Was God right about slavery in the bible?
I hope you can help, here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/does-god-approve-of-slavery.163988/
Religion and women.
- Thread starter Xelasnave.1947
- Start date
- Status
I hope you can help, here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/does-god-approve-of-slavery.163988/
The bible says that rape victims should marry their rapist:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29:
If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.
billvon said:
Maybe it's because they are following God's example, or instructions, from the bible. For example, here's one from earlier that you ignored, as usual.Jan Ardena said:
Numbers 31:
============
And the LORD said to Moses, “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.” So Moses told the people, “Arm some of your men for war, that they may go against the Midianites and execute the LORD’s vengeance on them. Send into battle a thousand men from each tribe of Israel.” So a thousand men were recruited from each tribe of Israel—twelve thousand armed for war. And Moses sent the thousand from each tribe into battle, along with Phinehas son of Eleazar the priest, who took with him the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for signaling. Then they waged war against Midian, as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed every male. Among the slain were Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba—the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. The Israelites captured the Midianite women and their children, and they plundered all their herds, flocks, and goods. Then they burned all the cities where the Midianites had lived, as well as all their encampments, and carried away all the plunder and spoils, both people and animals. They brought the captives, spoils, and plunder to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the congregation of Israel at the camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho. And Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the congregation went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was angry with the officers of the army—the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds—who were returning from the battle. “Have you spared all the women?” he asked them. “Look, these women caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to turn unfaithfully against the LORD at Peor, so that the plague struck the congregation of the LORD. So now, kill all the boys, as well as every woman who has had relations with a man, but spare for yourselves every girl who has never had relations with a man."
What kind of sheltered existence do you lead, Jan?
As an example, let me refer you to the definition of rape in the criminal code in my own jurisdiction. Rape requires sexual penetration without consent. Here's how "sexual penetration" is defined:
(1) A person (A) sexually penetrates another person (B) if—
(a) A introduces (to any extent) a part of A's body or an object into B's vagina; or
(b) A introduces (to any extent) a part of A's body or an object into B's anus; or
(c) A introduces (to any extent) their penis into B's mouth; or
(d) A, having introduced a part of A's body or an object into B's vagina, continues to keep it there; or
(e) A, having introduced a part of A's body or an object into B's anus, continues to keep it there; or
(f) A, having introduced their penis into B's mouth, continues to keep it there.
(2) A person sexually penetrates themselves if—
(a) the person introduces (to any extent) a part of their body or an object into their own vagina; or
(b) the person introduces (to any extent) a part of their body or an object into their own anus; or
(c) having introduced a part of their body or an object into their own vagina, they continue to keep it there; or
(d) having introduced a part of their body or an object into their own anus, they continue to keep it there.
---
Now, see if you can figure out the answer to your own question.
Right. It just supports or condones the abuse of women by men. It also allows men who abuse or condone abuse an excuse.
You have it backwards, as usual.
If you use your religion to excuse men abusing women - or to excuse your own abuse or sexism towards women - then you're acting immorally, because abuse of women by men is morally wrong.
It's not the atheists' fault if you, as a religious man, believe that your religion's allowance of or condoning of abuse makes it morally acceptable to you.
Go out of your way to twist the ordinary meaning of the words of your own "holy scriptures", wherever necessary, to suit your own preconceptions, you mean. And defend those "holy scriptures" even when they are clearly immoral or promulgate immorality.
Out of interest, Jan, seeing as you appear to support the legal code of Exodus and Deuteronomy, can you please confirm for me that you think the appropriate penalty for rape is death?
Bells
Staff member
Jan is debating that the original text or interpretation of the text does not explicitly say he raped her and does not indicate that she did not consent..
What Jan fails to note that it also does not say that she consented, so both are deemed to be the same if the woman or girl is a virgin and not betrothed or married.
And as for today, it's not just in Middle Eastern cultures, but also across many parts of the world and communities, be it Asia, Africa, South America, Europe, etc.. And in a lot of countries, such marry your rapist laws were only repealed in the last 10 years. Denmark, for example, repealed it's marry your rapist laws in 2013. Greece, 2018. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marry-your-rapist_law]
Some countries, like the Philippine's as one example, actually adopted such laws in the last 25 years.. There are others who keep these laws on their books..
Russia:
Article 134 of Russian criminal code states, that if the perpetrator is aged 18 or older and has committed statutory rape with a minor between the age of 14 and 16 for the first time, he is exempt from punishment if he marries the victim
Mexico:
Apparently, it's okay as long as the rapist marries the woman afterwards, and pays the appropriate dowry.
This is what you are supporting.
Looking at the bigger picture here, your problem, Jan, is that you seem to regard women as objects. Their value, if they have any, is in their ability to produce "progeny" for men. As objects, they are to be regarded as a kind of property that men can possess. This is the biblical attitude to women, too, for the most part.
Since women are the property of men, it follows that men can justifiably control women, including what they are and are not allowed to do with their own bodies. Thus follows the desire of men - especially, in the modern era, religious men - to control women's reproductive rights, because they can.
Your wide-eyed innocent ploy, saying "Nobody has shown why I'm a sexist man? (Poor little old me.)" is again exposed for the lie that it is. Your own words repeatedly condemn you.
Last edited:
Correct. Now learn what rape really is.
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
Just Google "how wives can submit to their husbands", but get a bucket first as what you will find will make you throw up...handy hints from good Christian folk on how to be a submissive wife....these people are evil...Weggs please have a goggle.
As Bells clearly identified things need to change and yet we get folk who will not see the problem...well I expect if nothing is done christianity will die out for what it is..an ancient superstitious cult offering terrible morality along side decency..folk in the end reject things that are in consistent...
I expect now many folk who have lost love ones, capital, businesses jobs recreation and had a very terrible past 12 months must be asking...why god why? And yes one can only wonder what is gods grand plan at the moment...how many deaths how many bankruptcies how much misery....but I don't see how the last year fits with Jans god can not do wrong...there would seem a great case for there is no god or if there is that he does not care about humans in the least... wake up folks there is no Santa.
Alex
As Bells clearly identified things need to change and yet we get folk who will not see the problem...well I expect if nothing is done christianity will die out for what it is..an ancient superstitious cult offering terrible morality along side decency..folk in the end reject things that are in consistent...
I expect now many folk who have lost love ones, capital, businesses jobs recreation and had a very terrible past 12 months must be asking...why god why? And yes one can only wonder what is gods grand plan at the moment...how many deaths how many bankruptcies how much misery....but I don't see how the last year fits with Jans god can not do wrong...there would seem a great case for there is no god or if there is that he does not care about humans in the least... wake up folks there is no Santa.
Alex
James James James -
We've already gone round and round on this with Jan. First he went with the translation that uses the terminology "lay hold of" and Jan tried to argue that that means that it was consensual because it's just like what women say in love songs (really.) Then I posted the NKJV translation ("seized") and he hemmed and hawed. Then I posted the NIV translation, a translation in simpler English for people who have trouble with vocabulary. It uses a much simpler term, "rape." He's been quiet since then.
If he follows his usual pattern he'll be back in a day and attempt to change the topic.
People who think that are either ignorant, evil, or both.
Jesus didn’t have to “treat” women with equity, as though they were a different species. He answered the Pharisees “Have ye not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female,”. Notice he said “read”, because he knew they didn’t know.
We are essentially the same, but we are made either male or female.
No need for any sentiment, or special treatment.
If you love God, with all your heart, soul, and might. You love all as you love yourself.
Neither do I.
How can they violate women, and be Christians simultaneously? That only makes sense if they are like the Pharisees. Those who make a show of religion (being Christian) with pomp, ceremony, and stuff that has nothing to do with God.
IOW one isn’t a follower of Christ because they deem themselves to be. To be a follower of Christ, one has to endeavour to love God with all your heart, soul, and might like Jesus did. Can be very difficult in this age.
It’s about progeny.
God conscious parents provide the best opportunity for souls to become God conscious.
Jesus is the example for all souls to follow.
It’s not about success in this world.
See it from that point, and it makes perfect sense.
By atheists.
Not credible
You can repeat that nonsense all you like.
You’re an atheist, meaning you are without, lack, or have a disbelief, in God.
Read how Jesus dealt with the Pharisees if you want a perfect idea of your current attitude.
The only reason you keep trying to hammer this home, is for your own benefit
Last edited:
Based on that quote. How so?
Progeny for men?
Where did I say that?
Terrible logic.
You concoct a scenario, make like that is what was said, then proceed to correct it.
You don’t need me to converse with.
Your doing it by yourself, by playing the part of me.
The “best opportunity” isn’t for a rape victim to marry her rapist. The Bible states that such men (usually) were put to death. They didn’t have an elaborate justice system then so that’s how they dealt with rapists. I’m not sure why you see this passage differently than it really is.
Yea, I don’t think that the rapists in question were followers of Jesus.
Article 134. Illicit Sexual Relations or Other Sexual Actions with a Person Who Has Not Reached 16 Years of Age
Illicit sexual relations, pederasty, or lesbianism, committed by a person who has reached 18 years of age with a person who obviously has not reached 16 years of age,
shall be punishable by restraint of liberty for a term of up to three years or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to four years.
Federal Law No. 73-FZ of July 21, 2004 amended Article 135 of the present Code
Article 135. Depraved Actions
Commission of depraved actions without the use of violence by the person who has reached the age of 18 years in relations to a person who obviously has not reached 16 years of age,
shall be punishable by a fine in the amount up to 300 thousand roubles, or in the amount of the wage or salary, or any other income of the convicted person for a period up to two years, or by restraint of liberty for a term of up to two years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to three years.
Chapter 19. Crimes Against the Constitutional Rights and Freedoms of Man and
Illicit sexual relations, pederasty, or lesbianism, committed by a person who has reached 18 years of age with a person who obviously has not reached 16 years of age,
shall be punishable by restraint of liberty for a term of up to three years or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to four years.
Federal Law No. 73-FZ of July 21, 2004 amended Article 135 of the present Code
Article 135. Depraved Actions
Commission of depraved actions without the use of violence by the person who has reached the age of 18 years in relations to a person who obviously has not reached 16 years of age,
shall be punishable by a fine in the amount up to 300 thousand roubles, or in the amount of the wage or salary, or any other income of the convicted person for a period up to two years, or by restraint of liberty for a term of up to two years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to three years.
Chapter 19. Crimes Against the Constitutional Rights and Freedoms of Man and
- Status