Religion and women.

[Bells]

You’re a liar.
To take hold of a woman does not mean he is raping her. Plus you seemed to bypass the actual law that states if a man forced himself on a woman, he and he alone is to be put to death.

What choices and rights?

I haven’t given any argument for or against women in this thread.
It’s not that women are “special” because they carry babies. It is that they carry babies, period.
Only a female can naturally do that.

Maybe you’ve never been in a relationship where the man naturally is inclined to protect you when he senses danger. Or where you naturally feel secure that this man has your back.
If you had, you would know what I mean by “naturally”.

You are a liar!
Show where I’ve said anything like this.
I said that if abuse did come to mind, it is on the abuser.
Liar!

I don’t know what Tiassa’s gig is, but playing the the victim, a symptom of your feminist/woke/whatever culture, is different from being being victimised.

“Slut shaming”!
Another lie!

Another lie!
I’m not a misogynist, and you have yet to show what makes me one.
You stupidly called me a racist too.
Where is the evidence of that? Liar!

I know why you’re angry and fed up.
Because you are morally bankrupt, and averse to truth.

There is no virtue in lying.
You put yourself on the back-foot every time you do so. You are your own worst enemy.

Sorry, you misogynistic and bigoted snowflake..

We've been through this multiple times and I'm not feeding your trolling any longer. I'm not Tiassa and have zero interest in enabling you.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Sorry, you misogynistic and bigoted snowflake..

We've been through this multiple times and I'm not feeding your trolling any longer. I'm not Tiassa and have zero interest in enabling you.

Unfortunately I knew you would react like this.
Either that, or not respond at all.
It is a pity you are afraid to be called out.

 

[Write4U]

Which theists?

The ones who believe in a single God. Millions of them!

 

[Write4U]

Impossible

And that is where your logic fails. You believe that some subjective feeling of "grokking" gives you authority to make definitive statements about something which cannot be proven.

In psychiatry that is called a "delusion"
Delusion - Wikipedia

A delusion is a fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence. ... In practice, psychiatrists tend to diagnose a belief as delusional if it is either patently bizarre, causing significant ... Furthermore, when beliefs involve value judgments, only those which cannot be proven true are considered delusions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion

God's commands are assumed "values" which cannot be proven and are therefore "delusional".
A "Holy War" (Jihad, Crusades) is a delusional activity.

 

[billvon]

You’re a liar.
To take hold of a woman does not mean he is raping her.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV: "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."

Eagerly await your next dishonest attempt to revise the Bible. Perhaps to you "rape" doesn't mean "rape?" Or maybe, like Todd Akin, you believe that Biblical rape is not legitimate rape; it's the kind of rape that you think is OK.

 

[Jan Ardena]

The ones who believe in a single God. Millions of them!

So theists who believe in God, are killing each other over the interpretation of God, which they all believe in?
Do you know how dumb that looks and sounds.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV: "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."

Eagerly await your next dishonest attempt to revise the Bible. Perhaps to you "rape" doesn't mean "rape?" Or maybe, like Todd Akin, you believe that Biblical rape is not legitimate rape; it's the kind of rape that you think is OK.

That NIV version is a dumb version to begin with.

“Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority, or against a person who is incapable of giving valid consent, such as one who is unconscious, incapacitated…”

That dumb NIV version attempts to trick folks by directly using the word “rape”, and fools like you don’t question it because it plays into your delusion of Godlessness.

The verse that you should accept as “rape”, simply because it use the term “by force”, is of no interest to you because it punishes the man alone, by death. But it is of no interest to you.
Just like if a black person gets shot by another black person (which happens every single day), you simps aren’t interested. You’re only interested when a white person shoots, or kills a black person, which rarely happens.
You people are sick.

Eagerly await your next dishonest attempt to revise the Bible. Perhaps to you "rape" doesn't mean "rape?" Or maybe, like Todd Akin, you believe that Biblical rape is not legitimate rape; it's the kind of rape that you think is OK.

Stop lying.
You know you’re wrong, and you know that I know you’re wrong (because you’re a liar), and you know I’ll call you out on your lies.
You should be ashamed of yourself, for allowing yourself to accept these lies.

25But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:
26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so isthis matter:

 

[billvon]

That NIV version is a dumb version to begin with.

Christian Standard Bible: If a man encounters a young woman, a virgin who is not engaged, takes hold of her and rapes her, and they are discovered . . .
Holman Standard Bible: If a man encounters a young woman, a virgin who is not engaged, takes hold of her and rapes her, and they are discovered . . .
God's Word translation: This is what you must do when a man rapes a virgin who isn't engaged. When the crime is discovered . . .
International Standard Version: However, if a man meets a girl who isn't engaged to be married, and he seizes her, rapes her, and is later found out . . .
NET Bible: Suppose a man comes across a virgin who is not engaged and overpowers and rapes her and they are discovered. . .

Why is it that the people who pound the Bible the hardest are least likely to know what is in the various translations? It's almost as if they feel they have to constantly lie. Sad.

 

[Write4U]

So theists who believe in God, are killing each other over the interpretation of God, which they all believe in?
Do you know how dumb that looks and sounds. ......

Yes indeed. How dumb can you get to kill millions of people over an interpretation of God, which they all claim to believe in, but is "unknowable". Hubris!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But ask any Christian if his God is the same God as Allah and they will deny it. I did my own poll.

The question was: "If there is only one true God, then is the Christian God the same God as Allah?"
The answer was always no, by reason of interpretation of the one God.

Samuel 15:3, “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
” God orders Saul to kill all men, women, and children of the Amalekites because of their parents’ alleged sins. “My God is better than your God.”

There are smaller religious wars that could be included, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Northern Ireland, Yugoslav Wars, Rwanda genocide, India-Pakistan, Congo, Tibet, and civil war in Sudan. These are wars fought in the modern era, the list could go on and on. “My God is better than your God.”

The Bible has many stories of these killings but, just look at the last 1,000 years. In the last thousand years about 40 million people have died in the name of religion.

https://www.swnewsmedia.com/eden_pr...cle_8f8ee092-5810-5d3d-9be6-f7fa277a0700.html

Now how dumb does that sound to you?

You may want to peruse the Skeptics Annotated Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon to see how the same God is interpreted by these three religions alone.
https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

 

[Jan Ardena]

Christian Standard Bible: If a man encounters a young woman, a virgin who is not engaged, takes hold of her and rapes her, and they are discovered . . .
Holman Standard Bible: If a man encounters a young woman, a virgin who is not engaged, takes hold of her and rapes her, and they are discovered . . .
God's Word translation: This is what you must do when a man rapes a virgin who isn't engaged. When the crime is discovered . . .
International Standard Version: However, if a man meets a girl who isn't engaged to be married, and he seizes her, rapes her, and is later found out . . .
NET Bible: Suppose a man comes across a virgin who is not engaged and overpowers and rapes her and they are discovered. . .

Taphas - lay hold on
https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/taphas.html

Show me the word RAPE in this.
Show holding a woman constitutes rape
Why do you ignore the earlier verse that actually deals with rape?
Huh!!!

Why is it that the people who pound the Bible the hardest are least likely to know what is in the various translations? It's almost as if they feel they have to constantly lie.

The various translations have nothing to do with the Bible. That is why they can decide, if they feel like it, to insert a modern word (rape) whenever they choose.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Yes indeed.

You know that doesn’t show anything, other than an opinion. Right?

How dumb can you get to kill millions of people over an interpretation of God, which they all claim to believe in, but is "unknowable". Hubris!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this all you have?

But ask any Christian if his God is the same God as Allah and they will deny it. I did my own poll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/26/17282284/pew-americans-god-religion-study-faith-identity

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...o-believe-in-god-to-go-to-heaven-8810062.html

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-christian-atheist_b_8866378

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/04/can-you-be-a-muslim-if-youre-an-atheist

https://stepfeed.com/we-talked-to-muslim-atheists-about-why-they-don-t-believe-9650

A theist believes in God, regardless of religion.
Most Christians and Muslims, believe in their religion, not God.
You will find that most people who leave their religion, become atheists. Because they were always atheist.

You can’t just lump theists as Christians, and Muslims. Theists have their own category, just like atheists.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Samuel 15:3, “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
” God orders Saul to kill all men, women, and children of the Amalekites because of their parents’ alleged sins.

What does any of this have to do with theism?
As a theist, I know that different religions are no different in essence, to different schools and places of academic learning. Most are crappy, a small amount are decent. But you wouldn’t know that, because you are atheist, and as such God is never in the picture.

You may want to peruse the Skeptics Annotated Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon to see how the same God is interpreted by these three religions alone.
https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

Why would I want to waste my time reading the words of idiot atheists, who can only spill what they comprehend?

 

[Write4U]

Why would I want to waste my time reading the words of idiot atheists, who can only spill what they comprehend?

Why would I want to waste my time reading the words of idiot theists, who can spill only what they themselves don't understand?

You can’t just lump theists as Christians, and Muslims. Theists have their own category, just like atheists.

At least atheists don't kill each other in the name of a non-existent God.

No one has ever been killed by a scientist who didn't agree with another scientist about the "beginning".

 

[Bells]

Unfortunately I knew you would react like this.
Either that, or not respond at all.
It is a pity you are afraid to be called out.

Over 50 pages of my responding to your misogyny, Jan. Repetitive offensive misogyny. Over 50 pages of it.

If a man is accused of raping your daughter and his defense is 'I did not rape her, I simply lay hold of her and lay with her', how well do you think that would go. You would be cool with that, yeah? Not rape, right? I mean shit, would you be okay with then selling her off to the guy for some coin and a few goats? How many coins is she worth to you?

"Lay hold of" means to grab, to take.. This does not suggest or imply consent. He took her and lay with her. That is why that passage is widely interpreted to mean rape by all except you and Tiassa it seems.

I understand your reasons, being that you are oppressively misogynistic who simply cannot understand or take a hint when a woman tells you that they don't want to speak with you any more (because you are a repulsive misogynist), so of course you don't think that a man taking hold of a woman and having sex with her without her consent is rape.. I mean, we get it dude!

Do you understand now?

If you want to excuse rape by playing word twister, that's on you. You are simply telling us what we already know.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Over 50 pages of my responding to your misogyny, Jan. Repetitive offensive misogyny. Over 50 pages of it.

Stop lying.
If I were misogynistic, you would have explained why/how during those “over fifty pages”. All you’ve done is made baseless accusations. Much like those lying Bible translations that want people to believe Deuteronomy 22:28 means rape. You all know it doesn’t. Furthermore a couple of verses before it actually defines rape, and punishes the man for such actions. But that is of no interest you, because it doesn’t fit your lying agenda. Shame on you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

If a man is accused of raping your daughter and his defense is 'I did not rape her, I simply lay hold of her and lay with her', how well do you think that would go. You would be cool with that, yeah? Not rape, right? I mean shit, would you be okay with then selling her off to the guy for some coin and a few goats? How many coins is she worth to you?

So because a man is “accused” of rape, he is guilty of rape? Are you serious?
Are you serious in general?
Let me know, in your tiny idea, if the man did actually rape my daughter, then it become a decent talking point.
Accusations alone cant determine the truth. Not that the truth matters to you in particular. But for normal people it does.

"Lay hold of" means to grab, to take.. This does not suggest or imply consent. He took her and lay with her. That is why that passage is widely interpreted to mean rape by all except you and Tiassa it seems.

It doesn’t need to imply consent, it has nothing to do with a msn forcing himself onto a woman and having sexual intercourse against her will. You have to be deranged to seriously come to the conclusion every time a man lays hold of a woman, he is to be accused of rape.
He could be accused of holding a woman against her will, or hurting her as a result, even kidnapping, if you wanted to go down the accusation route.
But rape?
I don’t think so, unless he actually did rape her. Then that becomes something other than taking hold of her

But what about the verse where “rape” is actually defined by the use of the word “force”, where the man is sentenced to death, and the woman is blameless.
Why don’t you mention that verse?
In fact here it is…

Deuteronomy 22:25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:

Let’s discuss this verse where it actually implies rape, and what happens to men that rape women. And how this law protects women.

Whaddaya-say!!

 

[Jan Ardena]

I understand your reasons, being that you are oppressively misogynistic who simply cannot understand or take a hint when a woman tells you that they don't want to speak with you any more (because you are a repulsive misogynist), so of course you don't think that a man taking hold of a woman and having sex with her without her consent is rape.. I mean, we get it dude!

Yet this is a response to you talking to me
You think this person is smart Tiassa?
This person is a complete mess.
Every time she opens her mouth to speak, she reveals this unfortunate truth.
This what happens when emotion takes over.

Do you understand now?

I understand that you’ve allowed your emotions to rule. I understand that you have a problem with men, and from a different thread, I understand you don’t like white people very much. I understand that you are plagued with problems.

If you want to excuse rape by playing word twister, that's on you. You are simply telling us what we already know.

So now you inadvertently accuse me of excusing rape, by twisting words ( something you haven’t done).
Your tactics are becoming tedious.
But it is a good thing because it reveals who you really are, which makes for a great read.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Why would I want to waste my time reading the words of idiot theists, who can spill only what they themselves don't understand?

A theist by dint of the designation believes in God , and while no man understand everything, a theist, by dint of designation understands God well enough to maintain his/her belief in Him.

An atheist, by dint of designation cannot possibly understand God. Why? Because for them, there is no God.
That’s just the way it is folks.
Get over it, move on, or lift that stubborn veil.
Start by accepting things that are true.

At least atheists don't kill each other in the name of a non-existent God.

Then the same has to be said of theists with regard to an “existent God.
As a theist, it doesn’t cross my mind to kill someone because they don’t agree with me.
I know atheists (as is now unfolding) can be really nasty. Even at a detriment to themselves.
The problem is, you cannot comprehend what theism is, because as has been mentioned, there is no God as far as you’re concerned. Every one is atheist in your false reality.

No one has ever been killed by a scientist who didn't agree with another scientist about the "beginning".

The beginning of what?

 

[Bells]

Stop lying.
If I were misogynistic, you would have explained why/how during those “over fifty pages”.

We all have, Jan.

And it's obvious that you don't care to change because you don't think there's anything wrong with you. And that's on you, not us. We have all taken time, effort and swallowed a lot of disgust in trying to show you, but you refuse to accept it. There is really nothing more we can do for you.

All you’ve done is made baseless accusations. Much like those lying Bible translations that want people to believe Deuteronomy 22:28 means rape. You all know it doesn’t. Furthermore a couple of verses before it actually defines rape, and punishes the man for such actions. But that is of no interest you, because it doesn’t fit your lying agenda. Shame on you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Yes Jan. It's everyone else but you (and Tiassa it seems).

It's a conspiracy!

So because a man is “accused” of rape, he is guilty of rape? Are you serious?
Are you serious in general?
Let me know, in your tiny idea, if the man did actually rape my daughter, then it become a decent talking point.
Accusations alone cant determine the truth. Not that the truth matters to you in particular. But for normal people it does.

And that's a conversation I can only hope you never, ever, EVER get to have with a loved one, Jan.

It doesn’t need to imply consent, it has nothing to do with a msn forcing himself onto a woman and having sexual intercourse against her will. You have to be deranged to seriously come to the conclusion every time a man lays hold of a woman, he is to be accused of rape.
He could be accused of holding a woman against her will, or hurting her as a result, even kidnapping, if you wanted to go down the accusation route.
But rape?
I don’t think so, unless he actually did rape her. Then that becomes something other than taking hold of her

But what about the verse where “rape” is actually defined by the use of the word “force”, where the man is sentenced to death, and the woman is blameless.
Why don’t you mention that verse?
In fact here it is…

Deuteronomy 22:25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:

Let’s discuss this verse where it actually implies rape, and what happens to men that rape women. And how this law protects women.

Whaddaya-say!!

Given the whole section deals with laws regarding marrital and sexual misconduct, sex and rape, why do you think that particular passage is interpreted by all except you and Tiassa and misogynists and rape denialists to mean rape, Jan?

Do you think the passage is indicating holding her in place for a BBQ?

But let's parse that particular passage, while ignoring the rest. Aside from the expectation that she "cried" and there was "none to save her"..

25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die: 26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: 27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.​

The only reason the "damsel" in 28 is now stoned to death is because she is not married or betrothed. She is only owned by her father. No money had exchanged hands for her until she is raped. He lay hold of her and and 'lie with her'.. He wasn't holding onto her for a hug.. Laying hold of her clearly implies holding her down and does not imply or suggest her consent. She is sold to her rapist. The extent to which you try to twist this to excuse her rape.. Is frankly astonishing.

Most astonishing is what you also seem to miss about the entire passage detailing various scenarios. The crime is not against her so much as it is against the man who owns her.

Yet this is a response to you talking to me
You think this person is smart Tiassa?
This person is a complete mess.
Every time she opens her mouth to speak, she reveals this unfortunate truth.
This what happens when emotion takes over.

Wait, you think that because Tiassa enabled you to this extent, that Tiassa is your friend and on your side?

I'm not the one ranting with massive font and carrying on like a lunatic, Jan. You are.

You are so emotionally invested in detailing what is not rape (despite all evidence leading to it being rape) that you have completely missed and disregarded the other problematic issues with the entire section. I mean, you got so bad that you came out with this when it could apply to your own daughter:

So because a man is “accused” of rape, he is guilty of rape? Are you serious?
Are you serious in general?
Let me know, in your tiny idea, if the man did actually rape my daughter, then it become a decent talking point.
Accusations alone cant determine the truth. Not that the truth matters to you in particular. But for normal people it does.

Talk about sick and twisted.

And you think Tiassa is going to save you?

Tiassa is going to have to live with having enabled you and to allow you to believe that you are in a safe place to say what you said about rape, me, my marriage for the sake of politics.. But you? Sick and twisted.

I understand that you’ve allowed your emotions to rule. I understand that you have a problem with men, and from a different thread, I understand you don’t like white people very much. I understand that you are plagued with problems.

At least I don't have the emotional capacity of a dingo when it comes to my own children and in the nightmarish scenario that they ever tell me they had been raped, I would not come out and say 'well, just because you say you've been raped, does not mean you were actually raped'..

So now you inadvertently accuse me of excusing rape, by twisting words ( something you haven’t done).
Your tactics are becoming tedious.
But it is a good thing because it reveals who you really are, which makes for a great read.

You have excused it. You have blamed and shamed the victim:

If I said that a female dressed in scanty clad is an excuse for her to be abused and/or raped. You would probably conclude that the problem lies with me, rather than the scantily clad woman.
The problem of their stubborn mind-set is their problem. Not mine.

This you?

Then again, I should not be surprised that this is you. I doubt any of us will ever forget when you tried to push a scenario where rape and murdering women could be beneficial.

Let's say that for some reason more females were born in region, than males. Let's say for every male that was born, a thousand females were born at the same time.

From an evolutionary standpoint, most of those females were not going to be able to have off-spring, so that they could pass on their genes.
Which would mean those excess females would not be selected.

Do you think it would be okay for some of the few remaining males to rape and/or murder a very small amount of these females?
Could that ever become a good thing?

Don't worry, I don't think you ever would, but I ask because you seem to think that moral decency comes from humans, or that morals are subjective as opposed to objective.

A little off topic, but I believe we can tailor it to fit, as it does have something to do with atheist and theist psychology.

Earlier I laid out a hypothetical scenario, where it was actually beneficial to society to rape and abuse non selected females.

We aren't accusing you of excusing rape, Jan. When we say that you excuse rape, we are simply stating a fact. This is who you are:

From your perspective, there is only matter. We see other creatures rape, kill, torture, yet we don't regard them as cruel, or evil. We tend to accept, even respect, and admire their particular nature. So why do you think that a human who rapes, and forces their own desires on other humans, as morally different from other creatures?

Why indeed, eh Jan?

The point, Jan, is that this is your history on this website. As I said, it's not that we are accusing you of being a misogynist and excuser of rape. It's not an accusation. It's a statement of fact.

 

[Write4U]

Deuteronomy 22:25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:

Let’s discuss this verse where it actually implies rape, and what happens to men that rape women. And how this law protects women.

No, that's rape of a married woman, an affront to her husband. Are you implying that unmarried women can be raped at will? Who is there to complain? Daddy?

 

[Write4U]

A theist by dint of the designation believes in God , and while no man understand everything, a theist, by dint of designation understands God well enough to maintain his/her belief in Him.

The only true things you said here is that "no man understands everything"

An atheist, by dint of designation cannot possibly understand God. Why? Because for them, there is no God.
That’s just the way it is folks.

OK , I'll use your argument. "while no man understand everything, an atheist, by dint of designation understands the concept of God well enough to maintain his/her unbelief in Him. Or Her, which is it?

Get over it, move on, or lift that stubborn veil.

It is you who is behind the veil, which was lifted a long time ago by men and women of reason.

Start by accepting things that are true

No, start by questioning things which cannot be proven to be true. Faith is not knowledge, it is belief!

Then the same has to be said of theists with regard to an “existent God.
As a theist, it doesn’t cross my mind to kill someone because they don’t agree with me.

So you disagree with scripture?

I know atheists (as is now unfolding) can be really nasty. Even at a detriment to themselves.

At least atheists see women as equals. Before you judge atheists, clean up your own back yard.
Your nasty back yard is well identified in the "The skeptics Annotated Bible". Your dismissal of that major moral analysis of biblical violent injustice only shows your ignorance of the atheist perspective. It is impossible for your male God to exist except in the mind of men. Hubris!!!!!!

The problem is, you cannot comprehend what theism is, because as has been mentioned, there is no God as far as you’re concerned. Every one is atheist in your false reality.

Scripture is your reality. Without scripture you have no reality. Pink Unicorns do not exist for real in my reality. Without scripture they would exist in your reality. Historically, belief without scripture is called "mythology"

The beginning of what?

The age of reason.