So in your own terms ‘sinless’ children who have ‘no choice’ are punished by God by virtue of the ‘sin’ imposed on them by others. How is this moral?
It is the ‘morality’ that man accepted when mankind accepted Satan’s temptation of Adam and Eve instead of the personal relationship with God that god desires.
For me. I’m absolutely certain about that. But then I have to ask myself if I am all that different from other men? You tell me.
Call it a “soul tie” or call it a simple mental/emotional to the point of intimate connection.
One further point, God explicitly states,
How do you reconcile this with your understanding? Your belief is in direct contradiction of this statement.
Okay…I’m just not sure that’s what’s going on in a rape. Or in sex where you don’t love the other person, like a one night stand. To spiritually attach to another person, you both need to care about each other, and I don’t think anyone cares about each other in a rape.
Adam and Eve had no concept or knowledge of morality prior to the fall. They could not ‘morally’ accept anything, or define or understand their actions in those terms. How do you differentiate this from your concept of a ‘sinless’ child? Again, how is punishing a ‘sinless’ child moral?
Nor, apparently, does your god leave the innocent unpunished. To the fourth generation?
What an, evil, nasty diety you worship, that punishes children for something someone else did, in some cases did before they were ever born. HOW can you proclaim your god to be “loving” when it does such horrible things? How can you reconcile the claim of “love” with punishing the innocent for other peoples’ sins? That makes no sense.
Again - that does not seem compatible with a loving and just god.
So if you know Jesus everything is OK, whether you truly repent or not, and murder, rape, or theft is automatically forgiven, but someone who has done none of those things - a week old baby, for example - is somehow covered in sin and goes straight to hell? This has also been one of the WTF? stumbling blocks I have with Christianity. This sort of doctrine is illogical.
Well, coercion is a Bad Thing in my religion, too. That is also a sin. But if the man in the hypothetical date rape situation is being manipulated why doesn’t he have the moral strength to refrain from sinning? In fact, I am certain there are men who have successfully resisted temptation. Saying “it’s her fault, she manipulated me!” doesn’t cut the mustard. The man is responsible for HIS actions.
If they’re defective they’re already damaged. Why don’t you believe there are damaged people? Is it because it’s easier to believe in a god who punishes children yet to be born?
WTF? 
If a thief is in jail it’s because he committed a crime, not becaue I sinned somehow. That’s ridiculous.
Oh, those poor men, at the mercy of evil, witchy women! It’s all the women’s fault that men have sexual impulse, it couldn’t possibly be something on the man’s part, some thought belong wholly to him, that could be a work here.
:rolleyes:
I am having a HUGE problem with a system that dumps sin on the innocent.
Oh, the kids might know the parent is pissed off - that doesn’t mean the parent has to take it out on the kids. Really. When I was a kid I remember times when one or the other of my parents came home pissed about something but were very careful to speak softly and kindly to us kids, reassure us we had nothing to do with the problem, and in no way “take it out on” us.
Like I said, what kind of jacked-up family did you grow up in, that you think it’s somehow normal for parents to inflict anger and frustrations on their kids? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I am saying it’s wrong and not normal.
Quick tip - when one partner is “submitting their will and identity totally to the man” the woman and the man are NOT equal partners!. Next you will tell me black is white and up is down.
Again, stupid, illogical contradictions. It’s like Zen koans, but much less amusing, and not leading to enlightenment.
:rolleyes:
If a man forces his wife to have sex against her will it is rape. Being married does not give one partner the license to abuse or coerce the other. The notion that is does is repugnant enough to make me vomit. If you love someone you do not force them to submit.
IF what you practice is Christianity it’s certainly a minority sect, and a twisted version of it. It’s certainly not what I got from reading the Bible (old and new testaments). It’s not what I see other Christians, including my spouse, practicing or holding up as their faith.
Has anybody gone to some place where the accent is so strong that you can cut it with a knife or read Middle English or heard Chaucer in the original or a conversation in Afrikans?
This is the feeling I get here: I sort of understand what he’s getting at and I sort of agree with parts of the ideas behind it but it’s like parallel world stuff. I have trouble with the concept of sin anyway; Guilt I can understand being transferred (in fact I think that happens in a lot of brutal rapes), pressure causing the bottom end to behave like savages, that I understand too, even some (dubious) cases of date-rape (We were naked in bed and I told him to stop - don’t get on the flight if you’re not sure about going to the airport). But the words are all wrong. It’s like the Cotton Mather school of Psychology
I have my own ideas about the Adam & Eve myth and I happen to think it one of the most important in the early Bible. I can guarantee K won’t like my version though. Who knows in detail why it says YHWH (it’s significant that it is YHWH there but ‘Elohim’ in the Gen 1 Created them in ‘His’ own likeness, Male and Female) threw a tantrum of literally ‘biblical’ proportions? Because they disobeyed? Read it “Because now they are as Us, knowing Good from Evil”.
Now think - why would a moral deity be furious because his charges have learnt morality just like him? Isn’t that what a moral deity would want? It’s like a parent kicking up stink because their kids have said they realise doing drugs and theft and underage sex and all that stuff is bad news and they’re going to study hard and be nice to people. Summat do be wrong somewhere me hearties.
I disagree.
Woohoo, more fuel for my secret witch engine!
Lust will work just as well of Love in soul ties. Lust is the willingness to take for your own benefit, love is the willingness to give regardless of ‘repayment’. Lust is selfish, love is selfless.
kanicbird is talking about indemnity. It’s a condition of spiritual restoration of one’s ancestors through suffering.
Taking the most extreme example, child molestation, the child is in the position to restore the sins of his ancestry if he can bear the experience without projecting it onto others later in life. The molester, on the other hand, is now setting a course of suffering and tribulation for his descendants, although hopefully there won’t be any.
That’s the concept of indemnity, and how it ties into the course of restoration since the Fall, but no one has had the wherewithal to restore original sin, leading to a vicious cycle. Am I right, kanicbird?
If you’re implying I’ve been raped, or molested, the answer is NO. It’s not “denial”, it’s reality.
A date – let’s say, just getting together for dinner, or whatever (doesn’t even have to be romantic) that doesn’t include sex (yes, it happens, people!), doesn’t create a “sexual link” or whatever you’re talking about. And even if it does, “no means NO.”
What about the rapist? What have you to say about him?
Spiritual sex? WTF? I’m eating dinner and watching a movie with a person – and I’m somehow having sex with him "spiritually? Mmmmkay.
The last sentence is true – only in that the child, depending on the age, is often unable to stop the abuse, and has no way out. They only “bear the weight” in that they have to suffer from said abuse. But they’re not “tied to their abuser.”
No. Of course my kids would know I’m cranky! I remember my dad coming home and being pissy – but that wouldn’t mean he’d start slapping my mother around, and that she would then do the same to us! He’d most just sit by himself for a little quiet time to relax. Being in a bad mood is NO EXCUSE for abusing others.
WTF? So, if I’m married, and I’m tired – or I have a cold, or whatever. I had a long day, and I want to go to bed. Well my husband is in a randy mood, and he wants to have sex. I say no, I’m not in the mood, please, not tonight. He grabs me, and even though I say no, he forces me to have sex. That’s not rape?
:dubious:
kanicbird, are you a member of The Family? Because that sure would explain a lot.
Wow, so when I get morning wood, it’s because someone is having dirty thoughts about me? That’s a nice thought, actually.
Kanicbird, do you have first-hand experience with this situation? Has a woman ever deceived you into forcing yourself upon her?
There is no contradiction:
Jesus was/is/will be always.
Spacetime is not a barrier to the Lord, or if this helps consider subjective reality.
Actually, from what I’m getting regarding the whole “marriage means they become one” all sex within marriage is masturbation, so spousal rape is the Marriage Entity forcing itself to masturbate.
Yeah, I get a “does not compute” out of that one, too.
Marriage does not make two people become “one”. Empirical evidence is ample to prove the contrary.
No it is not rape, it is struggle inside a single body for control, what part bears the burden.
One partner burning with desire and the other person denying them is the other end of this, it is equally a power struggle for control within the body.
So Jesus is not just Lord but a Time Lord?
And Lo, Herod said “EXTERMINATE the children! EXTERMINATE!”
Yea, thou shall leadest me beside the still waters
Thy rod and sonic screwdriver they comfort me.
And yea he fed the multitudes from but a tiny bag, saying “Jelly Baby?”
It may be, but sometimes it’s a love triangle where you are left out in the cold. Her mind and body is given to one person, spiritually she is making love to you, but having sex with someone else.
Kanicbird, do you have first-hand experience with this situation? Has a woman ever deceived you into forcing yourself upon her?
[/QUOTE]
While I don’t recall this type of situation ever coming up, I doubt it, it has not happened in any explicit form. I have experienced being manipulation by yielding control and being lead around like a puppy dog on a leash where she had full control and access to me. She gained full control of who I can see, she was able to control my access to others, she would withdraw any and all friends for months at a time as punishment. This was all done totally spiritually not physically, via voodoo and witchcraft, it was very very real and very very effective. My friends would not return calls or emails during this time.
Part of the deception is once she restores friends you end up thanking her for it (as you don’t realize it was her that removed them), which gains her more power.
Regardless of the claim that Jesus was/is/will be always, the second covenant was not communicated for half a millennium. God’s position during this period was inherently contradictory. Even if you assume that the physical limits of space-time do not apply to Jesus, it does not alter the fact that God had communicated to mankind that the sins of the forefather both were and were not born by subsequent generations. The offer of redemption through Jesus had not been made to these children. Scripture states they were both ‘punished’ and ‘not punished’ within this reference frame. It is an irresolvable contradiction in terms, alongside numerous other scriptural examples. Your bias towards one outcome is undermined by the direct word of God (from a literal position), whichever position you take.