tough teaching on divorce, the disciples, on hearing how serious marriage is, say that it's better to just avoid marriage altogether. Jesus responds by saying that not everyone can accept lifelong celibacy, and that it's not for everyone.

No.

Nobody ever taught you constructively about sex or what a healthy and godly sex life would look like as a Christian? Well, I'm sorry. It's an important topic, and it's good to delve into. Maybe that explains some of your views, I don't know.

Still, "healthy" is nowhere to be spotted in the bible.

So you believe sex between a married couple is always unhealthy and evil. OK, then. And, uh, where in the Bible do we see sex between a married couple being forbidden or called unhealthy?

A planet where this is only for the privileged rich people.

The only married people you know are rich people?

His wife might have passed away, so his mother in law required care taking from him. She was not mentioned at all, whether he was married or not could not be 100% confirmed, and it doesn't matter.

Oh, so you admit that it's least a possibility that Peter was married, not an impossibility. Progress, I guess. Haha!

Marriage is for all mankind, Holy Spirit is for Christian alone.

Wait. Aren't Christians part of "mankind"?

 

[Lovette]

When Jesus delivers a tough teaching on divorce, the disciples, on hearing how serious marriage is, say that it's better to just avoid marriage altogether. Jesus responds by saying that not everyone can accept lifelong celibacy, and that it's not for everyone.

So still, "everyone" rhetoric.

Nobody ever taught you constructively about sex or what a healthy and godly sex life would look like as a Christian? Well, I'm sorry. It's an important topic, and it's good to delve into. Maybe that explains some of your views, I don't know.

As much as you don't know that "healthy" is just a marketing buzzword, and sexuality has been totally perverted since the 60s sexual revolution, that's how your supposedly "godly" view sneaked into the church and corrupted God's people.

So you believe sex between a married couple is always unhealthy and evil. OK, then. And, uh, where in the Bible do we see sex between a married couple being forbidden or called unhealthy?

Where in the Bible is it specially called healthy, as though by doing it could prevent even cure disease?

The only married people you know are rich people?

Depends on how much asset and income qualifies "rich". What qualifies rich for me might be poor for you.

Oh, so you admit that it's least a possibility that Peter was married, not an impossibility. Progress, I guess. Haha!

It's an impossibility to affirmatively conclude that he stayed married after his conversion, baptism by the holy spirit and imprisonment.

Wait. Aren't Christians part of "mankind"?

Yes in this life, not in the next. All the unsaved will be dead in the grave waiting for the second resurrection and the white throne judgement. So ask yourself, what matters more to you, this temporary home and God's eternal kingdom - where there will be no marriage.

 

[RodColeman]

So still, "everyone" rhetoric.

Matthew 19:11: "But He said to them, 'All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given.' "

Um, yes. "All" is a synonym for "everyone." Crazy, I know.

As much as you don't know that "healthy" is just a marketing buzzword, and sexuality has been totally perverted since the 60s sexual revolution, that's how your supposedly "godly" view sneaked into the church and corrupted God's people.

Right. "healthy sex" is impossible, because some guy on the Internet who personally finds it icky and personally has never had sex, says so. Sure.

Where in the Bible is it specially called healthy, as though by doing it could prevent even cure disease?

When I say "healthy," I mean it's good for a married couple to engage in, as a way to bond. However, if you want to look for healthy side effects of sex, they are real. It can act similar to a light workout, raise levels of a certain antibody, releases endorphins that block pain, can release hormones that help you fall asleep faster, and can lower stress hormones. Of course, people in biblical times probably didn't know all the specific science behind it, but we do know this now.

It's an impossibility to affirmatively conclude that he stayed married after his conversion, baptism by the holy spirit and imprisonment.

Sure. But that is a different argument than saying something like, "It's 100% impossible that Peter was ever married." Which is what you, apparently believe. Even though Peter had a mother-in-law.

Yes in this life, not in the next. All the unsaved will be dead in the grave waiting for the second resurrection and the white throne judgement. So ask yourself, what matters more to you, this temporary home and God's eternal kingdom - where there will be no marriage.

But we're currently in "this life," as you put it. We are not in Heaven right now. Should I put my whole life on hold just because I might be in Heaven tomorrow? I would say no. Nobody knows when the Day will come.

 

[Lovette]

Matthew 19:11: "But He said to them, 'All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given.' "

Um, yes. "All" is a synonym for "everyone." Crazy, I know.

"All" is your rhetoric, not mine or Lord Jesus's.

Right. "healthy sex" is impossible, because some guy on the Internet who personally finds it icky and personally has never had sex, says so. Sure.

"Some guy on the Internet" shares the same feeling with most of the polite society, especially in the church, who find sex as an "icky" taboo topic and avoid talking about it.

When I say "healthy," I mean it's good for a married couple to engage in, as a way to bond. However, if you want to look for healthy side effects of sex, they are real. It can act similar to a light workout, raise levels of a certain antibody, releases endorphins that block pain, can release hormones that help you fall asleep faster, and can lower stress hormones. Of course, people in biblical times probably didn't know all the specific science behind it, but we do know this now.

What medical degree qualifies you to make such statement? Even if these were true, have you considered the pain or discomfort you'd cause to your partner? Have you any shred of respect for her, when you screw her body made in the image of God for your own use in the name of "health benefits"? Aren't you ashamed of yourself, treating your partner whom God gave to you as a therapeutic tool? Is it a way to bond - or exploit?

Sure. But that is a different argument than saying something like, "It's 100% impossible that Peter was ever married." Which is what you, apparently believe. Even though Peter had a mother-in-law.

Your strawman. I made no such argument.

But we're currently in "this life," as you put it. We are not in Heaven right now. Should I put my whole life on hold just because I might be in Heaven tomorrow? I would say no. Nobody knows when the Day will come.

Yes, and therefore always be watchful and prepared. Don't be distracted by worldly affairs, let you be caught sleeping on the job when the day does come.

 

[RodColeman]

"All" is your rhetoric, not mine or Lord Jesus's.

"All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given.'" Jesus Himself used the word "all" here.

"Some guy on the Internet" shares the same feeling with most of the polite society, especially in the church, who find sex as an "icky" taboo topic and avoid talking about it.

Depends on the setting, and how you talk about it.

What medical degree qualifies you to make such statement?

I don't need a medical degree to learn about how the human body works. Learning about things is easy in this day and age. What, exactly, did I say that was scientifically inaccurate? And did you need a medical degree to conclude that women can never, ever, enjoy sex?

Even if these were true, have you considered the pain or discomfort you'd cause to your partner? Have you any shred of respect for her, when you screw her body made in the image of God for your own use in the name of "health benefits"? Aren't you ashamed of yourself, treating your partner whom God gave to you as a therapeutic tool? Is it a way to bond - or exploit?

Are you saying that every married couple that has sex........has sex because the husband is coercing the wife to have sex with him? Is that how all those families form? And what if the wife wants sex? Is she "exploiting" her husband in that scenario? Look, I get that you, personally, have no interest in sex. And that you, personally, find it icky. But, as crazy as it sounds, not everyone on planet Earth is like that. I would have thought that was obvious, given that Earth is populated by as many as 8.3 billion people. How did all these people get here? Was it all because of a guy's coercion of his unwilling partner? In every single instance? Even among the Christians? Even among the people who got married and had sex?

Your strawman. I made no such argument.

Oh. So you do agree that Peter was married? Or agree that it's possible he was married? Wouldn't that be different from what you wrote earlier?

Yes, and therefore always be watchful and prepared. Don't be distracted by worldly affairs, let you be caught sleeping on the job when the day does come.

If you find marriage too distracting and worldly, well, you don't have to get married. Up to you.

 

[Lynx]

Dude. Fun is fun, but this is getting nowhere. I've seen this horse, and all the others on the merry-go-round, go past at least eight times now.

 

[RodColeman]

Dude. Fun is fun, but this is getting nowhere. I've seen this horse, and all the others on the merry-go-round, go past at least eight times now.

I am finding it fun, though. Hahaha!

 

[Lovette]

"All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given.'" Jesus Himself used the word "all" here.

All CANNOT. In other words, NOT all. You can't read？

Depends on the setting, and how you talk about it.

How about just don't talk about it at all, sparing you and others from the ickiness?

I don't need a medical degree to learn about how the human body works. Learning about things is easy in this day and age. What, exactly, did I say that was scientifically inaccurate? And did you need a medical degree to conclude that women can never, ever, enjoy sex?

Yes you do. Knowing ABOUT something is one thing, knowing something by lived experience is another. Learning about how things really work is NOT easy, because the algorythm feeds your confirmation bias by only showing you what you wanna see.

Are you saying that every married couple that has sex........has sex because the husband is coercing the wife to have sex with him? Is that how all those families form? And what if the wife wants sex? Is she "exploiting" her husband in that scenario? Look, I get that you, personally, have no interest in sex. And that you, personally, find it icky. But, as crazy as it sounds, not everyone on planet Earth is like that. I would have thought that was obvious, given that Earth is populated by as many as 8.3 billion people. How did all these people get here? Was it all because of a guy's coercion of his unwilling partner? In every single instance? Even among the Christians? Even among the people who got married and had sex?

Whether the wife wants it in your purely hypothetical scenario I don't know, all I know is that you promote sex for these fabricated therapeutic benefits by exploiting your partner. As crazy as it sounds, you have no idea what a woman has to go through, how much sacrifice she has to make for the consequence of your momentary pleasure.

Oh. So you do agree that Peter was married? Or agree that it's possible he was married? Wouldn't that be different from what you wrote earlier?

I agree it's all pointless speculation.

If you find marriage too distracting and worldly, well, you don't have to get married. Up to you.

I find your persistent lack of comprehension, that marriage is for all mankind, not unique for Christians. For Christians, those who are already married are given advice, those who are single are to remain single.

 

[Lynx]

 

[RodColeman]

All CANNOT. In other words, NOT all. You can't read？

"All cannot accept this saying." What saying? That it's better for everyone to just never marry. In other words, "All cannot accept staying single forever." Or "not everyone can accept staying single forever."

Or, to use your phrasing "Not all can accept this saying." Or "not all can accept staying single forever."

How about just don't talk about it at all, sparing you and others from the ickiness?

Sure, if you find it icky, you don't have to talk about it.

Yes you do. Knowing ABOUT something is one thing, knowing something by lived experience is another. Learning about how things really work is NOT easy, because the algorithm feeds your confirmation bias by only showing you what you wanna see.

Well, maybe you're right. and it was all just the algorithm feeding my biases. So what did I say that that was scientifically inaccurate?

Whether the wife wants it in your purely hypothetical scenario I don't know, all I know is that you promote sex for these fabricated therapeutic benefits by exploiting your partner. As crazy as it sounds, you have no idea what a woman has to go through, how much sacrifice she has to make for the consequence of your momentary pleasure.

Why are they "fabricated"? You assert that women can't enjoy sex. What science is this based on? Do you believe that all women have zero sexual desire? It's completely a male thing? If so, what are you basing that on?

I agree it's all pointless speculation.

So it's "speculation" that Peter was married or unmarried, either way? Apparently, we can't know whether or not Peter was married and that it was speculation. Even though the biblical texts tell us that he was married, or perhaps married at one time. Because he had a mother-in-law. So we can know. How can you be unmarried and still have a "mother-in-law" or "wife's mother," as the Greek wording puts it?

I find your persistent lack of comprehension, that marriage is for all mankind, not unique for Christians. For Christians, those who are already married are given advice, those who are single are to remain single.

So all singles of all ages have to remain single? Is that what Paul taught? What all did he say on this topic?

In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul says he has no "commandment from God" about this. Paul says that he wishes that everyone was single like him ── not that God wishes it. He says that he, personally, is content with being single ── but he admits that not everyone is like that. He says that it's good to stay single, but that it's better to marry if you have strong desires. Paul "supposes" that it's better to stay single because of "the present distress," some crisis that the church in Corinth was dealing with at the time. He says you're not sinning by marrying. Paul says a widow would be happier if she stayed single, but he admits that this is just a personal opinion. Evidently, many people are not happier being single. In 1 Timothy 4:1-3 Paul also condemns people who forbid marriage. And if Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews, then he also said that marriage is a good thing.

Is there a command here, given by Paul, for the Corinthians to stay single forever? Or for all Christians of all ages to stay single forever?

 

[Lovette]

"All cannot accept this saying." What saying? That it's better for everyone to just never marry. In other words, "All cannot accept staying single forever." Or "not everyone can accept staying single forever."

Or, to use your phrasing "Not all can accept this saying." Or "not all can accept staying single forever."

What's worth considering is if any girl would accept you, lol.

Sure, if you find it icky, you don't have to talk about it.

What I find really icky is you bringing sex talk into the house of God.

Well, maybe you're right. and it was all just the algorithm feeding my biases. So what did I say that that was scientifically inaccurate?

You're as accurate as any health guru promoting such "benefits" from sex. I never expected this from any credible Christian who's so obsessed with their nether region, so nosy in other people's business in the bedroom, and so proud of it.

Why are they "fabricated"? You assert that women can't enjoy sex. What science is this based on? Do you believe that all women have zero sexual desire? It's completely a male thing? If so, what are you basing that on?

Again, "all", your rhetoric, your blanket statement, not mine. You don't represent "all".

So it's "speculation" that Peter was married or unmarried, either way? Apparently, we can't know whether or not Peter was married and that it was speculation. Even though the biblical texts tell us that he was married, or perhaps married at one time. Because he had a mother-in-law. So we can know. How can you be unmarried and still have a "mother-in-law" or "wife's mother," as the Greek wording puts it?

The speculation is not on his initial marital status, but on whether he remained married after his denial of Christ, conversion, baptism of the Holy Spirit, imprisonment and missionary journey?

So all singles of all ages have to remain single? Is that what Paul taught? What all did he say on this topic?

In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul says he has no "commandment from God" about this. Paul says that he wishes that everyone was single like him ── not that God wishes it. He says that he, personally, is content with being single ── but he admits that not everyone is like that. He says that it's good to stay single, but that it's better to marry if you have strong desires. Paul "supposes" that it's better to stay single because of "the present distress," some crisis that the church in Corinth was dealing with at the time. He says you're not sinning by marrying. Paul says a widow would be happier if she stayed single, but he admits that this is just a personal opinion. Evidently, many people are not happier being single. In 1 Timothy 4:1-3 Paul also condemns people who forbid marriage. And if Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews, then he also said that marriage is a good thing.

Is there a command here, given by Paul, for the Corinthians to stay single forever? Or for all Christians of all ages to stay single forever?

Again, "all", your rhetoric, your blanket statement, not mine. You don't represent "all".

 

[RodColeman]

What's worth considering is if any girl would accept you, lol.

That has nothing to do with you or my interpretation of what Paul wrote here.

What I find really icky is you bringing sex talk into the house of God.

Well, I didn't mean to ick you out. But sex is a normal part of human biology, and human biology was designed by God. Doesn't mean all forms of sex are good or permitted, or course.

You're as accurate as any health guru promoting such "benefits" from sex. I never expected this from any credible Christian who's so obsessed with their nether region and so proud of it.

So there are no benefits to sex? Even if you're a Christian married couple?

Again, "all", your rhetoric, your blanket statement, not mine. You don't represent "all".

I'm asking questions to test the implications of things that you said. Or seem to be saying.

The speculation is not on his initial marital status, but on whether he remained married after his denial of Christ, conversion, baptism of the Holy Spirit, imprisonment and missionary journey?

We know Peter had a mother-in-law, so, yeah, he was married at one point.

Again, "all", your rhetoric, your blanket statement, not mine. You don't represent "all".

I'm asking questions to test some of your statements, not making a blanket statement. That's why I included question marks, haha.

 

[Lovette]

That has nothing to do with you or my interpretation of what Paul wrote here.

Or it has everything to do with how what he wrote applies to you.

Well, I didn't mean to ick you out. But sex is a normal part of human biology, and human biology was designed by God. Doesn't mean all forms of sex are good or permitted, or course.

Men do not live for biological impulses alone, but every word proceeds from the mouth of God.

So there are no benefits to sex? Even if you're a Christian married couple?

All or nothing false dichotomy.

I'm asking questions to test the implications of things that you said. Or seem to be saying.

And I'm returning it back to sender.

We know Peter had a mother-in-law, so, yeah, he was married at one point.

We don't know whether he had sex regularly or whether he had kids, so your gobbledygook is moot.

I'm asking questions to test some of your statements, not making a blanket statement. That's why I included question marks, haha.

And I'm returning it back to sender, once again.

 

[RodColeman]

Or it has everything to do with how what he wrote applies to you.

Well, what all did Paul write? Paul says he has no "commandment from God" about this. Paul says that he wishes that everyone was single like him ── not that God wishes it. He says that he, personally, is content with being single ── but he admits that not everyone is like that. He says that it's good to stay single, but that it's better to marry if you have strong desires. Paul "supposes" that it's better to stay single because of "the present distress," some crisis that the church in Corinth was dealing with at the time. He says you're not sinning by marrying. Paul says a widow would be happier if she stayed single, but he admits that this is just a personal opinion. Evidently, many people are not happier being single. In 1 Timothy 4:1-3 Paul also condemns people who forbid marriage. And if Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews, then he also said that marriage is a good thing.

Men do not live for biological impulses alone, but every word proceeds from the mouth of God.

I never said we should live by biological impulses "alone."

All or nothing false dichotomy.

It was a simple question.

And I'm returning it back to sender.

Why not answer the questions, though? You don't have to, though.

We don't know whether he had sex regularly or whether he had kids, so your gobbledygook is moot.

The reason I brought up Peter was because, earlier, you said that the disciples were role models and you questioned whether they ever had sex. Maybe you thought that all the disciples were single as well, though I don't know if that's what you actually thought. I brought up Peter because he was an example of a disciple of Jesus's who was not unmarried. Therefore, it was a possibility that he had had sex, because, well, he was a married man in an ancient society. Or perhaps, he was a once-married man.

I didn't say anything about whether or not Peter ever had sex or had kids. But if he did, it would have been lawful.

And I'm returning it back to sender, once again.

Why not just answer the question? LOL.