Christian Apologist Sexually Assaulted Several Women

[Paul of Tarsus]

The late Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias (died 19 May 2020 (aged 74)), has been accused of sexual misconduct by several women including his groping them, masturbating in front of them, and propositioning them. Wikipedia quoting Christianity Today says of the apologist's alleged misconduct:

Zacharias masturbated in front of one of the women more than 50 times, according to her recollection. He told her he was burdened by the demands of the ministry, and he needed this "therapy." He also asked her to have sex with him twice, she said, and requested explicit photos of her...

"He would touch my leg, which was kind of by his hand, but then he would run his hand up to the middle of my thighs and then to the private area," one woman said. Another woman recalled Zacharias touching her lower back. It seemed friendly, almost comforting. Then he moved his hand down and inside of her pants. Several other times, he moved his hand up her side and touched her breast.

These allegations are especially revealing considering that Zacharias often blamed society's ills on unbelief.

How are other Christian apologists responding to these revelations? Frank Turek, who worked with Zacharias at times, admits that Zacharias is guilty of the allegations but that Christianity is not to blame.



Is it true that we cannot blame Christian faith for these sad events, or is Christian faith responsible in some ways?"

[Tcg]

I've heard tell that sex within a marriage should only be for the baby making, and not the practice.

What say you?

Well the article I linked to above on the topic states the following :

The Bible describes the pleasure that husbands find in marriage with these words: “Rejoice with the wife of your youth . . . Let her own breasts intoxicate you at all times. With her love may you be in an ecstasy constantly.” (Proverbs 5:​18, 19) God also intends for wives to enjoy sex. The Bible says: “Husbands and wives should satisfy each other’s sexual needs.”​—1 Corinthians 7:3, God’s Word Bible.


source: Does the Bible Prohibit Sexual Pleasure?
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/q ... about-sex/

Odd isn't it that Jesus' buddy Paul had such a different outlook. One also has to wonder why Jesus never married unless of course it was on the downlow and we never heard about it. Of course he may have had other sexual proclivities that were kept on the downlow.


Tcg

[JoeyKnothead]

I've heard tell that sex within a marriage should only be for the baby making, and not the practice.
What say you?

Well the article I linked to above on the topic states the following :

The Bible describes the pleasure that husbands find in marriage with these words: “Rejoice with the wife of your youth . . . Let her own breasts intoxicate you at all times. With her love may you be in an ecstasy constantly.” (Proverbs 5:​18, 19) God also intends for wives to enjoy sex. The Bible says: “Husbands and wives should satisfy each other’s sexual needs.”​—1 Corinthians 7:3, God’s Word Bible.

source: Does the Bible Prohibit Sexual Pleasure?
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/q ... about-sex/

JW

RELATED POSTS

Does the bible portray sex between married people as "bad", "dirty" or "ungodly"? (1 Cor 7:1)
viewtopic.php?p=1019576#p1019576

Does the bible present sex as "distasteful" " immoral" or "reprehensible"?
viewtopic.php?p=1031631#p1031631

I preciate the schooling. I've had 'my' notion for a long time, and might forget this new data. Hopefully if such occurs you'll be around to correct me.

I lived a lot of my life kinda learning Christianity along the way from the wrong folks, I guess. More and more this site convinces me Christians ain't all of em the monsters I thought they were.

[JoeyKnothead]

...
One also has to wonder why Jesus never married unless of course it was on the downlow and we never heard about it.

She was probably a moped.

Of course he may have had other sexual proclivities that were kept on the downlow

Not that there's anything wrong with it, but it does seem like he enjoyed the company of men.

[brunumb]

...Jesus very clearly label just looking at a woman to be adultery and encourage his followers to abstain from sex?

MATTHEW 5:27, 28
You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Jesus was a Jew who explicitly expressed his endorsement of the Mosaic law. In line with the law Jesus condemned lusting after another mans wife, he did not condemn having sex with ones own marriage partner.

It says "anyone who looks at a woman". It doesn't say "another mans wife".

[JehovahsWitness]

...Jesus very clearly label just looking at a woman to be adultery and encourage his followers to abstain from sex?

MATTHEW 5:27, 28
You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Jesus was a Jew who explicitly expressed his endorsement of the Mosaic law. In line with the law Jesus condemned lusting after another mans wife, he did not condemn having sex with ones own marriage partner.

It says "anyone who looks at a woman". It doesn't say "another mans wife".

And why did Jesus classify "looking" at said woman as ADULTERY of the heart?

[Paul of Tarsus]

And why did Jesus classify "looking" at said woman as ADULTERY of the heart?

Jesus had a negative attitude toward sex to put it mildly. When he described people whom he thought were evil he described them as "adulterous." It's possible that one of Jesus' parents was adulterous, and he was hurt badly by the knowledge. His mother, for example, might have become pregnant by having sex with another man when she was betrothed to Joseph, and she made up the virgin-birth story to cover it up. Jesus could have become embittered toward his mother and women in general as he endured the stigma of being suspected of being an illegitimate child.

[JehovahsWitness]

And why did Jesus classify "looking" at said woman as ADULTERY of the heart?

When he described people whom he thought were evil he described them as "adulterous."

Jesus did not systematically describe the wicked as being "adulterous"(see Mat 7:11; Mat 17:17) so reasonably it was not without significance when he did . Adultery is being disloyal/betraying ones partner The nation of Israel was a dedicated nation whose "husbandly" owner was YHWH (Jehovah). Their disloyalty to God was thus spiritually adulterous. If Jesus also described the the man looking lustfully at a woman as being "adulterous" it is logically because it represented an act of betrayal.

MATTHEW 5:27, 28

You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Contextually and logically then Jesus was not making a blanket statement prohibiting having a sexual passion for one's own marriage partner but condemning an act of disloyalty to her.

[Tcg]

Adultery is being disloyal/betraying ones partner The nation of Israel was a dedicated nation whose "husbandly" owner was YHWH (Jehovah).

Wait, you are suggesting that husbands own their wives? Is that standard JW doctrine?


Tcg

[JehovahsWitness]

Adultery is being disloyal/betraying ones partner The nation of Israel was a dedicated nation whose "husbandly" owner was YHWH (Jehovah).

Wait, you are suggesting that husbands own their wives? Is that standard JW doctrine?


Tcg

No, its a standard bibliical description .

JEREMIAH 3:14 - ASV

... for I am a husband unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion

What did being a man's "property" mean to the ancient Hebrews?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 01#p814401

[Tcg]

Adultery is being disloyal/betraying ones partner The nation of Israel was a dedicated nation whose "husbandly" owner was YHWH (Jehovah).

Wait, you are suggesting that husbands own their wives? Is that standard JW doctrine?


Tcg

No, its a standard bibliical description .

Is it a standard biblical description you agree with?


Tcg