GOD RAPED MARY

[Aroura]

We don't know. Historians assume somewhere around 12 at the youngest to 16 at the oldest because she was engaged and that was the age when people got engaged/married back then.

Mary was supposedly a Jew and according to the Jewish Babylonian Talmud it's acceptable for three-year olds (even two-year olds) to get married.  It says that King David knocked up Bathsheba when she was six years old.  And the age of consent was seven (7) in America in 1895.

Ugh, man. History. 

[Cod]

I can see it as the news headlines some 2,000 years ago!

But seriously, both my daughters went to Anglican-based very expensive private schools. Ok, don't ask questions it just happened, ok? There were secular options but I blame myself for not enrolling them there. It is what it is.

Anyway, this particular school had sex education classes for the students but also had religious classes as well - of course. Some of the brighter ones put 2 & 2 together and since the "immaculate conception" was in fact a non-consential impregnation of a woman, the logical conclusion is that GOD RAPED MARY.

I don't see much discussion of this issue on atheist or xtian forums so I thought I would raise the topic in the religious section of an atheist website for the obvious reasons that I would probably get banned for discussing it on a xtian forum.

I was actually quite proud of my daughters for coming up with this conclusion together with their friends. It is particularly relevant at this time with all the sexual misconduct allegations that are arising in Hollywood and many other industries.

Does anyone else see this as rape?

Welcome. You will fit in well here: you and your equally stupid children can't even get the definition of rape right. Critical thinking skills are on the decline. I blame vaccines.

I blame people like you for the lack of critical thinking, how dare you reply to this post in this way? You would advocate children being lied to, you would back fear being put into children, you would like children to accept bullshit as fact, you sir need to think about what you are saying.

[Bow Before Zeus]

Well im not a fan of the one post wonders with 0 reps that pop on and off either. But otherwise i dont see much preaching going on. 80 percent of the time theists are just responding to obnoxious or provocative OP like this thread or explaining various doctrines.

I don't see facts as "obnoxious or provocative". These are value statements attributed to statements because of wrong view.

---

As to why we discuss the real world implications of what we consider to be a fairy tale?  Well, I spend a LOT of time discussing the meaning of many fairy tales.  Including Star War, Harry Potter, LotR, etc. Since the one in question here is one a lot of people believe in, it only makes sense to discuss it even more (and show it's flaws, because when someone tries to push flawed ideology off as inspired, and as something that should be enshrined as secular law, for instance, you don't just ignore it).

Agreed. And not only "enshrined as secular law" but the more demented of world leaders will use these religious fairy tales to shape international policy and war policy (sorry, I don't call it defense policy - that's too 1984 for me). This results in conflicts throughout the world and many millions dead and displaced. It even has the possibility of bringing us close to a nuclear 3rd world war. These fairy tales are the most dangerous fairy tales in the world. They need discussion and they need to be called out for what they are.

---

The story itself is ridiculous to me, though. So I just continue to view it as a fictional story. And I will concur that it was consensual.

@OP- There are so many easy parts of the Bible that we can point to and say “hey look, that’s fucked up!” There are even actual rape stories in there. I don’t see any need to add rape where it isn’t.

The fairy tale story is dangerous and per my previous post.

I do not concur that it was consensual so easily simply because there was no question asked nor permission given. There was only resignation to a statement of what is to happen. This is a critical rape in the bible because all the others are between other human beings but this it the xtian god taking advantage of his power.

---

It's not unheard of for gods to rape women though. Zeus after all raped Leda while in the form of a swan (!).

Indeed they did. In fact both male and female Greek gods engaged in sexual encounters with the mortals. But the key fact here is that they did not hide the fact. It's in the open and everyone agrees it happened.

There is much suppression of sex in xtianity (esp catholicism) that it creates obsessive and abnormal behaviours as has been witnessed with the catholic church's pedophilia scandals.

---

Late to the party, and I have to run to an appointment in 10 minutes so I don't have time to read the thread, sorry . . . 

But according to the fable, I think Mary gave consent.  At least Luke 1:38 said so.  The angel spoke to her, described what was about to happen in no detail, and waited for a response.  Mary says  "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word."  

Is a young woman going to say NO to some shining gorgeous angel who wants her to be the MOTHER OF GOD?  Uh, probably not.  

Not that it happened . . . 

The angel gives a fait accomplis statement to which Mary acquiesces. She is not asked whether she accepts to be impregnated by god to which she could answer with no adverse consequences for a negative response.

This is what I am looking for in the bible but there is no such passage. None that anyone has given thus far anyway.

[SteveII]

Welcome. You will fit in well here: you and your equally stupid children can't even get the definition of rape right. Critical thinking skills are on the decline. I blame vaccines.

I blame people like you for the lack of critical thinking, how dare you reply to this post in this way? You would advocate children being lied to, you would back fear being put into children, you would like children to accept bullshit as fact, you sir need to think about what you are saying.

I don't lack critical thinking. I think I was highly critical. I like to nip stupidity in the bud and for the really stupid, the direct approach is best.

I don't advocate children being lied to. If you get that from what I said, well...you're making this too easy.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

How many wings did the angel have that blew smoke up Mary's butt?

[Martian Mermaid]

It's only rape if there's a sexual act involved, that's what I think.
I was always told that she got pregnant magically without doing the deed.
Magic. (aka bullshit)

[Catholic_Lady]

RAPE
[reyp]
noun
unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

Yeah, but you know, some people like to change the definition of words and purposely leave out important details so they can make stupid and dishonest accusations to fit their narrative.

[Minimalist]

The bible is not exactly silent on the subject.

http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-home...the-bible/

Rape is one of the most heinous crimes imaginable.  Yet few people know that the Bible often condones and even approves of rape.  How anyone can get their moral guidance from a book that allows rape escapes me.  Perhaps they have been lied to about the Bible and carefully detoured around all the nasty stuff in the Bible.

[Brian37]

RAPE
[reyp]
noun
unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

Yeah, but you know, some people like to change the definition of words and purposely leave out important details so they can make stupid and dishonest accusations to fit their narrative.

CL, antiquity worldwide was IGNORANT, not just Christians, but EVERY RELIGION WORLDWIDE.  And back then girls/women WORLDWIDE, were bartered between families like currency. And the mortality rate for child birth back then was much higher, so females were expected to pop out kids at a far younger age.

Mary was just a mythological character, but it doesn't matter. Back then the average age to expect a female to produce a baby was between 9-14. It was the same for most worldwide back then.  Females were expected to produce at a far younger age back then. 

But that does not even address the claim that someone can produce offspring without a second set of DNA regardless. The virgin birth NEVER HAPPENED.

[Catholic_Lady]

Yeah, but you know, some people like to change the definition of words and purposely leave out important details so they can make stupid and dishonest accusations to fit their narrative.

CL, antiquity worldwide was IGNORANT, not just Christians, but EVERY RELIGION WORLDWIDE.  And back then girls/women WORLDWIDE, were bartered between families like currency. And the mortality rate for child birth back then was much higher, so females were expected to pop out kids at a far younger age.

Mary was just a mythological character, but it doesn't matter. Back then the average age to expect a female to produce a baby was between 9-14. It was the same for most worldwide back then.  Females were expected to produce at a far younger age back then. 

But that does not even address the claim that someone can produce offspring without a second set of DNA regardless. The virgin birth NEVER HAPPENED.

I think the reason it may have been like that was bc the life expectancy was so much shorter. Kids that age were considered grown up. They worked and everything. It was just a different culture entirely.