Well I'm sure his cat must have taught him a thing or two... but overall yes, sex does seem to be another subject that he just doesn't get.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 7^th, 2013 at 7:09pm:


Now now don't overplay it Longo...    I am saying that only a small fraction of the Scrolls have been released.  to anyone.!  Anyone  does not include, obviously,  just anyone.   a  t all..

And in fact  those 'Scholars'  are very few in number.... compared to the numbers of 'serious scholars' who would LOVE to get a chance to cherish them....    
don't ask me why...


You brought the 'conspiracy' word up...  and since you mention it... HOW could it possibly be BAD,  to allow wider access to this treasure of historical record.??   

What could there possibly be to fear??   

Quantum wrote on Mar 7^th, 2013 at 1:24pm:


No you havent "got me now" you have just finally decided to do the right thing. Was it THAT hard to do?

Now as i said before "sexuality" isnt what the celibacy article was talking about. Chastity and celibacy are different things to the church according to not only wikipedia but the catholic encyclopaedia i quoted.

Meanwhile the celibacy issues also a strawman - you like them dont you.

SOB

KJT1981 wrote on Mar 7^th, 2013 at 8:25pm:


Go away troll

SOB

You are batshit crazy. When there is complete agreement that you are wrong, when you are caught red handed making baseless accusations, and even when people who would normally agree with you say that Wikipedia is a ridiculous resource, you still fight on as if you a correct.

There is no greeting through to you that you are wrong. Your only response is; got no argument ay troll, when people give up explaining to you that water is wet and the Sun is hot because you just don't get it.

Myself making an argument, and you being too stupid to understand the argument being made, are two different things.

The argument has been made that celibacy both in and out of the church is in regards to being unmarried and sexually abstinent. I am not denying that the narrow usage of the word is in reference to being unmarried. In fact, the original usage of the word was in reference to being unmarried. But all words can have a narrow and broader meaning, as well as having a shift in meaning over time. Your problem spot is your inability to understand the dynamic range of a word, as well as selectively quoting a use that fits your argument (much like your limited understanding and use of the word atheism). This all started by your claim that;

Quote:


when I replied by asking;

Quote:


your only reply was;

Quote:
 

If you only wanted to argue that in the strictest sense of the word celibacy is in reference to remaining unmarried, you would get no argument from me. But when you want to extrapolate that point to conclude that the catholic church only holds to the narrow sense of the word and that it means that sex outside of marriage is not actually prohibited, then you are simply going to get proven wrong time and time again.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 8^th, 2013 at 10:44am:


To the question that was asked... yes, that was your only reply. You didn't go into any more detail than that in that post. It is forever preserved on page 6 of this thread and there is no point in denying it.

The chain of posts that resulted from your answer to the question are irrelevant, as it was the first post that answered the question that started the debate. It is bad enough that you don't understand English, but do you not understand time and sequence as well?