Where is everybody when it comes to 1 Corinthians 7:3-5?

[popsthebuilder]

Surely you feel better now, yes?

[IanHulett]

Ooo! Ooo! Ooo! Me! Me! Me! Let me have this one!!!
Deuteronomy 21
(18) If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:


(19) Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

(20) And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our sonis stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

(21) And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our sonis stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

There you go. God saying to his followers to punish disobedient children with death. Pretty evil God.

That's not what I got but, if someone was completely rebellious in a negative manner towards all good then he would be a burden on life and surely commit atrocities so yeah for the greater good and to limit suffering in the future I could almost understand it. I would prefer to read it for myself. Where can I find it in text?

Well, if you have a bible on your book case, like I do, you can open it up and read the passages for yourself, or you can visit this link:
http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/21.htm


Also, when you quoted me, I kind of messed up, because I accidentally posted verse 20 twice. 21 actually says "And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

[popsthebuilder]

I have it. Where is it, and in which book?

[IanHulett]

Surely you feel better now, yes?

Not really. Because the more I dissect the bible, the more confusing it becomes and the less it makes sense... to me personally.

[IanHulett]

I have it. Where is it, and in which book?

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

[popsthebuilder]

Yeah it's basically saying to obide by a truthful courtsystem. Plus the answer I already put.

[Pyrrho]

You should have continued reading:

6I say this as a concession, not as a command.

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/7.htm

Those verses you are quoting are a suggestion and not a requirement.

Well played. But the problem still remains that it still says we don't have authority over our own bodies but yield them to our spouse. Sounds like the verse is contradicted by the next verse. "Your spouse owns your body, not you. You must submit. Don't deprive each other because you'll be tempted by Satan. But that's just a suggestion." Makes no sense to me.

I disagree, but this specific issue isn't going to make any difference in evaluating the Bible as a whole.  It is a very nasty piece of work, and no one should be following the advice in it.  One might do things that happen to coincide with some command or other, but no one should do anything because it is in that terrible book.

God commanding people to stone women who do not show the signs of virginity when they are married is pretty brutal, particularly as the "signs of virginity" are not completely accurate.  One would think that if an omniscient being made people, he would know that and not command that innocent women be stoned to death because they don't seem to be virgins when they are.  (And if God were omnipotent, he could have made the "signs of virginity" accurate, but they are not.)  But this is typical of the evil being called "god" in the Bible.

[Jenny A]

God commanding people to stone women who do not show the signs of virginity when they are married is pretty brutal, particularly as the "signs of virginity" are not completely accurate.  One would think that if an omniscient being made people, he would know that and not command that innocent women be stoned to death because they don't seem to be virgins when they are.  (And if God were omnipotent, he could have made the "signs of virginity" accurate, but they are not.)  But this is typical of the evil being called "god" in the Bible.

Just being an athletic young woman can break the hymen as early as eight. I did that. Blood in my panties scared my mother. The pediatrician was used to the question. It's common. Makes you wonder how many young women were stoned for it.

[Pyrrho]

God commanding people to stone women who do not show the signs of virginity when they are married is pretty brutal, particularly as the "signs of virginity" are not completely accurate.  One would think that if an omniscient being made people, he would know that and not command that innocent women be stoned to death because they don't seem to be virgins when they are.  (And if God were omnipotent, he could have made the "signs of virginity" accurate, but they are not.)  But this is typical of the evil being called "god" in the Bible.

Just being an athletic young woman can break the hymen as early as eight.  I did that.  Blood in my panties scared my mother.  The pediatrician was used to the question.  It's common.  Makes you wonder how many young women were stoned for it.

If your husband (if you have one) didn't like you after your wedding night and if we followed the rules of the Bible, you would have been stoned to death for that.  Even if you were really a virgin when you married.

For those who need it, this is in Deuteronomy 22:13-21.

http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/22.htm

Yes, it certainly does make one wonder how many innocent women were murdered because of this law from "God."


A quick search online turned up the claim that the majority of women do not bleed the first time they have intercourse:

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2010/0...tercourse/

But regardless of that, it is an absolute fact that it is unreliable as a method of determining virginity, and consequently it is insane to use it as a life and death test.  Which tells us something significant about the god of the Bible.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

God commanding people to stone women who do not show the signs of virginity when they are married is pretty brutal, particularly as the "signs of virginity" are not completely accurate.  One would think that if an omniscient being made people, he would know that and not command that innocent women be stoned to death because they don't seem to be virgins when they are.  (And if God were omnipotent, he could have made the "signs of virginity" accurate, but they are not.)  But this is typical of the evil being called "god" in the Bible.

Just being an athletic young woman can break the hymen as early as eight.  I did that.  Blood in my panties scared my mother.  The pediatrician was used to the question.  It's common.  Makes you wonder how many young women were stoned for it.

The way it worked was that when the girl was going to get married her father would take a cloth and ram it up her vagina, causing her to bleed indicating that she was a virgin a second ago.  He would then keep the bloody cloth as proof of his daughter's (previous) virginity.  If the new husband then started to whine that his bride wasn't a virgin the father would produce the bloody cloth as proof that she was.  

It was some sick shit but that's the way it was in old time Judea.