mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (09/18/84)
> David Brunson writes this: >>If you don't agree that fornication and discipleship are incompatible, >>then you have been eating too much cabbage. Period. > Actually, St. Paul probably had a different understanding of >what fornication is. The latin word "fornix" means arch. This >is the etymological root of fornication. [Etymological treatise continues] > Of course, through the ages fornication has come to mean an >act of pre-marital or extra-marital sex. I submit that when Paul >spoke out against fornication, he was referring to the temple >prostitution that was common during the First Century. One big hole in this argument is that nothing that Paul may have happened to say in Latin has been recorded. The original language of the New Testament is Koine Greek; therefore, etymological arguements based on Latin are largely irrelevant. The choice of the word 'fornication' by MODERN translators (and I include the KJV among the moderns for this purpose) represents an attempt to convey the intended meaning of the original Greek words. Not to be snide, but I'll take the opinions of the biblical scholars on this one, especially considering their 350+ years of unanimity on this point. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe
jefff@cadovax.UUCP (Jeff Fields) (09/25/84)
Thank you Jeff Gillette and Charley Wingate for pointing out the
irrelevancy of the latin origin of the word fornication and Pauline
doctrine. I did take a rather extreme leap in logic in arguing that
Paul was down only on prostitution. In future postings I will
hopefully make less conclusions based on such sophomoric arguments.
Actually, my whole argument was based on a discussion that I had a few
years ago with a Classics major.
I do however want to make a linguistic and historic point. The
original meaning of fornication was prostitution. Page 722 of
_Webster's_ _New_ _Twentieth_ _Century_ _Dictionary_ _of_ _the_
_English_ _Language_ (Second Edition, unabirdged) has this entry for
fornication:
fornication, n. [LL. fornicatio (-onis), from fornicari, to
fornicate, from fornix (-icis), a vault, a brothel in an
underground vault]
1. voluntary sexual intercourse between an unmarried woman
and a man, especially an unmarried man: it is generally
forbidden by law.
"Fornication is the act of incontinency in single persons;
if either party be married it is adultery."
-Wharton
2. in the Bible, (a) any unlawful sexual intercourse,
including adultery; (b) a forsaking of the true God and
worshipping of idols
Which brings me back to some controversial assertions I made
about prostititutes hanging out in early Christian and Jewish temples.
Presently I have no references to back up these claims. I will work
on it. Remembering my conversation with the Classics student, I
recall that the early Christians before the Emperor Constantine had to
worship secretly in underground vaults. These vaults were used, in
some cases, by prostitutes.
After Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the
Roman Empire, pagan temples were converted into Christian churches.
Prostitution had been sanctioned by some pagan cults worhsipping in
the temples later to become churches. I conjecture that some of these
churches inherited the curse of prostitution.
In regards to my assertion about Jewish temples, I stand
corrected. There was indeed one Temple in Jerusalem. Whether or not
prostitutes frequented the Temple is highly conjectural. It does
mention in Mark 11:15 that Jesus expelled "those who were buying and
selling there;". Perhaps some of the people Jesus kicked out were
prostitutes and there clients.
In closing, I concede that the Pauline letters condemned sex per
se, even in the case of marriage. Paul believed that he was living in
the "End Times" before the second coming of Christ. Why bother with
sex as procreation when the Final Judgement is right around the
corner?
Jeff Fields
--
I once was sad that I had no shoes until a met a man that had no feet.gkm@hou2b.UUCP (G.MCNEES) (09/28/84)
In regard to this statement, I take strong issue!
In closing, I concede that the Pauline letters condemned sex per
se, even in the case of marriage. Paul believed that he was living in
the "End Times" before the second coming of Christ. Why bother with
sex as procreation when the Final Judgement is right around the
corner?
Jeff Fields
You have taken one place in Paul's writing where he was concerned
with the inpending destruction of Jeruselem to conclude that Paul
"comdemned sex per se". If you would read more his writings you
would find quite the contrary. For example, the leaders in the
churches, ie the Elders(=Pastors, Presbyters,Bishops) and Deacons
both had to be married in order to be such! See I Tim 3 and Titus 1.
He also says the "marriage bed" is undefiled, that the husband's
body belongs to his wife and vice versa. I don't have the time right
now to continue, but Paul definitely was in favor of "sex" in its
proper place: in marriage!
in Him who works all things after the council of HIS own will,
gary