(October 31, 2014 at 7:38 am)alpha male Wrote: I'm not missing the point, I'm disagreeing with it. My point is that, when bad people use something in an evil way for which the thing was not intended, logically the blame goes to the bad person, not the misused thing.
This is another example of the skeptic who reads what's there and the Christians who interpret what they read to mean what they already believe.
Quote:1COR 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband:
How is that not intended to establish that the man owns the woman's body? That is what it says, after all. Now you can spin and try to come up with obtuse interpretations to explain it all away but that's what the verse says in clear black and white.
If the passage says the man owns the woman's body, and it clearly does, then it's also saying he can rape her. After all, it's his body. He owns it. He can do with it as he pleases.
Spin, deny, put your hands over your ears and scream "la la la" all you like. When you're done, the verses will still be the same.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
