Thanks for the etymology of “to fornicate,” UDS. I’d seen the question but hadn’t gotten around to looking up the answer regarding the word’s origins. My distinct impression was that Paul and later writers weren’t using it exclusively for “sex with prostitutes” but for “casual sex for pleasure.”
The Greek word used is pornos, which I found in a Greek Lexicon and is used 10 times in the NT. For those who don’t wish to follow the link, here is the definitions it gives:
[quote]
[ul][li]a man who prostitutes his body to another’s lust for hire [/li][li]a male prostitute [/li][li]a man who indulges in unlawful sexual intercourse, a fornicator [/ul][/li][/quote]
ThunderBug’s Greek Lexicon said that pornos, the Greek word traditionally translated as some form of “fornicate,” can mean:
[QUOTE]
[li]a man who indulges in unlawful sexual intercourse, a fornicator[/li][/QUOTE]
Oh, great. Now we’ll never know what does and doesn’t qualify as fornication!
[hijack]
Did you ever read Stephen Jay Gould on the bivalve Fornix fornicarius, tracer?
Well, how about a definition-by-example, then: If it’s sexual, and Jerry Falwell condemns it, it’s probably fornication! 
[slight hijack]
Yes, but none of them did it successfully. In fact, every time someone came up with the brilliant idea of taking more than one wife, bad things happened as a direct result of that decision. It doesn’t take much to read the Bible and come to the conclusion that polgamy is a bad idea from that reading.
[/slight hijack]
A fair amount of “reading between the lines” is done even by bible churches; they have to do that in order to make sense of it all. Otherwise, why would you need to “study” so much to understand it all? You need to fill in the blanks.
On the other hand, perhaps it is not so much reading between the lines as it is believing in continued revelation. Is it your position that if a person believes that revelation is not dead (e.g., Catholics who believe that God reveals Himself to them through the Bible and the Church), then they are not Christian?
Some theologians try to bring out the spin doctors and make it look like something bad happened to them for taking on more than one wife, but this is rarely the case and in fact, they are often rewarded for it. Many try to point out Solomon and use that as case and point. I could be mistaken, but the best I recollect; I think what God was angry about with Solomon wasn’t so much his many wives, but because his wives encouraged him to worship other gods. But for punishment God doesn’t do anything to him, but takes it out on his son, saying he will take the kingdom away from him, but not do anything while Solomon is alive. Among some of the other polygamists and bigamists were, Moses, Lamech, Abraham, Esau, Jacob, and David. David had so many I can’t count them all, as well as having his share of mistresses. And his relationship with Jonathan is debatable as well. In the OT, women weren’t treated much better than cattle in that day. They were given as rewards, purchased as wives, captured as loot, just about anything your imagination can think of you‘ll find in the OT.
John
It’s a sad thing when I have to scroll back to the (most enlightening) hijacks since I can’t remember what the OP was about.
John, I don’t believe most preachers are confidence men, although I have known one I have a few doubts about, thanks to his attempts to sexually harrass me. He was, by the way, a somewhat fundamentalist Baptist who apparently chose to ignore the commandment about not committing adultery. I’d be willing to bet that since the founding of Christianity, there have been those who have become priests because they felt a genuine calling and those who’ve done so for more earthly reasons such as power and prestige. For that matter, I seem to recall there being something in the book of Acts about a man who claimed to be a disciple of Christ’s who wasn’t. As far as I know, the priests I’ve known have believed in the divinity of Christ and the things they’re teaching. I’ve also known a few who’ve admitted in sermons that there are things they don’t know. I don’t know what they believe in their heart of hearts; then again, they don’t know mine either.
CJ
Genuine question … is there any evidence of that ? Can give me a cite ?
First off, John, do you have any online cites from that book your mention in the OP? Any reason why we should consider it a reliable source, other than because you like it? (I’m just asking—I’ve never heard of the book, and don’t know anything about how they collected their data.)
Do preachers who don’t collect a salary factor into this? A lot of preachers are unpaid. My church does not pay its pastors, they all have day jobs. I doubt my church is alone in this practice. And, even among the preachers who do collect a salary, I doubt many of them make a lot of money. (With the exception of televangelists, which are in a different category altogether…)
What percentage of “confidence men” do you think exists amongst the different kinds of teachers (humble unpaid ones, to televangelists)? Does this book you cite tell you that?
JZ–In the NT, Jesus preferred a celibate lifestyle altogether
Not off the top of my head other than one I will share with you. But based on the reading of the NT, it seems quite clear Jesus never married, and he certainly had some very strong views dealing with sex. Very Essene in nature. Saying Jesus preferred celibacy would be too kind. Many believers took Jesus in Matthew 19:11-12 literally, and they self-castrated themselves. This included a famous church father named Origen. The practice got so bad, that the church had to issue a decree to outlaw it. Not much of a challenge after that.
John
CJ, I have to apologize for too, for hijacking my own board, but good to have your read since this is what my OP was about.
I think it’s difficult to get frank opinions from preachers even in private, and I‘ve only met a few. There’s been some excellent books out from ex-preachers that are eye-openers on how they run and talk shop when they were in the church. The Pope’s and early church father’s writings are also real eye-openers. Irenaeus writings show Jesus living to be an old man. Papias shared the same sentiments. There’s also a wealth of evidence on how the virgin-birth came about that I’m sure you’re never going to see taught in Sunday class rooms. There’s a Catholic site that has much of this on-line.
John
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by yosemitebabe *
First off, John, do you have any online cites from that book your mention in the OP? Any reason why we should consider it a reliable source, other than because you like it? (I’m just asking—I’ve never heard of the book, and don’t know anything about how they collected their data.)
[quote]
I cited my source on my OP but will make it more detailed if it is important to you. The Mind of the Bible-Believer by Edmund D. Cohen Prometheus Press c.r. 1988–Quote I provided was at the bottom of page 38 in footnotes and it cites for its source the authors Rodney Stark, Bruce D. Foster, Charles Y Glock, and Harold E. Quinley which gathered the information for their Wayward Shepherds: Prejudice and the Protestant Clergy It’s put out by Harper & Row NY c.r. 1971. No sorry, I don’t have a on-line source, and not sure if a google search engine would provide one since it is copyrighted.
I’m not concerned with me or anyone else liking or disliking the statistic.
Money doesn’t have to be the motivating force. As we heard from CJ, sex might enter into the equation. I’m sure your familiar with some of the sex scandals from various tele-evangelicals, as well as with what’s going on with the RCC right now.
Concerning the country preachers, I’ve met one similar preacher who had to hold another day time job as well while having a country church. Didn’t get to talk to him much. He seemed like an honest enough man to me from what little time I spent talking to him.
I don’t think it’s uncommon for congregations of 300-400 to be paying their preacher $100,000 per year. My memory may stand to be corrected on the amount, but that’s the figure I remember somebody telling me they paid their Church of Christ minister many years ago. I believe he also was furnished a house.
Sorry, but I don’t understand your last question dealing with confidence men as different kinds of teachers.
John
You have a cite? The Catholic site would suffice.
That would be because it was a typo. “Teachers” should have been “preachers”. I type too fast sometimes.
The reason I asked for more information on the book was because WV Woman didn’t believe the statistics. You said you did believe them, but you didn’t really explain why—other than the statistics were in that book. Is there any reason why WV Woman should believe them as well, or are you unconcerned as to whether she believes them or not?
As far as sex entering into the equation with some of these preachers, yes, I’m sure it does, in small numbers. Even though the molestation scandal in the Catholic Church is a horrible thing, I believe the percentage of priests who molest or have inappropriate sexual contact is relatively low (I could be wrong—can anyone provide cites?) And we are not even talking about other churches, where pastors are allowed (encouraged) to be married. I don’t know the percentages of course, but my WAG is that a distinct minority of preachers stay in their profession so they can hit on the babes.
As far as the salaries of some preachers—sure, some make a lot of money. But most churches I see (as I drive through a town) are average sized, and modest. I doubt that the congregations for these churches can afford to pay lofty salaries to their pastors. My WAG would be that only affluent churches can afford to pay their pastors such high salaries. I don’t think that the majority of churches are that affluent.
And your term “country preacher”—I’m not familiar with that term. I grew up in Los Angeles, no “country” there, yet none of the pastors in any of our congregations drew a salary. It is a tradition in our particular church.
And, I will ask again (without the typo): Are there any statistics (in the book you cited, or elsewhere) that give numbers on how many preachers (across the board, from unpaid preachers to telemarketers) are “confidence men”?
WV, everyone reads between the lines to a greater or lesser degree - if this were not the case there would be a great deal more one eyed Christian men than there are at present. 
It is really a question of degrees. I hope and pray that my relationship with God and His son Jesus Christ will help steer me away from interpretations of His word that are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay of base. As for the rest, they are not of that much consequence…
As for preachers being con men, it is easy to see how, in some of the less hierarchical denominations, there would be scope for dishonest people to use the system and the trust of their followers to line their own pockets. In the more traditional branches of the Church (C of E, Catholic, Methodist, et al) it is harder to see someone entering the ministry with profit on his mind - the salaries paid to the common or garden clergyman are hardly exorbitant!!
Grim
See, I type too fast! I meant (of course) “televangelists”.
She didn’t?
WV Woman-- Oh, if they were interviewing that particular subset, then yeah, I could see only 1/3 believing that Jesus was/is divine.
As far as you wanting me to give you a more detailed explanation of why I believe them, you don’t have to rely on me if it is something that interests you. I’ve given all the material to do your own research if this statistic concerns you that much. I’m satisfied with it. The author lists his source. It comes from a very respected publisher. The book has been out for over ten years, and I have yet to see any report doubting this statistic or the author’s credibility in any written or cyber form from anyone else. If you have something for me to doubt the statistic, then be forthcoming with it. I’d like to see it. With you coming from LA, haven’t you ever been around any liberal clergy?
Even though the molestation scandal in the Catholic Church is a horrible thing, I believe the percentage of priests who molest or have inappropriate sexual contact is relatively low (I could be wrong—can anyone provide cites?)
Yes, I think you’re wrong. Don’t have any URL’s, but have plenty of studies. If one starts a new thread on it, I’ll bring what studies I have to it.
The term “country preacher”–Texas is a bit more scattered, so we often use the expression here, even for a few of the churches on the outskirts of town. It’s probably not a very good description for the little churches in the city though.
I don’t think there are no percentages in the book that deal with the term “confidence men,” although it might, it’s been over 10 years since I’ve did a complete reading of it. It is very comprehensive and it deals with the psychology and devices that preachers use on their flocks.
John
This Catholic cite is the most comprehensive cite I’ve found dealing with early church fathers works. You can do a search engine on just about any church father, and if you have a particular work in mind, you can type in that as well. To save you a hell of a lot of time I dug up this one that goes directly to Iren’ dealing with what I mentioned and it will get you there faster and only take a few minutes to read:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103222.htm
It’s been some time since I’ve explored this Catholic cite, and trying to find something that will take you directly to the virgin-birth material. I’m mostly looking for St. Jerome’s material, in particular Adv.Juvianum. If you can’t find it there, I found the infidel’s cite that has Jeromes remarks cited here, along with the chapter and section. This isn’t the catholic cite you asked for with this one, but this is all the time I have for now, and if you perfer another cite, it’ll give you the source of Jerome’s material that has book chapter and section that you can read elsewhere from a cite that you may prefer better. Once you click on to this cite, scroll down about one-third of the page till you get to: The Septuagint and the ‘Virgin-Birth’ Fraud.
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/forgery_in_christianity/chapter_2.html
Hope this has been of some help.
John
Your words, John, but with my emphasis. Because I’m inclined to wonder how many of the priests in your survey fall into a middle ground between unquestioning belief and con-artistry.
You see, I don’t necessarily regard doubt as a negative thing… rather, I see it as a necessary component of having a strong, examined faith. I’m quite sure that a lot of priests feel doubts about many aspects of Christian doctrine. It’s part of the whole spiritual and intellectual process of living life as a Christian. So, I can see why someone, asked (for example) “Do you absolutely and without reservations believe in the divinity of Christ?” might legitimately answer “no”. In fact, as a churchgoer myself, I’m not sure that I’d trust a priest who could answer that question with an unequivocal “yes” - I’d wonder if s/he’d thought hard enough about the question.
But, I can also understand why a priest with doubts would not want to air those doubts in front of the congregation. The priest’s job is to help the congregation grow in faith and come to God; watching their priest go through a crisis of faith during the service is unlikely to achieve that. The priest needs to put the spiritual needs of the congregation first.
So, I’m inclined to think that there are some unquestioning believers in the priesthood, and some out-and-out fakers… and a lot of perfectly honest men and women who are trying to work through their own doubts in order to come to a better understanding of God and His word. I don’t have a problem with that; someone who’s worked through their own doubts stands a better chance of helping me work through mine.
In short; I believe that if God had wanted us to question our faith, He would have given us brains.