Is Rape just relatively wrong? Or ABSOLUTELY WRONG?

[steven84]

Mark Spence the Dean of S.O.B.E. (School Of Biblical Evangelism) encounters two atheists that were waiting for Ray Comfort and his crew to show up for some Open-Air preaching. SEE HERE:

Mark's first heckler was Bruce who ultimately concluded that morality is decided upon by "majority rule of a society." That is the very logical equation that justified Nazi Germany during the holocaust!

Frank said morality is genetic. This logical equation makes a man like Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer justified in their actions. They were dancing to the exact tune their DNA was tuned play. By Frank's logic there wasn't really anything wrong with these men...they were just unfashionable to the times. No right, no wrong just DNA and the will to live. Frank ultimately said we need to be more opened-minded to rape...the means would justify the ends according to him.

Mark unravels this faulty logic and reveals it for what it is. Moral Relativism, a view in which there in no real right or wrong...just fashions and changes. A world in which a mother Teresa and Hitler are both validly equal in the ways they lived their lives.

The only way to justify and kind of Absolute morality (which is embedded in our thinking) is to posit a Moral Law Giver which is the very God and Designer of our God Given Conscience that works as a Moral compass...convicting us and pointing us in the direction of the Savior. The Law of God is a school master that drives us to the cross!

Out of the three men in this debate who’s points were the most valid and realistic?

Is there any better way to take on a moral relativist? For instance does anyone know a quicker way to cut to the heart of the issue resolved?

Is there really a “Right� and “Wrong� in the objective/absolute sense? Or is it really just a matter of opinions?

You decide which side you fall on:

To the the Moral Absolutist...rape is an atrocity, it is the epitome of WRONG.

To the moral relativist...rape is merely a matter of preference and opinion. Hitler had his season of being the RIGHT kind of guy.

SEE MARK'S ENCOUNTER HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_kf3EgU6lk

[Zzyzx]

.

It is absolutely wrong because the Word of God teaches us that sexual immorality is a sin. It does not matter that you belong to a church and profess to be religious. Sin is still sin.

Sin is a religious concept that applies only to believers.

Christian "sins" are no more binding upon others than what might be considered "sin" by Muslims or Buddhists or Hindus applies to Christians.

Each religion may claim that their beliefs and their "gods" are universal, but there is absolutely no evidence that is true (only tales by ancient storytellers and religious promoters).

[olavisjo]

.

...and keep in mind...a Christian rapist is loved by God and will be rewarded in Heaven,but a hard working, honest Muslim family man is so despised by God that he will be cast into Hell forever.

Well said Flail.

That is a basic belief expressed by Christendom; worshipers of the chosen "god" are "forgiven" if they ask and rewarded in an "afterlife" whereas ALL who refuse to worship are condemned in that proposed "afterlife".

AND, "god is just and fair"

Go figure

Just a note on Christian doctrine. I am sure that there are those in your area that hold the belief you express, but salvation is not based on worship or refusal to worship. It is based on receiving Jesus as saviour. Also those who continue to live in sin with the expectation that they only need to ask to be forgiven will be sadly disappointed, as Hebrews 6:4-6(NIV) says...

4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6 if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because[a]to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

[Zzyzx]

.

Just a note on Christian doctrine. I am sure that there are those in your area that hold the belief you express, but salvation is not based on worship or refusal to worship. It is based on receiving Jesus as saviour.

Okay, change “worship� to read “receiving Jesus as savior�. That does not change my position.

“Those who ‘receive Jesus as savior' are 'forgiven' (according to Christian lore and doctrine) if they ask and are rewarded in an "afterlife" whereas ALL who refuse to ‘receive Jesus as savior’ are condemned in that proposed "afterlife".

Also those who continue to live in sin with the expectation that they only need to ask to be forgiven will be sadly disappointed, as Hebrews 6:4-6(NIV) says...

Are you claiming that “sins� are NOT forgiven if confessed and forgiveness requested?

[alsarg72]

And so I'll ask again, as simply as possible:

What is the quality of a behavior that makes it absolutely wrong?

It causes harm which can be determined without considering it relative to anything. I am using definition 6 below of absolute. If I am misusing Absolute and Relative in the sense of Moral Relativism please enlighten me as to which definition applies from an authoritative source. I suspect you are using definition 7.

ab·so·lute   [ab-suh-loot, ab-suh-loot] Show IPA
–adjective
1. free from imperfection; complete; perfect: absolute liberty.
2. not mixed or adulterated; pure: absolute alcohol.
3. complete; outright: an absolute lie; an absolute denial.
4. free from restriction or limitation; not limited in any way: absolute command; absolute freedom.
5. unrestrained or unlimited by a constitution, counterbalancing group, etc., in the exercise of governmental power, esp. when arbitrary or despotic: an absolute monarch.
6. viewed independently; not comparative or relative; ultimate; intrinsic: absolute knowledge.
7. positive; certain: absolute in opinion; absolute evidence.
8. Grammar.
a. relatively independent syntactically. The construction It being Sunday in It being Sunday, the family went to church is an absolute construction.
b. (of a usually transitive verb) used without an object, as the verb give in The charity asked him to give.
c. (of an adjective) having its noun understood, not expressed, as poor in The poor are always with us.
d. characterizing the phonological form of a word or phrase occurring by itself, not influenced by surrounding forms, as not in is not (as opposed to isn't), or will in they will (as opposed to they'll). Compare sandhi.
9. Physics.
a. independent of arbitrary standards or of particular properties of substances or systems: absolute humidity.
b. pertaining to a system of units, as the centimeter-gram-second system, based on some primary units, esp. units of length, mass, and time.
c. pertaining to a measurement based on an absolute zero or unit: absolute temperature.
10. Education. noting or pertaining to the scale of a grading system based on an individual's performance considered as representing his or her knowledge of a given subject regardless of the performance of others in a group: The math department marks on an absolute scale. Compare curve (def. 10).
11. Climatology. noting or pertaining to the highest or lowest value of a meteorological quantity recorded during a given, usually long, period of time: absolute maximum temperature.
12. Mathematics. (of an inequality) indicating that the expression is true for all values of the variable, as x2 + 1 > 0 for all real numbers x; unconditional.Compare conditional (def. 6).
13. Computers. machine-specific and requiring no translation (opposed to symbolic): absolute coding; absolute address.
–noun
14. something that is not dependent upon external conditions for existence or for its specific nature, size, etc. (opposed to relative).
15. the absolute,
a. something that is free from any restriction or condition.
b. something that is independent of some or all relations.
c. something that is perfect or complete.
d. (in Hegelianism) the world process operating in accordance with the absolute idea.

[Crazy Ivan]

And so I'll ask again, as simply as possible:

What is the quality of a behavior that makes it absolutely wrong?

It causes harm which can be determined without considering it relative to anything. I am using definition 6 below of absolute.(...)

How is the interaction between two beings ever irrelative to each other?

[The Nice Centurion]

Sure, I do. But not because of some sense of "absolute wrong", but "relative wrong". Relative to how I feel about it. I am "correct" as to how I feel, rapists are "correct" as to how they feel. We are "incorrect" in opposition to each other. It's all relative.

How you and the rapist feel about the crime of a woman being raped has nothing to do with the morality of the situation.

The rapist is "incorrect". What an understatement! How you "feel" as a third part is irrelevant.

If your mother was raped would you consider other peoples' opinions as to how they "feel" about it? Would you consider the rapists "feelings" about how at the time it was "correct" for him?

Your thinking is disturbing.

Yes, I am pretty sure, he would consider all that IN A CASE WHERE HE HIMSELF HAD BEEN THE RAPER OF HIS MOTHER!

See how everything must bow to subjective morality?