Christians allow sexual assault

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Those are sinful humans doing those awful things, not the Holy Spirit. I think the story of how God impregnated Mary would be tawdry except that any rational person knows it never happened. Luke wasn't there at the time so there is no possible way he could have known the circumstances.

And Luke is the only source we have for this story. Matthew and Mark don't even mention it, except Matthew briefly stated that before and Joseph came together, she was "found to be with child." And he says the angel speaks to Joseph about it, but no mention of any conversation with Mary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Believing a supernatural force could impregnate a human female without sexual intercourse is what's weird. Of course women who have found themselves in these circumstances all over the world have had to make up such explanations. You know what the penalty was for being an unwed mother in those days, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God did not send the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus without Mary’s consent; Mary’s full verbal consent was required and obtained before Jesus was conceived. God waited for consent; and it was not “implied” or “presumed” consent. Luke 1:38 is clearly Mary’s full consent to God’s plan.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. 39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; 40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and asaluted Elisabeth.

Dude, read Luke 1:31-33. It was a done deal, she really had no say in the matter. This assumes of course Luke, whoever that was, could possibly have known what circumstances led to Jesus's birth since he wasn't there at the time and could not possibly have known what the angel said to Mary.

Plus, in those days, no one asked a woman what she wanted. They simply told her want was going to happen to her.

Here is the account of Mary learning that she'll be the mother of Christ, as told in the first chapter of Luke's gospel:

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!" But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."

And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?"

And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God." And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

The literal words in the Bible (across various translations) make clear that the angel Gabriel's words at the Annunciation convey to Mary what will happen, not what has happened, a future conception not a past one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/let-it-be-marys-radical-declaration-of-consent/266616/

What about the selling of young girls to old men as is common in Islam? Forced marriages between girls who are 9 years old to elderly men?

How is that evil ignored in this thread?

What part of the word you will conceive do you not understand? This was an announcement. She wasn't being asked.

Wrong. Mary asked how she would possibly conceive since she was a virgin, and was told the Holy Spirit would come upon her. She was asking how it would happen. It wasn’t an announcement, it was an answer to her question.

She consented.

NO. She was told you will conceive. Then she asked how. Luke 1:31

She consented? Really. She was about 15 years old if that. And after being told God is going to impregnate you, she reasonably concluded from this statement that it was inevitable. Like she's going to tell the most powerful entity in the universe "no."?

Why are people fussing about her age? Fourteen or 15 was a completely normal marriage age in those days, when life expectancy was not much over 35.

She was betrothed at the time; betrothal in those times was more like half married, not at all like engagements these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Believing a supernatural force could impregnate a human female without sexual intercourse is what's weird. Of course women who have found themselves in these circumstances all over the world have had to make up such explanations. You know what the penalty was for being an unwed mother in those days, right?

Women may make up stories to explain pregnancy, but their children don’t become the founder of the world’s largest religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God did not send the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus without Mary’s consent; Mary’s full verbal consent was required and obtained before Jesus was conceived. God waited for consent; and it was not “implied” or “presumed” consent. Luke 1:38 is clearly Mary’s full consent to God’s plan.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. 39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; 40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and asaluted Elisabeth.

Dude, read Luke 1:31-33. It was a done deal, she really had no say in the matter. This assumes of course Luke, whoever that was, could possibly have known what circumstances led to Jesus's birth since he wasn't there at the time and could not possibly have known what the angel said to Mary.

Plus, in those days, no one asked a woman what she wanted. They simply told her want was going to happen to her.

Here is the account of Mary learning that she'll be the mother of Christ, as told in the first chapter of Luke's gospel:

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!" But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."

And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?"

And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God." And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

The literal words in the Bible (across various translations) make clear that the angel Gabriel's words at the Annunciation convey to Mary what will happen, not what has happened, a future conception not a past one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/let-it-be-marys-radical-declaration-of-consent/266616/

What about the selling of young girls to old men as is common in Islam? Forced marriages between girls who are 9 years old to elderly men?

How is that evil ignored in this thread?

What part of the word you will conceive do you not understand? This was an announcement. She wasn't being asked.

Wrong. Mary asked how she would possibly conceive since she was a virgin, and was told the Holy Spirit would come upon her. She was asking how it would happen. It wasn’t an announcement, it was an answer to her question.

She consented.

NO. She was told you will conceive. Then she asked how. Luke 1:31

She consented? Really. She was about 15 years old if that. And after being told God is going to impregnate you, she reasonably concluded from this statement that it was inevitable. Like she's going to tell the most powerful entity in the universe "no."?

Why are people fussing about her age? Fourteen or 15 was a completely normal marriage age in those days, when life expectancy was not much over 35.

She was betrothed at the time; betrothal in those times was more like half married, not at all like engagements these days.

But she hadn't been with a man

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Believing a supernatural force could impregnate a human female without sexual intercourse is what's weird. Of course women who have found themselves in these circumstances all over the world have had to make up such explanations. You know what the penalty was for being an unwed mother in those days, right?

Women may make up stories to explain pregnancy, but their children don’t become the founder of the world’s largest religion.

that happened many centuries after Jesus's birth - and to be frank, Paul was the founder of the religion, and the Emperor Constantine gave it its big break -- for reasons of his own which had nothing to do with devotion to Jesus.

[Anonymous]

The title of this thread is correct

MO and Louisana and Tennessee all will allow child brides. Legislation for no age limit will pass. If that is not Christian's supporting sexual assault then you all are idiots.

The religious right 100% supports sexual assault.

And the Catholic Church, come on now people that one is clear for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God did not send the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus without Mary’s consent; Mary’s full verbal consent was required and obtained before Jesus was conceived. God waited for consent; and it was not “implied” or “presumed” consent. Luke 1:38 is clearly Mary’s full consent to God’s plan.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. 39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; 40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and asaluted Elisabeth.

Dude, read Luke 1:31-33. It was a done deal, she really had no say in the matter. This assumes of course Luke, whoever that was, could possibly have known what circumstances led to Jesus's birth since he wasn't there at the time and could not possibly have known what the angel said to Mary.

Plus, in those days, no one asked a woman what she wanted. They simply told her want was going to happen to her.

Here is the account of Mary learning that she'll be the mother of Christ, as told in the first chapter of Luke's gospel:

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!" But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."

And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?"

And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God." And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

The literal words in the Bible (across various translations) make clear that the angel Gabriel's words at the Annunciation convey to Mary what will happen, not what has happened, a future conception not a past one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/let-it-be-marys-radical-declaration-of-consent/266616/

What about the selling of young girls to old men as is common in Islam? Forced marriages between girls who are 9 years old to elderly men?

How is that evil ignored in this thread?

What part of the word you will conceive do you not understand? This was an announcement. She wasn't being asked.

Wrong. Mary asked how she would possibly conceive since she was a virgin, and was told the Holy Spirit would come upon her. She was asking how it would happen. It wasn’t an announcement, it was an answer to her question.

She consented.

NO. She was told you will conceive. Then she asked how. Luke 1:31

She consented? Really. She was about 15 years old if that. And after being told God is going to impregnate you, she reasonably concluded from this statement that it was inevitable. Like she's going to tell the most powerful entity in the universe "no."?

Why are people fussing about her age? Fourteen or 15 was a completely normal marriage age in those days, when life expectancy was not much over 35.

She was betrothed at the time; betrothal in those times was more like half married, not at all like engagements these days.

But she hadn't been with a man

At least that's what she claimed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God did not send the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus without Mary’s consent; Mary’s full verbal consent was required and obtained before Jesus was conceived. God waited for consent; and it was not “implied” or “presumed” consent. Luke 1:38 is clearly Mary’s full consent to God’s plan.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. 39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; 40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and asaluted Elisabeth.

Dude, read Luke 1:31-33. It was a done deal, she really had no say in the matter. This assumes of course Luke, whoever that was, could possibly have known what circumstances led to Jesus's birth since he wasn't there at the time and could not possibly have known what the angel said to Mary.

Plus, in those days, no one asked a woman what she wanted. They simply told her want was going to happen to her.

Here is the account of Mary learning that she'll be the mother of Christ, as told in the first chapter of Luke's gospel:

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!" But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."

And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?"

And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God." And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

The literal words in the Bible (across various translations) make clear that the angel Gabriel's words at the Annunciation convey to Mary what will happen, not what has happened, a future conception not a past one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/let-it-be-marys-radical-declaration-of-consent/266616/

What about the selling of young girls to old men as is common in Islam? Forced marriages between girls who are 9 years old to elderly men?

How is that evil ignored in this thread?

What part of the word you will conceive do you not understand? This was an announcement. She wasn't being asked.

Wrong. Mary asked how she would possibly conceive since she was a virgin, and was told the Holy Spirit would come upon her. She was asking how it would happen. It wasn’t an announcement, it was an answer to her question.

She consented.

NO. She was told you will conceive. Then she asked how. Luke 1:31

She consented? Really. She was about 15 years old if that. And after being told God is going to impregnate you, she reasonably concluded from this statement that it was inevitable. Like she's going to tell the most powerful entity in the universe "no."?

Why are people fussing about her age? Fourteen or 15 was a completely normal marriage age in those days, when life expectancy was not much over 35.

She was betrothed at the time; betrothal in those times was more like half married, not at all like engagements these days.

But she hadn't been with a man

That response does not seem on point with the question, which is why are people making a big deal of her age given it was totally normal for a woman to be married and maybe have had a child by age 14 or 15 two thousand years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Those are sinful humans doing those awful things, not the Holy Spirit. I think the story of how God impregnated Mary would be tawdry except that any rational person knows it never happened. Luke wasn't there at the time so there is no possible way he could have known the circumstances.

And Luke is the only source we have for this story. Matthew and Mark don't even mention it, except Matthew briefly stated that before and Joseph came together, she was "found to be with child." And he says the angel speaks to Joseph about it, but no mention of any conversation with Mary.

Great response. Of course, the bigots are all ignoring it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God did not send the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus without Mary’s consent; Mary’s full verbal consent was required and obtained before Jesus was conceived. God waited for consent; and it was not “implied” or “presumed” consent. Luke 1:38 is clearly Mary’s full consent to God’s plan.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. 39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; 40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and asaluted Elisabeth.

Dude, read Luke 1:31-33. It was a done deal, she really had no say in the matter. This assumes of course Luke, whoever that was, could possibly have known what circumstances led to Jesus's birth since he wasn't there at the time and could not possibly have known what the angel said to Mary.

Plus, in those days, no one asked a woman what she wanted. They simply told her want was going to happen to her.

Here is the account of Mary learning that she'll be the mother of Christ, as told in the first chapter of Luke's gospel:

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!" But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."

And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?"

And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God." And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

The literal words in the Bible (across various translations) make clear that the angel Gabriel's words at the Annunciation convey to Mary what will happen, not what has happened, a future conception not a past one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/let-it-be-marys-radical-declaration-of-consent/266616/

What about the selling of young girls to old men as is common in Islam? Forced marriages between girls who are 9 years old to elderly men?

How is that evil ignored in this thread?

What part of the word you will conceive do you not understand? This was an announcement. She wasn't being asked.

Wrong. Mary asked how she would possibly conceive since she was a virgin, and was told the Holy Spirit would come upon her. She was asking how it would happen. It wasn’t an announcement, it was an answer to her question.

She consented.

NO. She was told you will conceive. Then she asked how. Luke 1:31

She consented? Really. She was about 15 years old if that. And after being told God is going to impregnate you, she reasonably concluded from this statement that it was inevitable. Like she's going to tell the most powerful entity in the universe "no."?

Why are people fussing about her age? Fourteen or 15 was a completely normal marriage age in those days, when life expectancy was not much over 35.

She was betrothed at the time; betrothal in those times was more like half married, not at all like engagements these days.

But she hadn't been with a man

That response does not seem on point with the question, which is why are people making a big deal of her age given it was totally normal for a woman to be married and maybe have had a child by age 14 or 15 two thousand years ago.

only married women; she wasn't married. The penalty for being an unwed mum in those days was stoning. Which completely and 100% explains why her and Joseph went to Bethlehem for the birth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Believing a supernatural force could impregnate a human female without sexual intercourse is what's weird. Of course women who have found themselves in these circumstances all over the world have had to make up such explanations. You know what the penalty was for being an unwed mother in those days, right?

Women may make up stories to explain pregnancy, but their children don’t become the founder of the world’s largest religion.

that happened many centuries after Jesus's birth - and to be frank, Paul was the founder of the religion, and the Emperor Constantine gave it its big break -- for reasons of his own which had nothing to do with devotion to Jesus.

No. Christ is the church.

[Anonymous]

Mostly only conservative Christians allow sexual assault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Believing a supernatural force could impregnate a human female without sexual intercourse is what's weird. Of course women who have found themselves in these circumstances all over the world have had to make up such explanations. You know what the penalty was for being an unwed mother in those days, right?

Women may make up stories to explain pregnancy, but their children don’t become the founder of the world’s largest religion.

that happened many centuries after Jesus's birth - and to be frank, Paul was the founder of the religion, and the Emperor Constantine gave it its big break -- for reasons of his own which had nothing to do with devotion to Jesus.

No. Christ is the church.

No serious person who has read on the arly church can possibly believe this. I'd love to hear your thinking in support of this baseless statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Deuteronomy 21 and the Quran, victorious Jewish and Muslim men can take captive women as their wives/slaves. Yet you guys are obsessing over whether or not Mary consented. Weird.

Believing a supernatural force could impregnate a human female without sexual intercourse is what's weird. Of course women who have found themselves in these circumstances all over the world have had to make up such explanations. You know what the penalty was for being an unwed mother in those days, right?

Women may make up stories to explain pregnancy, but their children don’t become the founder of the world’s largest religion.

that happened many centuries after Jesus's birth - and to be frank, Paul was the founder of the religion, and the Emperor Constantine gave it its big break -- for reasons of his own which had nothing to do with devotion to Jesus.

No. Christ is the church.

No serious person who has read on the arly church can possibly believe this. I'd love to hear your thinking in support of this baseless statement.

early