User Tag List

Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 613141516
Results 226 to 238 of 238

Thread: To Those Who Think Adulterers, Homosexuals, Fornicators etc...

  1. #226
    TOL Legend Arthur Brain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Precariously balanced on top of a mineshaft
    Posts
    14,957
    Thanks
    9,100
    Thanked 7,173 Times in 4,792 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147751
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Good grief, Arty. Do you not even bother to study what God's word says?

    The word is "defile."


    Strong's h6031

    - Lexical: עָנָה
    - Transliteration: anah
    - Part of Speech: Verb
    - Phonetic Spelling: aw-naw'
    - Definition: defile.
    - Origin: A primitive root (possibly rather ident. With anah through the idea of looking down or browbeating); to depress literally or figuratively, transitive or intransitive (in various applications, as follows).
    - Usage: abase self, afflict(-ion, self), answer (by mistake for anah), chasten self, deal hardly with, defile, exercise, force, gentleness, humble (self), hurt, ravish, sing (by mistake for anah), speak (by mistake for anah), submit self, weaken, X in any wise.
    - Translated as (count): afflict (4), and you shall afflict (4), to afflict (4), was afflicted (3), and afflicted (2), and shall afflict (2), do afflict (2), he has humbled (2), to be exercised (2), you afflict (2), you shall afflict (2), abase (1), afflicted (1), and afflict (1), and afflict them (1), and afflict us (1), and afflicted them (1), and afflicted us (1), and dealt so harshly (1), and defile (1), and defiled her (1), And he humbled (1), and humble you (1), and submit (1), and they shall afflict (1), and Though I have afflicted (1), and to chasten yourself (1), and You have afflicted (1), answers (1), are afflicted (1), be afflicted (1), do I will afflict (1), force me (1), forced her (1), have they forced (1), have we afflicted (1), he had forced (1), he might humble you (1), He weakened (1), his afflictions (1), humble (1), I am afflicted (1), I been afflicted (1), I humbled (1), in any way (1), in you has humbled (1), in you have they humbled (1), Leannoth (1), of those who afflicted (1), that afflict (1), that he forced (1), that we might afflict ourselves (1), the afflicted (1), they afflicted (1), they hurt (1), They ravished (1), they were afflicted (1), they were troubled (1), to humble (1), to humble yourself (1), you do afflict (1), You have afflicted (1), you have afflicted me (1), you have been afflicted (1), you have humbled (1).



    By raping a woman, or fornicating with her, or committing adultery with her, a man defiles her, especially in the eyes of God.

    That's what it means for a woman to be humbled in this context.
    What, and she has to pay the penalty for being married to the guy?! That's what you advocate on here among other things...

    Well this is fun isn't it?


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Arthur Brain For Your Post:

    Rusha (December 3rd, 2018)

  3. #227
    TOL Legend Arthur Brain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Precariously balanced on top of a mineshaft
    Posts
    14,957
    Thanks
    9,100
    Thanked 7,173 Times in 4,792 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147751
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Captivating an audience is force? "can I have your attention, please" is force?

    Tell me Arty, do you interpret everything in the Bible to the extreme so you can mock it? Or are you just that ignorant of what words mean?
    Dude, if you need the difference explained to you regarding the physical and metaphorical then this convo isn't going anywhere fast...
    Well this is fun isn't it?


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Arthur Brain For Your Post:

    Rusha (December 3rd, 2018)

  5. #228
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,773
    Thanks
    25,102
    Thanked 7,040 Times in 4,438 Posts

    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147607
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    Oh, and let's just concede that there are going to be two willing participants in this "seizure/capture" often enough.
    I mean, it literally says, "AND THEY ARE FOUND OUT"...

    "it's obvious"

    What about the ones where the woman has had sex forced on her.
    Well that's when you put the rapist (because that's what he is) to death.

    How are you going to determine the difference via OT law? Do tell...
    Try reading your Bible, it'll help.

    Or do you even have a Bible?

  6. #229
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington
    Posts
    15,941
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 684 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    122743
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    How would you define "seized"? Cos that smacks of force.
    It means that he seized her. She is unmarried. Not engaged or betrothed. He must have used some kind of force, but I do not know if she is a willing participant. Force used would not be good. Her not being married might have something to do with it, even her being seized.

  7. #230
    TOL Legend Arthur Brain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Precariously balanced on top of a mineshaft
    Posts
    14,957
    Thanks
    9,100
    Thanked 7,173 Times in 4,792 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147751
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    I mean, it literally says, "AND THEY ARE FOUND OUT"...

    "it's obvious"



    Well that's when you put the rapist (because that's what he is) to death.



    Try reading your Bible, it'll help.

    Or do you even have a Bible?
    How about you just explain how it can be determined that such cases can be construed as consensual or forced via your proposals for society? Aka the whole no need for concrete proof but two to three witnesses etc?

    Or just carry on with your kiddy emoticons...
    Well this is fun isn't it?


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Arthur Brain For Your Post:

    Rusha (December 3rd, 2018)

  9. #231
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,773
    Thanks
    25,102
    Thanked 7,040 Times in 4,438 Posts

    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147607
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    How about you just explain how it can be determined that such cases can be construed as consensual or forced via your proposals for society? Aka the whole no need for concrete proof but two to three witnesses etc?

    Or just carry on with your kiddy emoticons...
    I'll go through the last few posts more thoroughly tomorrow.

    Right now, I'm getting ready for bed.

  10. #232
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    21,443
    Thanks
    2,255
    Thanked 6,372 Times in 4,744 Posts

    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147737
    artie whines:
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    ....no need for concrete ....
    JR tolerantly and patiently responds:
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Right now, I'm getting ready for bed.
    i just mixed and poured seven bags of concrete and am going back out to cover the pours with plastic and clean up my tools, so i can fully sympathize with your unwillingness to address the idiocy upon which this thread is predicated

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (December 3rd, 2018),way 2 go (December 6th, 2018)

  12. #233
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    21,443
    Thanks
    2,255
    Thanked 6,372 Times in 4,744 Posts

    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147737
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Good grief, Arty. Do you not even bother to study what God's word says?
    no, he doesn't

    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Tell me Arty, do you interpret everything in the Bible to the extreme so you can mock it? Or are you just that ignorant of what words mean?
    both

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (December 3rd, 2018)

  14. #234
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    20
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    I think you'll find, if you were to actually do ANY decent amount of study on how women were treated in the Bible, that God values women far higher than you do.
    Didn't Jacob work for 14 years for the right to marry Rachel? That means women are truly honored above and beyond the call of duty.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to joeyarnoldvn For Your Post:

    ok doser (December 6th, 2018)

  16. #235
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    “If a man entices a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall surely pay the bride-price for her to be his wife.If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money according to the bride-price of virgins. - Exodus 22:16-17 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...7&version=NKJV

    “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out,then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days. - Deuteronomy 22:28-29 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...9&version=NKJV
    Exodus and Deuteronomy are saying the same thing, the father is just lost in the context of the latter. The father would never give his daughter over to her rapist and those fifty shekels were the compensation either in refusal or in bride-price.
    The reason the father was given an option nonetheless was so in the event that an otherwise unwanted or poor woman was taken by a wealthy man she could maybe go on and carry on her father's name in in higher legacy.

    ‘The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death. - Leviticus 20:10 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...0&version=NKJV
    1000's of years ago that was maybe a bit more appropriate.
    To do it now is just dumb and unnecessary. There's a reason why we stopped doing that a very, very long time ago and it wasn't because we were 'against God'.
    Also
    "Let he without sin cast the first stone" was Jesus' response to people dragging a woman to be stoned for it. You're just abusing the concept of the Law to be hostile to others.

  17. #236
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,773
    Thanks
    25,102
    Thanked 7,040 Times in 4,438 Posts

    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147607
    Quote Originally Posted by Crucifer View Post
    Exodus and Deuteronomy are saying the same thing, the father is just lost in the context of the latter. The father would never give his daughter over to her rapist and those fifty shekels were the compensation either in refusal or in bride-price.
    The reason the father was given an option nonetheless was so in the event that an otherwise unwanted or poor woman was taken by a wealthy man she could maybe go on and carry on her father's name in in higher legacy.
    You're correct that those two passages are saying the same thing...

    But neither of them have anything to do with rape.

    If you would have read in Deuteronomy 22:25-27, you would know that, as rape is specifically mentioned in those three verses, separate from 28-29.

    1000's of years ago that was maybe a bit more appropriate.
    To do it now is just dumb and unnecessary. There's a reason why we stopped doing that a very, very long time ago and it wasn't because we were 'against God'.
    Also
    "Let he without sin cast the first stone" was Jesus' response to people dragging a woman to be stoned for it.
    The woman was found not guilty due to a lack of witnesses.

    But you don't even bother reading God's word, do you?

    You're just abusing the concept of the Law to be hostile to others.
    Calling God's laws and demands for justice "dumb and unnecessary" isn't going to do you any favors come judgment day.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    ok doser (December 6th, 2018)

  19. #237
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,773
    Thanks
    25,102
    Thanked 7,040 Times in 4,438 Posts

    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147607
    Quote Originally Posted by Crucifer View Post
    Exodus and Deuteronomy are saying the same thing, the father is just lost in the context of the latter. The father would never give his daughter over to her rapist and those fifty shekels were the compensation either in refusal or in bride-price.
    The reason the father was given an option nonetheless was so in the event that an otherwise unwanted or poor woman was taken by a wealthy man she could maybe go on and carry on her father's name in in higher legacy.



    1000's of years ago that was maybe a bit more appropriate.
    To do it now is just dumb and unnecessary. There's a reason why we stopped doing that a very, very long time ago and it wasn't because we were 'against God'.
    Also
    "Let he without sin cast the first stone" was Jesus' response to people dragging a woman to be stoned for it. You're just abusing the concept of the Law to be hostile to others.
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    You're correct that those two passages are saying the same thing...

    But neither of them have anything to do with rape.

    If you would have read in Deuteronomy 22:25-27, you would know that, as rape is specifically mentioned in those three verses, separate from 28-29.



    The woman was found not guilty due to a lack of witnesses.

    But you don't even bother reading God's word, do you?



    Calling God's laws and demands for justice "dumb and unnecessary" isn't going to do you any favors come judgment day.
    Here, something for you to read while you're on vacation from TOL:

    https://cbmw.org/topics/sex/did-old-...ry-her-rapist/

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    ok doser (December 6th, 2018)

  21. #238
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    21,443
    Thanks
    2,255
    Thanked 6,372 Times in 4,744 Posts

    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147737
    i don't get the impression that crucifer is smart enough to figure out how to read the site while he's banned

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (December 7th, 2018)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us