Anyone Who Thinks Another Person Deserves To Be Raped Is A Knob

[elohiym]

The title of this thread is " Anyone Who Thinks Another Person Deserves To Be Raped Is A Knob"

We are obviously not discussing the rapists.

Uh, you don't think a rapist thinks another person deserves to be raped, or don't think a rapist is a knob, or both? Seems obvious that we are discussing rapists and rape culture, too, not just specific knobs on this forum.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Who has been willing to declare that they are not a rapist, other than my husband? Would you like to join him in that declaration?

Let us stand together against rape for any reason and then we can discuss how to avoid rape and how to take responsibility for living in a society of rapist predators.

Are you kidding? I'm not a rapist. No one here has ever committed a rape ever in their life.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Are they children of God or not?

What does the Bible say about it?

Romans 9:8 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.​

 

[CabinetMaker]

I believe the change in the law was an act of pure evil.
Wives do not need legal protection against having sex with their husbands.
Husbands and wives having sex with each other is the foundation of the marriage contract.
People having sex outside of marriage is repeatedly condemned throughout the entire Bible, but not a single word is said to condemn a married couple having sex.
Allowing a wife to press criminal charges of rape against her husband without any evidence other than her word that she did not consent is detrimental to the institution of marriage.

You are obviously wrong. If there was not a need for women to have more protection no law would have been changed. There are many shelters for abused women and wives seeking to leave abusive husbands, husbands who call themselves Christian. If women don't need protection from abusive husbands, including rape, why do these shelters exist.

So am I, so what?


So am I, so what?

Then please explain to us the difference between an eye for and eye and do to others what you want them to do to you.

 

[elohiym]

We are all the Father's children, whether dead, lost or saved. Respecting that fact is key to the plan of salvation.

Yes. That is why that fact was a key part of Paul's sermon on Mars Hill (Acts 17:28-29).

 

[genuineoriginal]

Uh, you don't think a rapist thinks another person deserves to be raped, or don't think a rapist is a knob, or both?

I don't believe what a rapist thinks is the topic, since they are not the ones posting on this forum.

Seems obvious that we are discussing rapists and rape culture, too, not just specific knobs on this forum.

Do you often speak about yourself in the 'royal we'?

 

[genuineoriginal]

You are obviously wrong. If there was not a need for women to have more protection no law would have been changed. There are many shelters for abused women and wives seeking to leave abusive husbands, husbands who call themselves Christian. If women don't need protection from abusive husbands, including rape, why do these shelters exist.

You poor pathetic confused man.

Of course women need protection against abusive husbands.
The only thing wrong with your vain imaginations against God's institution of marriage is the inclusion of "rape" in the list.

A husband can most certainly abuse his wife, but a husband can never rape his wife, since rape is : "A carnal knowledge of a woman not one's wife by force or against her will."

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Are you kidding? I'm not a rapist. No one here has ever committed a rape ever in their life.

You speak for yourself; not too long ago we wouldn't have imagined Cosby as a rapist.

Let the gentlemen set themselves apart from the rapists for themselves.

 

[elohiym]

What does the Bible say about it?

Romans 9:8 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.​

According to your proof text without context and interpreted strictly literally, some people are not God's children and were somehow conceived by the devil even though the devil can't create or father people. However, the idea of "Children of the devil" is obviously figurative. In one place Jesus tells the same ones he called children of the devil that they are God's sons according to scripture (John 10:34 cf. Psalm 82:6).

Do you care about what Jesus taught?

"Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven."​

One difference between us is that I can say that to everyone unconditionally, like Paul did on Mars Hill (Acts 17:28-29); but you can't tell every sinner that God is their Father so they can have hope.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

You poor pathetic confused man.

Of course women need protection against abusive husbands.
The only thing wrong with your vain imaginations against God's institution of marriage is the inclusion of "rape" in the list.

A husband can most certainly abuse his wife, but a husband can never rape his wife, since rape is : "A carnal knowledge of a woman not one's wife by force or against her will."

Rape isn't even a word in the Bible, so does that make it not a real thing? You aren't using the Bible to define rape because it's not even a word in there.

Are you also going to say that men can't be raped?

 

[elohiym]

Are you kidding?

I'm not.

I'm not a rapist.

According to what definition? You've been on the side of those arguing certain situations are not rape because of a definition. I'm trying to simplify this by stating first that I have never forced another person to have sex against their will. If you can say the same, then do so.

No one here has ever committed a rape ever in their life.

You can only speak for yourself.

 

[genuineoriginal]

According to your proof text without context and interpreted strictly literally, some people are not God's children and were somehow conceived by the devil even though the devil can't create or father people. However, the idea of "Children of the devil" is obviously figurative.

Children of disobedience is not figurative.

Ephesians 5:6 6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.​

 

[genuineoriginal]

Rape isn't even a word in the Bible, so does that make it not a real thing? You aren't using the Bible to define rape because it's not even a word in there.

Feel free to post all the verses about rape in the Bible along with the punishments that God decreed for the act.

You could spend the rest of your life trying to find any that deals with a man having sex with his own wife.

 

[elohiym]

I don't believe what a rapist thinks is the topic, since they are not the ones posting on this forum.

Who says they aren't posting on this forum? You know this how?

Seems obvious that we are discussing rapists and rape culture, too, not just specific knobs on this forum.

Do you often speak about yourself in the 'royal we'?

That's not an example of "royal we" usage. If you and I are in a discussion then it is proper for me to say "we" are in a discussion. Wow, you are just grasping for anything now.

 

[genuineoriginal]

According to what definition? You've been on the side of those arguing certain situations are not rape because of a definition. I'm trying to simplify this by stating first that I have never forced another person to have sex against their will. If you can say the same, then do so.

Luke 18:11 11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.​

 

[elohiym]

Children of disobedience is not figurative.

Ephesians 5:6 6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.​

Meaning His disobedient children, the ones who didn't believe Christ.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Feel free to post all the verses about rape in the Bible along with the punishments that God decreed for the act.

You could spend the rest of your life trying to find any that deals with a man having sex with his own wife.

Rape is not a word in the Bible. Forced sex is described as happening to men and women and marital rape de facto is prohibited by saying that our bodies are in mutual submission during marriage and that a man is to cherish the wife as Christ loves the Church.

So rape is what the word means in modern English. Forced/non-consensual penetration.

 

[elohiym]

Luke 18:11 11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.​

Why not just state that you have never forced another person to have sex against their will? It would be so simple to do.

If I asked a priest I suspected of molesting children if he ever molested children, you would use the Pharisee line, too?

Face it: people who claim they could rape someone today and still be saved while they commit that rape are evil. You are on the side of evil.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

I don't believe what a rapist thinks is the topic, since they are not the ones posting on this forum.


Do you often speak about yourself in the 'royal we'?

Since you can't agree with us on the definition of rape, why don't you go bolder and say no one on this thread has forced another person to have sex.

Will you say that about yourself, that you never forced anyone, wife or otherwise, to have sex with you?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Rape is not a word in the Bible. Forced sex is described as happening to men and women

Feel free to post the verses that describe this along with the punishments prescribed in the Bible.

and marital rape de facto is prohibited by saying that our bodies are in mutual submission during marriage

Now you are just making up your own Bible?

So rape is what the word means in modern English. Forced/non-consensual penetration.

This is the definition of rape before feminists got it changed in the 1970s:
"A carnal knowledge of a woman not one's wife by force or against her will."

Do you have any idea why this was the definition for so many centuries?