(November 13, 2012 at 5:57 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: No it is not. Religion is the "law" and from there Constantine 'Ruled" from there Henry VIII 'ruled" so the point stands.

It's okay I reject the RCC like any other sane person.

(November 12, 2012 at 5:22 pm)Darkstar Wrote: Forced marriage does not necessarily equate to rape.

True, and forced marriage is what we're discussing.

Quote:It is when the wife (it could also technically be the husband, but I don't think it ever has been) is forced to have sex. Marriage is not rape, rape is rape, regardless of context.

Again, that's a relatively rare view across time and cultures.

---

(November 13, 2012 at 4:10 am)Daniel Wrote: If you want to be justified by the law, you will be judged by it. Christ has promised, however, that those who follow him will not even pass before judgement (John 5:24).

Since there is no way that you are going to be able to keep the whole of the Jewish law, nor do I believe that you want to, then you can't decide to act upon the "divine instruction" to kill sinners. You don't get to decide what to follow and what not to follow. You would have to take your brothers wives as your own should they die and produce children for your dead brothers, etc.

I'm not referring to myself, I'm referring to those to whom this law was given. Was it sinful for them to apply it?

(November 13, 2012 at 11:35 am)John V Wrote:

(November 12, 2012 at 5:22 pm)Darkstar Wrote: Forced marriage does not necessarily equate to rape.

True, and forced marriage is what we're discussing.

Forced marriage in biblical times. Whether or not someone gets raped by their spouse is independant of whether or not the marriage was voluntary, but typically cultures with forced marriages (especially in the distant past) also allowed spousal rape.

Take a look at this passage:

---

Ephesians 5:22-24

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

---

So, yes, women would be forced to submit sexually to their husbands. Well, in this case it wouldn't really be women but probably young teens/preteens (given the customs and life expectancy of the time).

John V Wrote:

Darkstar Wrote:It is when the wife (it could also technically be the husband, but I don't think it ever has been) is forced to have sex. Marriage is not rape, rape is rape, regardless of context.

Again, that's a relatively rare view across time and cultures.

If forcing someone to have sex with you against their will isn't rape, then what is? And if you say that it isn't rape in a marriage, then we must note that the marriage was also forced. Or are you implying that women shouldn't have a say in the matter, and that the bible is morally correct after all?

Quote:Forced marriage does not necessarily equate to rape

It's immoral.

(November 13, 2012 at 9:24 am)Daniel Wrote: It's okay I reject the RCC like any other sane person.

You owe me a new irony meter!

(November 13, 2012 at 11:46 am)Kirbmarc Wrote:

Quote:Forced marriage does not necessarily equate to rape

It's immoral.

Mmmhmm

John V Wrote:I'm not referring to myself, I'm referring to those to whom this law was given. Was it sinful for them to apply it?

Well obviously not because 'sinful' is defined as "what god says is wrong", not "what is actually wrong". You would think that a being with objectively perfect morals would, you know, fix the moral problems of its followers. He doesn't advise aginst stuff like this though, and even advocates similarly immoral things that, for the most part, people of the day only followed because their morals were not as developed as the morals of today.

Quote: Mmmhmm

Sorry, I know this is obvious. I was about to write more but I forgot to type in.

The sentence I wanted to write is "Even if forced marriage is not rape, it's still immoral, so if god is the ultimate moral authority, he shouldn't allow it".

(November 13, 2012 at 11:45 am)Darkstar Wrote: Forced marriage in biblical times.

Yes, yet you keep bringing in relatively recent views on sex withing marriage.

Quote:Whether or not someone gets raped by their spouse is independant of whether or not the marriage was voluntary, but typically cultures with forced marriages (especially in the distant past) also allowed spousal rape.

Typically, cultures have not considered sex between husband and wife to be rape in any circumstances.

Quote:Take a look at this passage:

---

Ephesians 5:22-24

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

---

So, yes, women would be forced to submit sexually to their husbands. Well, in this case it wouldn't really be women but probably young teens/preteens (given the customs and life expectancy of the time).

This is an indirect way to get their. If you knew the Bible you'd go here:

1 Cor 7
3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Not that either of these NT passages applied to the OT passage you cite.

Quote:If forcing someone to have sex with you against their will isn't rape, then what is?

Rape is unlawful sexual intercourse. Most cultures have excluded sex between husband and wife from rape laws.

Quote:And if you say that it isn't rape in a marriage, then we must note that the marriage was also forced.

Yes. You noted yourself that forced marriage does not necessarily imply rape.

Quote:Or are you implying that women shouldn't have a say in the matter, and that the bible is morally correct after all?

I'm just asking that critics get the situation correct. Is it still unsettling from a modern western POV? Yes. But most atheists view it as battlefield rape and/or sex slaves, and that's not accurate. In that culture, men were expected to marry, and polygamy was allowed. That means some wives were needed from outside.

(November 13, 2012 at 12:01 pm)Kirbmarc Wrote:

Quote: Mmmhmm

The sentence I wanted to write is "Even if forced marriage is not rape, it's still immoral, so if god is the ultimate moral authority, he shouldn't allow it".

Yeah, but he always uses the excuse "if I make it legal, the it isn't technically rape". Tis sad...
(and I was simply agreeing, not trying to be sarcastic or anything, althougth yes it is quite obvious, but so is the fact that slavery is wrong, and yet Jesus condones it, so...)

Guys, if your point is merely that you disagree with morality in the Bible, that ain't exactly a news flash. As morality is subjective, I don't bother arguing it with you. I'm just pointing out what really took place, and views on the subject from other times and cultures. You can disagree all you want.