Did God really shout to his son?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Did God really shout to his son?

Post #1

Post by marco »

Matthew tells us:

" And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.�


Billions of babies get baptized but the Voice doesn't express delight. I've checked to see if this Voice was heard by any Roman writer of the time but apparently it was a local phenomenon for Christ's pointless ceremony. Sadly nothing concrete was dropped from what is called heaven but I suppose that could have ended in tragedy, for it's one thing for a pigeon to descend on the jubilant Jesus, quite another for a ton of gold to hit him. So all we have is the testimony of unstable Matthew to let us know about this fantastic piece of history.


Can we take the tale as a symbolic tribute to Christ, rather than fact?
Does the Bible lose credibility through Matthew's indulgence in such stories?

User avatar
Mithrae
Prodigy
Posts: 4304
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:33 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 190 times

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #61

Post by Mithrae »

[Replying to post 59 by JehovahsWitness]

Where did you read that these girls were permitted even the pretense of "consent" to marry the Israelite soldiers who desired them? You yourself have acknowledged that even in cases of fathers betrothing their own daughters to someone else within the tribe or nation consent was sometimes coerced or outright ignored, an issue which the Torah makes no attempt to acknowledge or remedy. Yet you're still trying to defend the obvious fact of mass rape in these passages; the obvious fact that not even adult women would willingly marry their families' killers without extreme coercion (would you?), let alone captive young girls whose 'consent' would not be legally recognized in even the best of circumstances today!

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #62

Post by JehovahsWitness »

marco wrote: You suggest "arranged marriage"; the flaw in this is that there was no arrangement - it was an imposed union on someone who had no choice.
ARRANGEMENT

An informal agreement or settlement especially on personal, social, or political matters

TO ARRANGE

To put into a proper order or into a correct or suitable sequence, relationship, or adjustment

source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arrange

An "arranged marriage" is by definition arranged whether the arrangement is imposed on one or more of the parties or not. In the historical context here it would be arrranged (ie put into place) by the family patriarch. It is worth pointing out that all marriages (including those of the patriarchs natural born daughters) would have been initiated in exactly the same manner. The slave girl however stood to gain more than the natural Jewess in tems of greatly improving her legal and financial status.

To confligate the above patriarchal system to a mass rape program is to display a dichotomic mindset worthy of the most radical "new wave feminist". It demands we believe under such an arrangement all women then went on to refuse to have sex with their husbands and all men went on to rape their wives. Since rape is naturally abhorrent to all but the perverse and the psychologically deranged such a conclusion is not only insulting to men in general but statistically improbable.




JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3247 times
Been thanked: 1997 times

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #63

Post by Difflugia »

JehovahsWitness wrote:The slave girl however stood to gain more than the natural Jewess in tems of greatly improving her legal and financial status.
So, it's for her own good, then?
JehovahsWitness wrote:To confligate the above patriarchal system to a mass rape program is to display a dichotomic mindset worthy of the most radical "new wave feminist".
Then why are you doing so? If you recall, we're talking about the forced "marriages" of prisoners of war. You're the only one trying to turn the argument into the straw man of "all arranged marriages no matter how benign the social construction are rape." That is certainly an easier argument to refute than "forcing enslaved prisoners of war to have sex with you is rape," but even so, is that really the hill on which you want to make your stand?

Overcomer
Guru
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Post #64

Post by Overcomer »

marco wrote:
Transmissions from the sky presumably require a LOUD voice given the absence of mechanical assistance. Ergo shout or scream. Salutation, from the Latin first conjugation verb salutare, to greet, is just a way of saying God greeted people to that announcement.
The Greek word is λέγουσα. It is translated "saying" because that's what the word means. It doesn't mean shout or holler or roar. The root word means "to say". See here:

https://biblehub.com/greek/3004.htm

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3247 times
Been thanked: 1997 times

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #65

Post by Difflugia »

JehovahsWitness wrote:To confligate the above patriarchal system to a mass rape program is to display a dichotomic mindset worthy of the most radical "new wave feminist".
I hope you realize that you're dancing very close to claiming that promotion of sexual autonomy for women is something you perceive as insulting.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #66

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Difflugia wrote:If you recall, we're talking about the forced "marriages" of prisoners of war.

Firstly speaking about war captives as "prisoners" is a misnommer since at no time were slaves to be put in prisons (the Hebrew system didn't have prison). Further there is the unproven assumption that slave girls offered the opportunity of an arranged marriage would automatically need to be "forced" to accept. Given her circumstances, that would be unlikely to say the least.

If we remove such subtianiated notions, are you suggesting that, because of the unique aspects of the history of such a girl, an arranged marriage for a war bride is indeed tantamount to rape? If yes, explain why. If no we have no issue.



JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3247 times
Been thanked: 1997 times

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #67

Post by Difflugia »

JehovahsWitness wrote:Firstly speaking about war captives as "prisoners" is a misnommer since at no time were slaves to be put in prisons (the Hebrew system didn't have prison).
You've hinged your arguments on split hairs before, but this might be the winner. "War captives," then.
JehovahsWitness wrote:Further there is the unproven assumption that slave girls offered the opportunity of an arranged marriage would automatically need to be "forced" to accept. Given her circumstances, that would be unlikely to say the least.
This is one of the most surreal apologetic arguments I think I've ever had to deal with and believe me, that's saying someting. Your first implication here is that Deuteronomy 21:10-14 can somehow be construed as an "offer of marriage" with, apparently, an inherent right to refuse. Your second is that the prospects of being a slave were apparently (according to your argument) so much worse than marriage to one of your captors that a woman or girl would be not only willing, but eager to accept such a marriage and this somehow amounts to meaningful consent.

I am literally, viscerally horrified.
JehovahsWitness wrote:If we remove such subtianiated notions, are you suggesting that, because of the unique aspects of the history of such a girl...
The "unique aspects" were being taken captive after the slaughter (the text assumes) of her parents. Just so we're all clear.
JehovahsWitness wrote:...an arranged marriage for a war bride is indeed tantamount to rape?
Even if I agree that an "arranged marriage" is somehow not rape by virtue of being a marriage by someone's definition (which I don't), then a captor "arranging" his marriage to his own captive strains even the broadest definition of "arranged marriage."
JehovahsWitness wrote:If yes, explain why. If no we have no issue.
Good gods! In the immortal (if apocryphal) words of some Christian guy, "Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders!"
  • Nonconsensual sex is rape.
  • Nonconsensual sex within marriage is rape.
  • Consent given as a response to coercion or threat is not consent.
  • Consent given by someone held against their will, even as a condition of release, is not consent.
These are axiomatic for me. If you do not agree with these in whole, without qualification or quibbling over definitions, then we do not agree. Any god, real or imagined, that doesn't agree with these can be a god of neither love nor justice.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #68

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Difflugia wrote: Even if I agree that an "arranged marriage" is somehow not rape by virtue of being a marriage

Since marriage is a legal contract and a rape is force sexual intercourse I cannot see how you can do anything BUT agree that a marriage (of any description) is not a rape. If however you indeed trying to redefine the plain meaning of words, free to present argumentation that is more substantial than your shock and horror (both of which will presumably subside with access to a good dictionary).

If you accept that arranged marriages regardless of the parameters, are not rape but are actually arguing that the former must by definition lead to the latter, I have already addressed this point, and can see little in the way of counterargument that doesn't amount to "I don't like it".

Facts don't care about your feelings and the fact of the matter is that there is nothing in scripture or in the cultural context of Hebrew society to indicate the girl couldnt have refused marriage (and the legal status as a wife and the inheritance for her children ) in favor of remaining childless slave in her master's house forever*. Short of running away and taking a chance on how much better a young virgin girl without protection would be treated by the child sacrificing Cananites, or attempting to wander about in the desert until shes picked off by a wild animal, a non-crazy girl would most likely accept her lot in life, agree to marriage and live up to her part of the arrangement.

* Most men past and present that are not psychopaths will choose not to marry a girl if he believes he will have to rape her to have sex with her.
Those were the facts which are arguably comparatively humaine, and in any case, and whether we find them morally agreeable or not there is no reason to confligate them to a presumption of systematic rape which defies both the national law and basic human nature which usually finds rape repellent.




JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Tue May 19, 2020 3:54 pm, edited 6 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11342
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 312 times
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #69

Post by 1213 »

Difflugia wrote:
1213 wrote:Where it is said in the Bible that it is righteous to rape, beat or destroy? Destroy is only one that I can agree that can be righteous, if it is evil that is destroyed.
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 is quoted often enough that I'm always surprised when someone forgets about it:
When you go out to battle against your enemies, and Yahweh your God delivers them into your hands and you carry them away captive, and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you are attracted to her, and desire to take her as your wife, then you shall bring her home to your house. She shall shave her head and trim her nails. She shall take off the clothing of her captivity, and shall remain in your house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month. After that you shall go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife.
Thanks for showing the scripture. As all can see, it does not say “it is righteous to rape, beat or destroy�. Makes me wonder, why do people claim so, if everyone can clearly see it is not true.

I think what you say tells more about you than about the Bible. If you would be in the same situation, would you rape?

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Did God really shout to his son?

Post #70

Post by marco »

1213 wrote:
Difflugia wrote:
1213 wrote:Where it is said in the Bible that it is righteous to rape, beat or destroy? Destroy is only one that I can agree that can be righteous, if it is evil that is destroyed.
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 is quoted often enough that I'm always surprised when someone forgets about it:
When you go out to battle against your enemies, and Yahweh your God delivers them into your hands and you carry them away captive, and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you are attracted to her, and desire to take her as your wife, then you shall bring her home to your house. She shall shave her head and trim her nails. She shall take off the clothing of her captivity, and shall remain in your house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month. After that you shall go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife.
Thanks for showing the scripture. As all can see, it does not say “it is righteous to rape, beat or destroy�. Makes me wonder, why do people claim so, if everyone can clearly see it is not true.
If one argues simplistically one can justify anything or overlook murder. There is no command that says we must not murder - we must not kill. The above details give God's permission for a man to abuse girls he has snatched away. We don't need to search for a four-letter word.

We get a good idea of God's intentions from the man God conversed with, to whom he offered his commandments: In Numbers 31 we have this beautiful passage:

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. "

Perhaps "kill" does not mean kill and perhaps the virgin girls are to be given roses. But let us follow your advice and read what is written.


I think what you say tells more about you than about the Bible. If you would be in the same situation, would you rape?
Is it more moral to defend violence to girls or to condemn it, 1213?

Post Reply