Why is this cringe, though? They're not arguing something countless artists haven't; they're just using their Bible as a reference to support the argument.
I'm missing some context, in a big way. All I know is this was a letter to the Corinthian church, by Paul?
Yah, I don't know either. I'm just not sure what OP is objecting to as "cringe." Viewing marriage as slavery certainly isn't a commonly held Christian viewpoint. I got a reply that using the bible to argue anything is cringe; I assume that would be their view if someone argued against usury, murder, rape, or whatever by using passages from the bible.
The sound bite reads as if a Christian opposes marriage, and is using the Bible itself as a reference. I'm lost about what's cringey about it.
Arguing anything on the basis of the Bible (or any religious text) is pretty cringe.
Huh. I'd expect that take from an #athiest community. I don't think this is an "anything having to do with religion is cringe" community.
The use of the word "slavery" is strange, but there are plenty of Christians who took this view of marriage. The Quakers pretty much died out because they believed celibacy was better than marriage.
I viewpoint more religious people should take. I prefer it to the quiverfull nutjobs
"No, I'm not dumb, ugly or a religious nutcase. I don't WANT to get married because I read some parts of a book written thousands of years ago by sheepfuckers, and according to my clearly superior interpretation of said book, Jesus and the invisible sky-lord don't want me to marry."
It very clearly says that marriage is okay.
The context of those passages, as I recall, is basically that "Jesus is gonna come back any second now, so don't bother with worldly concerns like marriage and making babies. Just devote your life to being a good Christian and leave the fornicating to the heathens, unless you absolutely can't live without getting laid on the regular." It's hard to understate the degree to which the early church was basically a doomsday cult. They were certain that the Rapture was going to happen in their lifetimes, and that short time horizon had a big impact on how they thought their society should be organized.
Had a buddy at work like this. Whole family was staunch Southern Baptists. Having said that, they were some of the finest people I've ever known. Really.
We were talking religion one day and he brought up the, "Jesus coming back any minute" thing. I think we started on global warming, which he seemed to think was some sort of conspiracy, and in any case, didn't matter because the world was ending soon.
"You realize contemporary Christians in Jesus' time believed he was coming back at 'any minute'? They expected him back in their lifetimes. It's right there in the Bible. And so is the bit about not knowing the day or hour, 'I will come like a thief in the night.' Jesus' own words. Do you not believe the man's own words?"
"So don't you think it's kinda arrogant, thinking our generation is so special that Jesus will grace us? Cause people have been waiting for 2,000-years, thinking they were special, and they weren't."
Obviously that wasn't the exact discussion, but I set out all those points at once. He was nonplussed, to say the least. Especially the part about "thief in the night" and not believing Jesus' own words.
Anyway, I guess I'm rambling. But the only way to turn people around is a solid sit-down like him and I had. And notice I didn't steam roll him with facts? I appealed to some emotion in there. (That doesn't really come across in text.)
Yeah, he says "look buddy, you can do it if you want, but I'm telling you right now, you won't enjoy the trouble it brings you".
Which is basically what my drunk divorced friend told me before I got married...
Well, okay then, talk about out of context assumption.
But if sex is only allowed between married partners, how does the religion not die out? π€ /s
