I Would Like to Thank Some of the Christians Here (Jesus, homosexuals)

[DallasApple]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

I think you're stretching an analogy to the breaking point. Both Jesus and Paul said it was better not to marry at all, so the analogy of male-female sexual union cannot be meant to be lived out in the life of every believer.

Right...getting married was to avoid burning with desire and possibly commiting sin.

Paul did admit though form what I interpreted that he knew most could not be like him..Its kinda like..I know you all will be miserable if you dont get to have sex "unlike me"..So go ahead and get married so you can be relieved of your torture.

Love

Dallas

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

The only unity that is allowed is the one that compliments the unity of Christ (male) and the Church (female). There is no male/male or female/female unity, just like Timaeus.

So how exactly does a male priesthood fit into the male/female, Christ/Church cosmology?

[DallasApple]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

So how exactly does a male priesthood fit into the male/female, Christ/Church cosmology?

The priest is married to the church????And the church is a female???

Love

Dallas

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

In that case, it is expressed in a participation in a closer union of Christ // Church rather than male // female.

So, some forms of sexual expression (celibacy) can opt out of the analogy, but others can't?

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by DallasApple

The priest is married to the church????And the church is a female???

I think the priest is said to represent Christ, in which case we should probably eat his flesh and drink his blood.

But then, the priest is also part of the Church, and represents the Church before God. So the priest should be a female.

And the Mother of God is symbolic of the Church, too, but she's Jesus' mother, not his bride.

And at least two of the three persons of the Trinity are represented as male, and the other is sometimes represented as female. Maybe the relationship most emblematic of the love of the Holy Trinity would be one woman with two men.

Or maybe the relationship of two men is emblematic of the union of the Father and the Son. Or maybe the relationship of two women is emblematic of the union of the Church and the Holy Spirit.

Or maybe all such ideas are arbitrary and contrived, and sensible people don't judge real-life sexual relationships by such criteria.

[DallasApple]

I think the priest is said to represent Christ, in which case we should probably eat his flesh and drink his blood.

Oh darn!!! Im trying to cut back on meat!..

But I'll take a piece of bread and some red wine...

Love

Dallas

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

So, some forms of sexual expression (celibacy) can opt out of the analogy, but others can't?

Celibacy is not a form of sexual expression. Remember, in this context the emphasis is not on inner sexuality (attractiveness or psychology) but action. Inaction is not an action, so it's a moot point.

As it happens, celibacy is preferred, but sexual expression (read activity) is limited to the heterosexual activity that is in the image of unity (male//female = Christ // church) patterned after the original created order (Adam // Eve).

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Or maybe all such ideas are arbitrary and contrived, and sensible people don't judge real-life sexual relationships by such criteria.

Not back then.

Read Plato's Symposium, then the Timaeus, and compare that to Plutarch's dialogue on love (patterned after the Symposium), and compare that to Paul / Christ / and the Apocalypse. It all fits together quite nicely - the cosmology in the NT takes quite a clear position on the side that argues for a cosmology and ethic that excludes homosexuality.