• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is God guilty of rape?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Is God guilty of rape?

  • God rapist

  • God not rapist

Results are only viewable after voting.
Still no one asking the interesting questions, and no one providing the answers.

Hypothetically assuming the biblical story to be true:

Did God impregnate Mary without her consent?

Was this a violation of her free will and indicate that God operates on pre-destiny?

Did God fuse God DNA with hers or was the child a completely fabricated being genetically unrelated to Mary resulting in her being only a surrogate?

Since an intact hymen was the traditional test of virginity and during birth the child would have ruptured it before emerging into the world, can it still be considered a "virgin birth"?

I would like to hear the current Christian interpretation of the events and how they answer the above questions.
 
cubby1223 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] The noun troll may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted".
Click to expand...

Yep and its a judgement call something man fails at.
 
jackschmittusa said:
Still no one asking the interesting questions, and no one providing the answers.

Hypothetically assuming the biblical story to be true:

Did God impregnate Mary without her consent?

Was this a violation of her free will and indicate that God operates on pre-destiny?

Did God fuse God DNA with hers or was the child a completely fabricated being genetically unrelated to Mary resulting in her being only a surrogate?

Since an intact hymen was the traditional test of virginity and during birth the child would have ruptured it before emerging into the world, can it still be considered a "virgin birth"?

I would like to hear the current Christian interpretation of the events and how they answer the above questions.
Click to expand...

That whole virgin birth and 12 apostles 1 true god . Is older than israel. At least 5 times befor christ other cultures had the exact same story . Its all about Dec 25 being the change in direction of the suns nothern movement . Belief in a thing is a good thing . But that doesn't excuse one from gaining insight as to where that belief started
 
Just think of all the inbreeding that occurred before God even got to Mary.

Best not to think about all the technical details lest it make you an atheistic evolutionist.
 
While it is obvious this is a troll thread, it is easy to show no rape was involved. All you have to do is understand is the mere basics of what is needed for rape, something everyone knows (which is why it is obvious to all that this is a troll thread).

http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/

Rape requires sexual intercourse. No intercourse, no rape. All three classes of rape require sexual intercourse.
 
cybrsage said:
While it is obvious this is a troll thread, it is easy to show no rape was involved. All you have to do is understand is the mere basics of what is needed for rape, something everyone knows (which is why it is obvious to all that this is a troll thread).

http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rape/

Rape requires sexual intercourse. No intercourse, no rape. All three classes of rape require sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...

And I thought it was any bodily intrusion>silly me.
 
WHAMPOM said:
And I thought it was any bodily intrusion>silly me.
Click to expand...

That would mean each time a nurse drew blood she raped you with the needle. It would mean each time you got sick you were raped by the disease that make you sick.

You really thought anything intruding into the body is rape?
 
Any person who has seriously studied theology, even atheists that have done so, would agree that the OP's question misses the point. This is a troll thread.
 
cubby1223 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] The noun troll may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted".
Click to expand...

Ban yourself cubby, your post meets every definition of an egregious troll post, inflammatory, extraneous, off topic, provoking readers, disrupting...yes an excellent troll you have posted.
 
MovingTarget said:
Any person who has seriously studied theology, even atheists that have done so, would agree that the OP's question misses the point. This is a troll thread.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Theology simply doesn't address the issue from a practical point of view. It goes on the assumption that God is correct about anything, simply because it is God. From that assumption it then tries to expound upon what that means to us. Simply put, God wouldn't Rape, because God has declared Rape as a Sin, and God doesn't Sin, So Mary could not have been Raped.

On the flipside, practically speaking Rape is forcing Sex upon a person who is unwilling to either have Sex and/or accepts Sex due to a sense of having no position to refuse it. If God came to you and said, "I'm gonna sex you up", does any mere mortal have the nads to think they can refuse?

However, if God existed, Sex wouldn't be necessary for conception to occur. Which, although ridiculous in its' own right, could have been someones' response to this thread.
 
cybrsage said:
That would mean each time a nurse drew blood she raped you with the needle. It would mean each time you got sick you were raped by the disease that make you sick.

You really thought anything intruding into the body is rape?
Click to expand...

Silly boy, nit-picking just to prove you are right. Yes, anything without consent.
 
IMHO, "God" didn't rape Mary.

That said, Mary may have been raped by a family member, a traveler/soldier, or had a love child with someone. It may have saved Mary from stoning by saying that the child is a God child, and Joseph the kind heart carpenter took Mary under his wing. They had to flee to save Mary from certain death. Or, as a "journeyman" carpenter, Joseph must travel from town to town for work hence it is convenience for the 2 to travel together (he provide her with sustenance and safety, while she is his house wife/sex slave).

[add]

Joseph was an old lech, at 40 year old he married a woman called Melcha/Escha/Salome, and lived with her for 49 years (according to some readings) and had 4 kids with her. He then took Mary as his wife at the age of 12-14.
 
Last edited:
cybrsage

You do realize "intrusion" was meant in a sexual context don't you? The meaning is that you don't need to use a penis for rape, a broomstick will do.

Feel free to continue in your newly enlightened state.
 
To quote Henry Miller, "if there's anything god-like about God it's that he dared to imagine it all."

God IS all, ergo a rapist. God is also a dunce and a hopelessly deranged schizophrenic.
 
Did anyone else see the program that postulated that Mary was a genetically male, phenotypical female, with androgen insensitivity syndrom and wolferian duct inhibitory deficency that had a spontaneous asexual gamete reproduction.
Basically a one in a million event with a one in a million event with a one in a million mutation that had a one in a million chance of survival.
 
mattpegher said:
Did anyone else see the program that postulated that Mary was a genetically male, phenotypical female, with androgen insensitivity syndrom and wolferian duct inhibitory deficency that had a spontaneous asexual gamete reproduction.
Basically a one in a million event with a one in a million event with a one in a million mutation that had a one in a million chance of survival.
Click to expand...

Didn't see it, but not surprised that it would exist. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top