(Cont'd) I have no issue with it. Material care for the woman is the only reason he isn't getting the sword, which makes sense in ancient culture.
Today, rapists (thanks to some spineless politically-correct judges) get slap-on-the-wrists sentences, while their victims are devastated FOR LIFE. Now, they could have their wages garnished (i.e. child support), to help pay for medical bills, lost wages, etc. Back then, such was done via marriage.
The answer to why rape victims had to marry the rapist is buried in historical context. In those days rape victims were shunned by their families and such due to them being disgraced. Hence, the rapist had to marry her to support her. Obviously it's far from the ideal marriage in many ways but at least the victim wouldn't die from starvation.
In ancient Hebrew marriages, there was the betrothment (the effective marriage) and the wedding. During that time, the couple did not live together for at least a year. With Jacob & Rachel, it was 7 years, during which he DID NOT have sex with her. You can be legally married without living together or having sex. That happens today when couples get separated. A rapist could be legally married to his victim (i.e. having to provide material care FOR LIFE) without ever seeing her again.
1) If you rape a woman in city then that woman would be stoned to death and man also. Man not because he raped her but just bc of honor. And woman just because she was a victim.
2) If you rape a woman on field then you get killed.
3)If you rape un escorted virgin woman you get to marry her when you pay to her fater.
That is just sick. I'm amazed how anyone would belive in god, jesus, bible. Even the title "Holy Bible" is so contradictory to what's written in there.
@Liacgi No, you don't get it right. If you rape a woman and she is already betrothed/married, YOU GET EXECUTED. Deu. 22:25-26, "But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter."
@MCWAY1 - No, you're not getting it right, MCWAY1, because you only selectively cited Deuteronomy. You cited chapter 22, verses 25 and 26, and curiously stopped there. Why not go one more verse to 27 that said the reason she was spared was because she cried out and no one could hear her (because she was out in a field and away from the city).
Interesting, you didn't start with the earlier verses of 23-24 that said if she WAS in a city and didn't cry out, she gets killed with her raper.
@43alley Verse 27 reinforces verses 25 and 26. In short, SHE WAS RAPED. Therefore only the assailant gets executed. The issue isn't location; it's about force. Notice that NOTHING in verses 23 and 24 says a thing about "the man force her and lie with her" as is th case in 25 and 26.
She is betrothed, effectively married. If she's a willing participant, she is committing ADULTERY and both she and he are executed.
@43alley You're projecting. The lack of understanding is on YOUR end, not mine. I know the verse says "because she cried not". "Why would somone need to cry out for help during consensual sex?"...EXACTLY!!!! And when there's consensual sex with one party being married/betrothed, that's called....ADULTERY. That was punishable by DEATH for both parties.
Again, you ignore that NOWHERE in verses 23 and 24 is there any indication of force; unlike the cases in 25 onward.
@43alley I addressed verses 28 and 29. Again, it appears that some atheists don't understand simple words. Why is the rapist spared if the victim is unmarried but EXECUTED if she is married?
Answer: The rapist MUST PROVIDE for that woman for life. And, if you read what I posted earlier, you'd note that marriage DOES NOT NECESSITATE living together and having sex. Plus, this all ASSUMES the father agreed to the deal, which he can refuse. The rapist is on the hook, regardless.
@MCWAY1 - Watching you defend these passages is amusing if not a little disturbing.
You sit here and falsely say rapists today get off with slaps on the wrist "thanks to some spineless politically-correct judges," but then you don't realize that you're defending passages that say that all the rapist in the Hebrew Bible has to do is pay the father some money and he gets a new wife.
I don't know what's more appalling, your ignorance of modern criminal justice or your Iron Age apologetics.
@43alley I don't falsely state that rapists get off with slap-on-the-wrist-sentences. The unfortunate case is that, in some cases, they do.
Once again, the simplest of concepts zip right over your head, namely that you can have a wife (especially under ancient Hebrew conditions) and NEVER lay a hand on her, never see her, much less have sex with her. Then again, you falsely claimed that a rape victim gets executed along with her attacker, even though the text says nothing of the sort.
I have to give the Devil his due, though: Christians say on the label that their religion has a New Covenant. Thus they don't have to obey all the laws of the old testiment. That's why they are called Christians, rather than Jews. The new testiment shows a marked improvement in morality vis a vis marriage by at least giving the husband some (albiet vague) responsibilties. That the laws that resulted were misogynistic is likely due more to human lust-for-power than Jesus.
@CaptPhoenix True. Although there is a minority of christians who still say the old laws still apply. I guess this is mostly a response to the use of Leviticus by christians to site why homosexuals can't marry.
The girl who was raped in the field wasn't punished?
Under Sharia law she would be put to death.
Even if she wasn't raped, but simply put herself into a position where she COULD BE raped (like sharing a taxi with a stranger) she will be put to death under Sharia.
Interesting to note that the laws of barbarian shepards 3000 years ago are still more morally advanced than the laws a good fraction of the Earth's population lives under today.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the maker of this video, has opened the bible only once in his life. i guess. he eaven doesnt want to see that what the real religious people see. anybody who have a question about this video, mail it to me
@fabioz91 - The poster of the above comment has only seen a video from this series once in his life, I guess. He doesn't even know that I have opened a bible AT LEAST 13 times because there are 13 videos in this series.
@43alley that was not my point. my point is that he hasnt read the bible thinking that "how does this link go to this and how religious people see it and does it make any sense after all?". sorry my bad english. ive noticed that most of the christians dont know a shit of our religion, either doesnt atheists.
@fabioz91 how exactly do you spin, stoning someone to death? This is great morality? You do realize that many atheists were once followers of the ignorance called christianity.
@43alley Why does it seem like the atheists always seem to know the bible far and away better than the Xians? I've always had a vague thought that perhaps the mere act of reading this book carefully destroys religious faith.
@randomizer1666 A better question would be: If atheists know so much about the Bible, why do they REPEATEDLY ask the same silly questions which can easily be answered, if they bothered looking just a few verses downward?
@fabioz91 I've read the Bible many times. This IS in the Bible. I guess people who don't reach the same conclusions as you do, even if they believe the Bible and believe in God, aren't real religious people either?
This is exactly the kind of stuff why I can't understand how any woman with the least bit of self respect can call her self a Christian. The Bible is full of stories where women get treated like second class human beings and or just as objects who man should have control over it's just horrible.
You had me at the princess bride reference. Why does it feel it necessary to say stone them with stones? It's not like your going to try to stone them with delicious pies, that would take forever, and who's got time to make all those pies anyway? Anyways, always hilarious, keep the vids coming.
I'm sure you've noticed there are lots of laws of the old and new testament that we no longer hold to. There's a reason for that. They were laws of the land at that time. It really isn't difficult to figure out which laws were of the land and which are of divine state. In almost every case, if the law states it is man's place to harm another for a transgression, it will be a law of the land. Though I can't think of any that are divine that say to do that.
Good job leaving off the important second half of that lecture. Here it is.
Ephesians 5:25-28 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
@skyesfury Okay, I'll give you that one. Even when I was a Christian, they did teach this at our congregation. It is even commanded that a husband be willing to die for her. We used to see a lot of new male members looking for a "good Christian girl" to marry, thinking they would have their way because of the verses mentioned in this video. They could not disappear quickly enough when they saw what was required of them. :)
Todays lesson? If your a woman and get raped in th city - you better cry LOUDLY... otherwise your probably just enjoying it a bit too much for the lords liking.
This was in early stages of intelligent human society. Remember that ALL THE OTHER NATIONS really HAD NO LAWS, esp laws that didn't serve their royalty. THIS happened all the time back then bt the Hebrews HAD laws for appropriating carnal desires. NOW it seems archaic but it was archaic times. Man was still brutish mostly. The money paid is penance to the honorable party who raised their dtr right. Wmn in STREETS means she was unjustly hanging out. The FIELD means she was working. Its a CODE too
That is total nonsense. ALL the other nations? How very ignorant of other nations. Study China's history around that time. They clearly have laws. Laws not given by GOD. That's just one example.
So gad says we need to kill rape victims that are not working when they get raped, just don't interfere with her job.. OK got it dude! I'll make sure I only rape lazy chicks. GO JESUS!
As someone who takes the bible fairly seriously, I'd like to submit that many of the verses cited here were taken out of context. I feel that they were misread and the meanings misrepresented. This point, in particular the verses citing a woman's supposed lower status, are very fiery debate topics among Christians. I personally see these verses as indicating something quite different.
@puddleswithoutbounds the old "out of context" spiel, huh? Okay then...please provide the correct context.
Also, what's the proper context of this explicit command from God:
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:17-18)
@puddleswithoutbounds Please put a woman being raped but being stoned to death because she didnt' yell (deuteronomy 22:23-24) into context for me. While you're at it, put a woman being raped, bought, and forced to marry her rapist into context for me too (deuteronomy 22:28-29). At what point do you just say this shit is wrong and stop making excuses for it?
1 pet 3:1Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2when they see the purity and reverence of your lives
@logic39da Well, I don't see how it shed light on the verse in the vid to somehow make it sound better. It's pretty much saying that to perpetuate the idea that "the word" creates a better life, just act like it does no matter what. The woman has the biggest role of acting happy even when she's not. Having no say in a relationship (which must be the case if theyre submitting to their husbands) may make some men happy but the wife pretty much just has to deal with it.
1 pet 3:7 7Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.
eph 5:28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church...this is why woman submit to there husbands, the husbands are supposed to love there wives..
Eph 5:22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing
I noticed in the NT scriptures posted for women submitted to their Husbands, you only post where it states they submit to there husbands but you don't state the ones that state why....
Christians will give the excuse that these were instructions for an ancient group of people who could only comprehend things in a certain way and that these wacky ideas don't apply to modern marriage. To bad they can't apply that same logic to the rest of the bible.
Seriously, fuck this marriage shit. Love is all you need why do you need a paper that says you own this person? I love and respect my guy to much to want to marry him, odd I know but it's not my place to take away his individuality.
I'm curious if you've read Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion?" Good topic I must add that because of christian doctrine, I as a fully transitioned trans-women am allowed under some religiously tinged state law am able to marry a man as I am straight, or under others be forced to marry another women?
This whole time we've been prosecuting and imprisoning these men. All they had to do was buy the woman afterwards and marry her. Dammit, thousands of rape cases have gone awry for years now.
that's why so many men get raped in prison, felons read the "holy" bible and apply what they read on new inmates, the taking of a maid/fish/fresh meat/man booty is normal according to the good book,
@kevin080592 I think honestly that faith has deluded there minds, I had a debate with a creationist a while back were he said I should experience god and I'd know he was real.
They blow it out of propotion I feel good after I take a shit but do I think it's jesus? NO. Chemical processes in our body fluctuate constantly and saying that when you have a dream or you feel strange that it's caused by god is bullshit, does god have ID? I don't think so, so is it god? Or did you just take a dump.
well that's quite nice...deathbed visions quite awed me in the past however as my mind progress to science, i have been quite relieve that you don't need religion to live isn'it?, so now deathbed visions for me,..like you said it, "biological fluctuations", im just paranoid that i've been seeing accounts like "i almost died and i saw burning hell, now i lived becus of jesus" the likes,...
I'm showing this to my mother-in-law to be. I told her I did not want "christain" prayer involved in our ceremony. Apparently she hasn't read her bible lately! Though i did enjoy the book of Timothy lines...haha, thanks for putting this video together 43Alley .
@timfmr - Well, at least you tried. That says a lot about you. Many of us just keep this stuff to ourselves and let other people do their thing, even to the point to where it intrudes on our lives.
@43alley Question for you. Our JP is making it weird and wants to hold a Bible while doing our ceremony. Besides the origin of species any recommendation for books I could ask him to hold. I don't want to piss the guy off because he is a friend of my fiancee's family, but this is BS!
@timfmr - Is this IN ADDITION to the Bible or IN PLACE OF IT?
Either way, maybe some sort of philosophy book or a collection of Shakespeare sonnets or poems. A nice leather-bound book to make it look respectable would be a nice touch.
One alternative (and perhaps a middle ground if you just go for one book) would be The Jefferson Bible. Thomas Jefferson once took a pair of scissors to the New Testament, taking out all the supernatural stuff. You can get this version on Amazon.
Alley, if an atheist takes up a moral charge against God Himself and yet condones abortion, then yes, I call them on their hypocrisy as often and as bluntly as I can. Your stance on abortion blows a hole through the premise of this video. Glad you have enough time to stalk me on Google, though...interesting.
@Sweet92Sue - I typed in your username to Google. Google owns YouTube, so they have it all to search. It took 5 seconds to do.
You've "raped" my comment section to this video with over 30 posts. That must have taken much longer.
Are you this annoying in the comments of other videos?
Never mind, don't answer.
Go troll off-topic somewhere else. I'm sure there's a guitar lesson video or that "Charlie Bit Me" video where you can go barf off-topic about abortion 30 times in one day.
@43alley You're awful thin-skinned, alley. You made a video defaming the Christian God and His Book; I am a Christian. Are you so fragile that if you're not constantly stroked by fellow atheists you must personally stalk and attack those who disagree with you and question your beliefs and assertions?
@43alley Also, it's so incredibly hypocritical for you to call my dissention "annoying". Your ENTIRE video collection is dissention! Of course, that's typical leftist secularist denial...it's "brilliant" for YOU to dissent, but simply annoying for me to do so. Free thought for me, not for thee. Dissention for me, not for thee.
@Sweet92Sue - It's not your dissention (which is quite welcome) that is annoying. It's that you posted 30-plus times, most of the time in these 6-7 consecutive post rants. How any times do I have to say it, Sue?
YOU POSTED MORE THAN 30 TIMES IN ONE DAY. YOU ARE ANNOYING. YOU POSTED MORE THAN 30 TIMES IN ONE DAY. YOU ARE ANNOYING.
Sue ... you're annoying. You posted more than 30 times in one day.
@43alley best not to feed trolls and lowly imbeciles who still believe in this hate called christianity. any woman who believes in this shit is a disgrace to my gender.
Oh, loud and clear. You are focused on character assassination rather than my argument. How can you be disgusted by a God who orders dirty laundry aired,yet condone the dismemberment of unborn human life? I know it's a dichotomy for you to live with. I know it causes cognitive, pyschological and moral dissonance. I know you'd rather mock me than deal with hypocrisy in your worldview.
@Sweet92Sue if a christian takes up a moral charge against abortion and yet condones all the rape, genocide, animal and human sacrifice, incest, misogyny, torture and slavery in some book written 2,000 years ago by Bronze-age peasants, then yes, I call them on their hypocrisy. Your stance on human and animal rights blows a hole through the premise of your entire thought process. Go troll somewhere else.
@AtheistBrit It's amazing how simplistic atheists are. Just because it's recorded in the Bible does NOT mean that God condones it. On the few occasions He did order a nation judged, can you not see that it was just punishment for depravity and incomprehensible evil? Oh but right, that's horrible.
@Sweet92Sue But a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby? The innocent unborn life inside of her? Well, just off it. No harm, no foul. Just like alley, methinks you're a little touchy. That tends to happen when the conscience is pricked. Abortion is your downfall, leftist atheists. You cannot defend it. And it demolishes your pathetic moral posturizing.
@Sweet92Sue "Just because it's recorded in the Bible does NOT mean that God condones it." - You obviously haven't ever read the passages I quoted. Many of those atrocities were done DIRECTLY by god, like killing the innocent firstborn Egyptians for something that Pharaoh had done which god had made him do! You call ME simplistic, yet you're so simple you can't even see what awful things were done directly by your so-called loving god.
Of course this would all be fine if you realised it was just a story like the rest of us do. Problem is, you decide to hold up this book of blood sacrifice and say it's the only source of morality in the world. REALLY?
You call atheists simplistic yet you can only see abortion in black and white instead of the myriad of shades of grey it actually is. Try telling a mentally disabled teenage rape victim that she can't abort her child even though carrying it to term would kill her.
@AtheistBrit So let me get this straight. When WE kill innocent babies it's just "shades of grey"--sometimes wrong, sometimes right. But when GOD does it--He who has all knowledge, all understanding, and all widsom--that is wrong? You contradict yourself with every post.
@Sweet92Sue No. Again you're being so simplistic it's almost laughable. God kills innocent children for the most petty reasons imaginable as I have TWICE pointed out (killing the Egyptian first-borns because of something god actually caused pharaoh to do). When a woman requires an abortion it's usually the lesser of many evils and may often actually be necessary to save her life.
And yes, of course the "creator of life" (although he doesn't exist, but whatever) would by necessity decide when and how it will end. But the fact is, according to your book, he frequently chooses ways that result in deliberate suffering. Then folks like you turn around and say that your god is all-loving and that the bible is the source of moral authority.
@AtheistBrit Talk about laughable. Why don't you do your statistical homework, Brit? the majority of abortions occur because partners were too negligent or lazy to use birth control. Please use FACT and not EMOTIONAL HYPERBOLE to make your arguments, okay? Defend to me why it's okay to have fun for a night, be irresponsible, then destroy the human being that results. Please, defend that.
@Sweet92Sue I'm IN the field of medical sciences, and this is just an utter crock. About half of all fertilized eggs die and are aborted spontaneously. 8 out of 10 times this occurs before the woman knows of her pregnancy. As for non-spontaneous abortions (i.e. the woman realizes she is pregnant) the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%; half due to age and genetics, 1/3 diabetes. Compare this to the 1.8% abortion-by-choice rate, and there you will find your "statistical homework" done for you.
@rationalmuscle Let me use YOUR reasoning in another context. All humans die. Therefore, it should be acceptable to kill them before they have the chance to expire of natural causes, particularly if they are inconvenient or unwanted. Wow. That was probably the saddest application of logic and the most coldhearted things I'ver read in a while. I will pray for you.
@Sweet92Sue I merely corrected re: abortion being the result of "not using the pill" and pointing out that GOD obviously built abortion into the "design of life."
What's you've done here, other than commit two logical fallacies (kudos!) is assume I am "pro" abortion-by-choice. This is not my point, nor my stance. Deal with the argument presented: Admit you were wrong about abortion stats, and address the issue of "god's" role in abortion.
@rationalmuscle If you think I don't understand the difference between spontaneous abortion and abortion through medical procedure, you're wrong. I have no interest in being caught in the snare of your semantic games. No, really. You cannot defend the indefensible, so you resort to obfuscation. Kudos!
@Sweet92Sue Of course you have no interest, and what you call "obfuscation" is merely ignorance on your part of the subjects at hand. You also apparently have no interest in intellectual honesty, facts, or being bitch-slapped mentally speaking by someone who actually knows what they're talking about (the latter is understandable... heh... )
And you cannot defend my biblical retorts either, now can you?
So please... defend Deut. 22 with your concept of God's nature. Should be fun.
@rationalmuscle I could easily do so, as every line reveals one of God's inherent characteristics of just, holy or loving. However, it would take pages of commentary, and I've been told to be concise (atheists are very intolerant, after all). So I will leave you with that: God is just. He is holy. And He is loving. Now chew on that.
The "commentary" you would provide, if provided at all, would be cut and paste from the likes of apologetic sites or perhaps Swinburne if you're into the butchered idea of open theology. At least it is a defense.
And you could PM me personally, writing a novel if you like.
But again, you cannot. And this is but ONE passage.
Why do you lie to this extent just to protect your holy book? Do you not see the absolute contradiction in this behavior?
@rationalmuscle We were talking about medically induced abortion, NOT spontaneous abortion. Being an bully, (perhaps particularly of women), you thought me too ignorant to know the difference. You thought I'd curl up in a ball, sobbing, when you "enlightened" me to the fact that, in your opinion, "God kills 80% of babies anyway!" Stinks when I don't play your games, doesn't it?
@Sweet92Sue 1. I addressed my personal thoughts on voluntary abortion to silence; 2. The original post was to CORRECT your lie re: the cause of most abortions AND to point out God's penchant for the act; 3. I don't play games. I point out absurd commentary from fundamentalists. On rare occasion they actually understand.
This is not one of those occasions.
P.S. No. 1 cause of death until the late 1800s? CHILDBIRTH (baby and/or mother.)
@Sweet92Sue In addition to all the other replies re: spontaneous and non-spontaneous abortion, just think for a minute about what you said. If you make abortion illegal, then the girls who were raped, no matter how small a proportion, would be forced to carry the child to term. That is NOT acceptable! If you made abortion legal only for rape victims, the victim would have to go about proving they were raped (and the conviction rate is laughable). Again, you're too simplistic and narrow-minded.
@AtheistBrit The weak-minded call names when they are caught in their own fallacies. Calling me simplistic and narrow-minded does not advance your argument one iota. Please tell me what is worse: a rape victim carrying her child for nine months, or the slaughter of innocent human life--resulting in a life that can never be reclaimed. Put another way, if your mother because impregnanted through rape, do you wish she'd have aborted YOU to spare her the emotional pain?
@Sweet92Sue Excuse me, I meant "became impregnated". Also--why must you continue to belabor the most extreme, smallest statistical sample of all abortions? Why don't you answer my question about negligent, lazy adults who can't be bothered with birth control and murder a developing human for convenience? Please defend abortion in that case--the most common reason women murder their own children in modern society.
@Sweet92Sue I do not applaud the decision made by most women, but you utterly fail to address the fact that your GOD aborts more children than women ever could through his (er-HUM) wonder of design. The body's response to 'any' foreign entity is to expel it, including children. Only under ideal circumstances is childbirth possible.
Some design, eh? Me... oh, I'd put a 2-child cap on it and then let the ovaries cease functioning. There. Birth AND population control.
@Sweet92Sue "The weak-minded call names when they are caught in their own fallacies." - it was you who first called me simplistic, I merely called out your hypocrisy.
"if your mother because impregnanted through rape, do you wish she'd have aborted YOU to spare her the emotional pain?" I'm glad you asked me that. Yes, I wish she had done. I would never have known any different and she would have been spared a whole lot of agony.
@AtheistBrit Oh my goodness. Really? God does not condone those actions FOR US except in extreme circumstances. He is the Creator of life. Can not the Creator of life, the very Author of it, decide when it will end, and in what manner?
@Sweet92Sue Please explain this passage: "If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her." Deut. 22
Note that this is Yahweh speaking, NOT the author, therefore the tired "God did not condone it" reasoning cannot be used.
Do you consider this the decree of a "moral", just god?
@Sweet92Sue I fail to see what relevence a stance on abortion has with regards to the topics explored in this video. Regardless of what I think of abortion, killing someone just because they weren't a virgin when they got married or because they were raped is wrong. Forcing a woman to marry her rapist is wrong. And any being that condones such behavior is wrong.
@FireDragons42 Alley has a case against God. So he uses God's guidelines of 4000 YEARS AGO--guidelines that were for that culture, in that time--to make a cartoon case against God. Meanwhile, alley is perfectly comfortable with the abortion business in the USA, where innocent babies go to die because they're "inconvenient". The hypocrisy just drips off my computer screen....I expose it, and atheistic "morality", at every turn....
Really? So the New Testament was written 2000 years before the supposed birth of Jesus? And isn't it even more absurd to be defending a religion that holds as its foundation such writings that are, as you say, "guidelines that were for" such a barbaric society?
@Sweet92Sue Making a woman marry her rapist is evil. I disagree that this was for the provision of any children arising in the rape. The woman in the city could have conceived also and yet she would be stoned. The married women who committed adultery could have conceived also and yet she was also stoned.
Context: The woman was married off because she was seen as damaged property. No one wanted to marry a women who was not a virgin and her father compensated.
@Sweet92Sue How come God does not mind others stoning a woman who has committed adultery or been rape when it is probable she may be carrying a child?
Why is it one when God sent the Israelites to war they kill women pregnant or not simply because they were no maids(virgins)? They get to take the maids for themselves. He seems to regard the un-pregnant as greater than those with child? Why does he not care that children will be aborted too?
Obviously I am more against abortion than your God.
@Sweet92Sue Really sue I don't mind. Three comments can't be too hard for you after you have left so many messages here and I'd like others to be able to see the answers to my questions also. No doubt many people have them.
@Sweet92Sue - Sounds like you don't answer the hard questions on here. The question was to you, not me.
And don't blame me for you not publicly answering. I lampooned you for your 30 posts in one day. You have to admit, Sue, a stretch like that is a little extreme and off-putting.
@Sweet92Sue Alley does not seem to be complaining. I also, as he correctly recognises did not question him. I would like you to give a public answer.
You have the right to PM me and give me an answer but if you do so I wish to post it. Don't you want others to have the answer to such common questions?
@imaginelolalola I did give comprehensive, thoughtful answers--but when I reread your threat to post PMs, along with alley's continued complaining about my multiple comments, I reconsidered. I shall not throw my pearls before swine. Good bye.
@Sweet92Sue It was not a threat but a promise. I love to share knowledge. What do you have to tell me that I could not tell others?
I rather doubt you had any pearls. You don't want to give knowledge to those who want it. And you have used that phrase from the bible incorrectly. It is pointless to throw pearls before swine because they don't want nor appreciate them. Who that has answers to these common questions would keep them to themselves?
stupidest comment of the year? so lets see sweet sue ... I THOUGHT that god's laws were his own, and not subject to the culture of mere mortals??? :P .... does this mean that god bends over to the whims of people? arent his laws supposed to shape the society as opposed to the other way around ... hahahah stupidest christian comment ive ever read lol!
So if you marry and your wife isn't a virgin, you and the men in your town can kill her. And if you find a girl in the country and rape her you can keep her. The Bible is a creepy book.
People like Sue need to do their fucking research.
But as you said a bit ago, this video has nothing to do with abortion.
It's clearly very misogynistic and loaded with double-standards... I feel really bad for the women of that time who were virgins but didn't bleed on their wedding nights, weren't believed, and were killed in vain.
@oliverj83 - I feel bad for the women of THIS time that read these passages and aren't turned off and still try to defend it. I won't give any names, but if you look around, you'll see over 30 posts by her.
Sue you have no idea what you are talking about. THis video is about what the bible states about marrage, the rules surounding rape and nothing about abortion.
If you truly believe that your god has better morrals than alley, then you have NEVER read your bible. Your god condones rape, mas murder, genocide, slavery. . . on and on. Sorry but it was the bible itself that made me stop believing in a god.
@Sweet92Sue Alley can't live with that thorny problem, but he can surely live with an innocent life being destroyed if the mother in question is a young, mentally disabled person. In that case, yes, go ahead and destroy the innocent life in question, so sad, but whatareya gonna do. Right?
@Sweet92Sue Isn't that the VERY SAME THING you're doing when you condone abortion for that baby? Aren't YOU playing God, deciding which life is worth keeping and which is okay to destroy utterly and completely? Yet when God plays God...well, that's horrible and wrong.
@Sweet92Sue YOU did not create that aborted baby. YOU cannot assure that the mother's or the baby's life is kept whole and healthy and complete. YOU cannot bring blessing from the worst of life's circumstances--which, by the way, is God's specialty. Yet you're perfectly comfortable mocking the only One who offers the REAL solutions to life's problems.
@Sweet92Sue - My head hurts from reading your non sequitur (yet obsessive) ramblings.
You're using a christian fundamentalist debate tactic where you ask an off-topic question & then take the answer & spin it in your "fill-in-the-blank" straw man sermon.
Can you really not be concise enough for one posting? Do you really have to sound like a crazy homeless person with a handwritten cardboard sign?
No one will be able to follow your bleatings. I'm sorry that this is how you spend your time.
@43alley You cannot help but contradict yourself. You YOURSELF said that "solutions don't fit on bumper stickers". So when I offered a comprehensive response, you lampoon that too. Then you ad hominem, the fallback of every atheist caught in a web of their own imcomprehensible moral "standards", such as they are.
@43alley I'll make it simple for you. You accuse God of being evil for dealing with the fallout for human sin. Making a woman marry her rapist is evil, in your opinion. Yet YOUR solution for dealing with human sin is to kill an innocent baby. So. How is that better than what God does?
@Sweet92Sue - Still don't have the "concise posting" thing down, do you?
Yes, my solution to deal with human sin is to kill an innocent baby ... (?)
You realize that the required marriage here has nothing to do with the woman getting pregnant, right? It has to do with ownership of the woman. If it was about impregnation, then the woman wouldn't be stoned to death for "not crying out loud enough in the city."
God was never much known for advocating children's rights.
@43alley 1. The required marriage has to do with a possible pregnancy AND with the woman's provision in that culture. I know that you believe "ownership" of a woman is much worse than the DESTRUCTION of 25 million future women since Roe Vs. Wade passed....
@Sweet92Sue 2. You have a right to make videos mocking my faith; I have a right to respond. I know many atheists consider YT their "church". So you anticipate the back-patting over your "brilliant" videos. I do not find them brilliant; I find them intellectually lazy. You haven't fully thourght through these moral issues.
the ole virgin price lol prostitution at it's best i especially like the part about selling your daughters into slavery.
Hatebot123 3 months ago
yes! quote from princes bride! :D
03jkeeley 11 months ago
(Cont'd) I have no issue with it. Material care for the woman is the only reason he isn't getting the sword, which makes sense in ancient culture.
Today, rapists (thanks to some spineless politically-correct judges) get slap-on-the-wrists sentences, while their victims are devastated FOR LIFE. Now, they could have their wages garnished (i.e. child support), to help pay for medical bills, lost wages, etc. Back then, such was done via marriage.
MCWAY1 1 year ago
The answer to why rape victims had to marry the rapist is buried in historical context. In those days rape victims were shunned by their families and such due to them being disgraced. Hence, the rapist had to marry her to support her. Obviously it's far from the ideal marriage in many ways but at least the victim wouldn't die from starvation.
Moussyed 1 year ago
In ancient Hebrew marriages, there was the betrothment (the effective marriage) and the wedding. During that time, the couple did not live together for at least a year. With Jacob & Rachel, it was 7 years, during which he DID NOT have sex with her. You can be legally married without living together or having sex. That happens today when couples get separated. A rapist could be legally married to his victim (i.e. having to provide material care FOR LIFE) without ever seeing her again.
MCWAY1 1 year ago
lol
YEAH!!! It's the crocoduck at 0:55
ORANGES99 1 year ago
Do i get it right?
1) If you rape a woman in city then that woman would be stoned to death and man also. Man not because he raped her but just bc of honor. And woman just because she was a victim.
2) If you rape a woman on field then you get killed.
3)If you rape un escorted virgin woman you get to marry her when you pay to her fater.
That is just sick. I'm amazed how anyone would belive in god, jesus, bible. Even the title "Holy Bible" is so contradictory to what's written in there.
Liacgi 1 year ago
@Liacgi No, you don't get it right. If you rape a woman and she is already betrothed/married, YOU GET EXECUTED. Deu. 22:25-26, "But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter."
MCWAY1 1 year ago
@MCWAY1 - No, you're not getting it right, MCWAY1, because you only selectively cited Deuteronomy. You cited chapter 22, verses 25 and 26, and curiously stopped there. Why not go one more verse to 27 that said the reason she was spared was because she cried out and no one could hear her (because she was out in a field and away from the city).
Interesting, you didn't start with the earlier verses of 23-24 that said if she WAS in a city and didn't cry out, she gets killed with her raper.
43alley 1 year ago
@43alley Verse 27 reinforces verses 25 and 26. In short, SHE WAS RAPED. Therefore only the assailant gets executed. The issue isn't location; it's about force. Notice that NOTHING in verses 23 and 24 says a thing about "the man force her and lie with her" as is th case in 25 and 26.
She is betrothed, effectively married. If she's a willing participant, she is committing ADULTERY and both she and he are executed.
MCWAY1 1 year ago
@MCWAY1 - It seems that you are having trouble understanding these passages. I hope it's not intentional.
Verse 24 specifically says she dies "because she cried not."
You ignore that this passage refers to her crying out for help. Why would someone need to cry out for help during consensual sex?
And what about the girl having to marry her rapist in 28-29? Do you have any problems with that? And why does that rule not apply anymore?
Just admit that these rules are outdated and Man moved on.
43alley 1 year ago
@43alley You're projecting. The lack of understanding is on YOUR end, not mine. I know the verse says "because she cried not". "Why would somone need to cry out for help during consensual sex?"...EXACTLY!!!! And when there's consensual sex with one party being married/betrothed, that's called....ADULTERY. That was punishable by DEATH for both parties.
Again, you ignore that NOWHERE in verses 23 and 24 is there any indication of force; unlike the cases in 25 onward.
MCWAY1 1 year ago
@43alley I addressed verses 28 and 29. Again, it appears that some atheists don't understand simple words. Why is the rapist spared if the victim is unmarried but EXECUTED if she is married?
Answer: The rapist MUST PROVIDE for that woman for life. And, if you read what I posted earlier, you'd note that marriage DOES NOT NECESSITATE living together and having sex. Plus, this all ASSUMES the father agreed to the deal, which he can refuse. The rapist is on the hook, regardless.
MCWAY1 1 year ago
@MCWAY1 - Watching you defend these passages is amusing if not a little disturbing.
You sit here and falsely say rapists today get off with slaps on the wrist "thanks to some spineless politically-correct judges," but then you don't realize that you're defending passages that say that all the rapist in the Hebrew Bible has to do is pay the father some money and he gets a new wife.
I don't know what's more appalling, your ignorance of modern criminal justice or your Iron Age apologetics.
43alley 1 year ago 3
@43alley I don't falsely state that rapists get off with slap-on-the-wrist-sentences. The unfortunate case is that, in some cases, they do.
Once again, the simplest of concepts zip right over your head, namely that you can have a wife (especially under ancient Hebrew conditions) and NEVER lay a hand on her, never see her, much less have sex with her. Then again, you falsely claimed that a rape victim gets executed along with her attacker, even though the text says nothing of the sort.
MCWAY1 1 year ago
Loved the addition of the infamous Crockaduck at 5:36 - lol!
Tobinius 1 year ago
Comment removed
Tobinius 1 year ago
I have to give the Devil his due, though: Christians say on the label that their religion has a New Covenant. Thus they don't have to obey all the laws of the old testiment. That's why they are called Christians, rather than Jews. The new testiment shows a marked improvement in morality vis a vis marriage by at least giving the husband some (albiet vague) responsibilties. That the laws that resulted were misogynistic is likely due more to human lust-for-power than Jesus.
CaptPhoenix 1 year ago
@CaptPhoenix True. Although there is a minority of christians who still say the old laws still apply. I guess this is mostly a response to the use of Leviticus by christians to site why homosexuals can't marry.
DeePhlat 1 year ago
The girl who was raped in the field wasn't punished?
Under Sharia law she would be put to death.
Even if she wasn't raped, but simply put herself into a position where she COULD BE raped (like sharing a taxi with a stranger) she will be put to death under Sharia.
Interesting to note that the laws of barbarian shepards 3000 years ago are still more morally advanced than the laws a good fraction of the Earth's population lives under today.
CaptPhoenix 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the maker of this video, has opened the bible only once in his life. i guess. he eaven doesnt want to see that what the real religious people see. anybody who have a question about this video, mail it to me
fabioz91 1 year ago
@fabioz91 - The poster of the above comment has only seen a video from this series once in his life, I guess. He doesn't even know that I have opened a bible AT LEAST 13 times because there are 13 videos in this series.
43alley 1 year ago 26
@43alley that was not my point. my point is that he hasnt read the bible thinking that "how does this link go to this and how religious people see it and does it make any sense after all?". sorry my bad english. ive noticed that most of the christians dont know a shit of our religion, either doesnt atheists.
fabioz91 1 year ago
@fabioz91 how exactly do you spin, stoning someone to death? This is great morality? You do realize that many atheists were once followers of the ignorance called christianity.
Relativisticism 1 year ago
@43alley Why does it seem like the atheists always seem to know the bible far and away better than the Xians? I've always had a vague thought that perhaps the mere act of reading this book carefully destroys religious faith.
randomizer1666 1 year ago
@randomizer1666 A better question would be: If atheists know so much about the Bible, why do they REPEATEDLY ask the same silly questions which can easily be answered, if they bothered looking just a few verses downward?
MCWAY1 1 year ago
@fabioz91 "he eaven doesnt want to see that what the real religious people see"
did you attend school?
nomilkforsanta 1 year ago
@fabioz91 I've read the Bible many times. This IS in the Bible. I guess people who don't reach the same conclusions as you do, even if they believe the Bible and believe in God, aren't real religious people either?
RadarKat73080 1 year ago
Wow, to call this a double standard would be some understatement!!
What's interesting is that the god of Israel approved and advocated these practices. Misogyny at it's worst!
Would an advanced spiritual being make such laws? Would it have such a mentality as this?
The bible was written by men, for the sake and benefit of men! No gods involved!
Cootabux 1 year ago
This is exactly the kind of stuff why I can't understand how any woman with the least bit of self respect can call her self a Christian. The Bible is full of stories where women get treated like second class human beings and or just as objects who man should have control over it's just horrible.
p3st0lino 1 year ago
fuck religion. gay butt secks ftw
spicypeteWoW 1 year ago
0:57 LOL, crocoduck.
Kirk Cameron, you fucktard.
gamingsoul11 1 year ago 2
You had me at the princess bride reference. Why does it feel it necessary to say stone them with stones? It's not like your going to try to stone them with delicious pies, that would take forever, and who's got time to make all those pies anyway? Anyways, always hilarious, keep the vids coming.
TheFightfirewithbaco 1 year ago
MAHWIDGE! MAHWIDGE IS WHOT BWINGS US TOGEVAH....TODAY...
sthebg20 1 year ago
@sthebg20 Does anybody know where this is from?
kcpackerfan 1 year ago
@kcpackerfan Never mind, I found it. The Princess Bride.
kcpackerfan 1 year ago
This is more like the Quron..oh yeah...same thing!!!
blewvelvet 1 year ago 2
And this is just Christianity (and some Judaism); have you seen the shit Muslims pull with their wives?
UnderlordZ 1 year ago 2
lol@the princess bride
zodiakranch 1 year ago
yeah, I mean every woman has streams and streams of blood pouring out of her when she is deflorated, right?
happiehtoast 1 year ago
god doesent exist , just admit it and stfu.
ZeroToleranceLT 1 year ago
My Spidey Sense is telling me that this religion was made a male chauvinist. Amazingly, he got others to adhere to his crazy notions.
SamonMarquis 1 year ago 14
Hahahahahahahahahahaha, shows you what a bullshit the bible, christianity and religion on a whole is.
charliechickrox 1 year ago
I'm sure you've noticed there are lots of laws of the old and new testament that we no longer hold to. There's a reason for that. They were laws of the land at that time. It really isn't difficult to figure out which laws were of the land and which are of divine state. In almost every case, if the law states it is man's place to harm another for a transgression, it will be a law of the land. Though I can't think of any that are divine that say to do that.
skyesfury 1 year ago
Good job leaving off the important second half of that lecture. Here it is.
Ephesians 5:25-28 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
skyesfury 1 year ago
@skyesfury im glad you pointed this out!
TheLovevolta 1 year ago
@skyesfury Too bad everything before that totally makes this little section a worthless piece of shit.
RetardicA 1 year ago
@skyesfury Okay, I'll give you that one. Even when I was a Christian, they did teach this at our congregation. It is even commanded that a husband be willing to die for her. We used to see a lot of new male members looking for a "good Christian girl" to marry, thinking they would have their way because of the verses mentioned in this video. They could not disappear quickly enough when they saw what was required of them. :)
AloofPeregrine 1 year ago
Just kidding sorry.
4AMsunshine 1 year ago
By the way, what is the song you use at the beginning of the video?
4AMsunshine 1 year ago
MAWWIGE.
4AMsunshine 1 year ago
i dont think mrpleasantpreacher cherry picks!
youngn420 1 year ago
Todays lesson? If your a woman and get raped in th city - you better cry LOUDLY... otherwise your probably just enjoying it a bit too much for the lords liking.
TheStigma 1 year ago
would it not be nice to have these laws in practice today it would take us back to an era where people were more godly
smithbrain 1 year ago
@smithbrain Yes. And anyone who does agree shall be have stones thrown at them till they die. For it is the lord who you shall answer and summit too.
NanaTroll7 1 year ago
This was in early stages of intelligent human society. Remember that ALL THE OTHER NATIONS really HAD NO LAWS, esp laws that didn't serve their royalty. THIS happened all the time back then bt the Hebrews HAD laws for appropriating carnal desires. NOW it seems archaic but it was archaic times. Man was still brutish mostly. The money paid is penance to the honorable party who raised their dtr right. Wmn in STREETS means she was unjustly hanging out. The FIELD means she was working. Its a CODE too
MarcusDarling4026 1 year ago
@MarcusDarling4026
That is total nonsense. ALL the other nations? How very ignorant of other nations. Study China's history around that time. They clearly have laws. Laws not given by GOD. That's just one example.
So gad says we need to kill rape victims that are not working when they get raped, just don't interfere with her job.. OK got it dude! I'll make sure I only rape lazy chicks. GO JESUS!
Zarathustrada 1 year ago 2
Anyone know where I can get 50 sheckels? I feel like raping an unbetrothed Christian damsel.
knicoal 1 year ago 3
@knicoal I don`t even know what a sheckel is?!
paolo27th 1 year ago
@paolo27th Me neither. But I bet we can double her for 75 if you're down. ^.^
knicoal 1 year ago
As someone who takes the bible fairly seriously, I'd like to submit that many of the verses cited here were taken out of context. I feel that they were misread and the meanings misrepresented. This point, in particular the verses citing a woman's supposed lower status, are very fiery debate topics among Christians. I personally see these verses as indicating something quite different.
puddleswithoutbounds 1 year ago
@puddleswithoutbounds the old "out of context" spiel, huh? Okay then...please provide the correct context.
Also, what's the proper context of this explicit command from God:
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:17-18)
MaximusRelaximus 1 year ago 2
@puddleswithoutbounds Please put a woman being raped but being stoned to death because she didnt' yell (deuteronomy 22:23-24) into context for me. While you're at it, put a woman being raped, bought, and forced to marry her rapist into context for me too (deuteronomy 22:28-29). At what point do you just say this shit is wrong and stop making excuses for it?
logic39da 1 year ago 4
Comment removed
puddleswithoutbounds 1 year ago
Comment removed
puddleswithoutbounds 1 year ago
1 pet 3:1Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2when they see the purity and reverence of your lives
chrismichael1 1 year ago
@chrismichael1 You really didn't help the case
logic39da 1 year ago
@logic39da You have to explain why.
chrismichael1 1 year ago
@logic39da Well, I don't see how it shed light on the verse in the vid to somehow make it sound better. It's pretty much saying that to perpetuate the idea that "the word" creates a better life, just act like it does no matter what. The woman has the biggest role of acting happy even when she's not. Having no say in a relationship (which must be the case if theyre submitting to their husbands) may make some men happy but the wife pretty much just has to deal with it.
logic39da 1 year ago
1 pet 3:7 7Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.
chrismichael1 1 year ago
eph 5:28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church...this is why woman submit to there husbands, the husbands are supposed to love there wives..
chrismichael1 1 year ago
Eph 5:22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing
chrismichael1 1 year ago
I noticed in the NT scriptures posted for women submitted to their Husbands, you only post where it states they submit to there husbands but you don't state the ones that state why....
chrismichael1 1 year ago
I know lots of "Christian" women who do not "subject themselves to their husbands"!
RadarKat73080 1 year ago
Christians will give the excuse that these were instructions for an ancient group of people who could only comprehend things in a certain way and that these wacky ideas don't apply to modern marriage. To bad they can't apply that same logic to the rest of the bible.
whoopiman 1 year ago
Seriously, fuck this marriage shit. Love is all you need why do you need a paper that says you own this person? I love and respect my guy to much to want to marry him, odd I know but it's not my place to take away his individuality.
TheNurseGrenade 1 year ago
I'm curious if you've read Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion?" Good topic I must add that because of christian doctrine, I as a fully transitioned trans-women am allowed under some religiously tinged state law am able to marry a man as I am straight, or under others be forced to marry another women?
ZoeyTG 1 year ago
This whole time we've been prosecuting and imprisoning these men. All they had to do was buy the woman afterwards and marry her. Dammit, thousands of rape cases have gone awry for years now.
UltraComboer 1 year ago
that's why so many men get raped in prison, felons read the "holy" bible and apply what they read on new inmates, the taking of a maid/fish/fresh meat/man booty is normal according to the good book,
this is why I don't brake the law
marktsheppard 1 year ago
Excellent video. Surprised that you didn't quote the lines from Jesus where he says that all of the OT rules still apply.
BobTKaye 1 year ago
LOL
winner0loser 1 year ago
Poll: for atheists and free thinkers like me,...
what do you think of those deathbed visions of atheists and non believers who alleged that they have gone from hell and back again?
kevin080592 1 year ago
@kevin080592 I think honestly that faith has deluded there minds, I had a debate with a creationist a while back were he said I should experience god and I'd know he was real.
They blow it out of propotion I feel good after I take a shit but do I think it's jesus? NO. Chemical processes in our body fluctuate constantly and saying that when you have a dream or you feel strange that it's caused by god is bullshit, does god have ID? I don't think so, so is it god? Or did you just take a dump.
AfroMageman 1 year ago
@AfroMageman
well that's quite nice...deathbed visions quite awed me in the past however as my mind progress to science, i have been quite relieve that you don't need religion to live isn'it?, so now deathbed visions for me,..like you said it, "biological fluctuations", im just paranoid that i've been seeing accounts like "i almost died and i saw burning hell, now i lived becus of jesus" the likes,...
kevin080592 1 year ago
O_O......poor ladies..................
christianshounen101 1 year ago
It would be awesome if I could force a girl to marry me by doing that, lol! That's pretty messed up.
AllOtherNamesTaken2 1 year ago
I'm showing this to my mother-in-law to be. I told her I did not want "christain" prayer involved in our ceremony. Apparently she hasn't read her bible lately! Though i did enjoy the book of Timothy lines...haha, thanks for putting this video together 43Alley .
timfmr 1 year ago
@timfmr - Let us know how it goes.
43alley 1 year ago
@43alley She was not a fan. She is a big time picker and chooser. Christians hate evidence...
timfmr 1 year ago 5
@timfmr - Well, at least you tried. That says a lot about you. Many of us just keep this stuff to ourselves and let other people do their thing, even to the point to where it intrudes on our lives.
43alley 1 year ago
@43alley Question for you. Our JP is making it weird and wants to hold a Bible while doing our ceremony. Besides the origin of species any recommendation for books I could ask him to hold. I don't want to piss the guy off because he is a friend of my fiancee's family, but this is BS!
timfmr 1 year ago
@timfmr - Is this IN ADDITION to the Bible or IN PLACE OF IT?
Either way, maybe some sort of philosophy book or a collection of Shakespeare sonnets or poems. A nice leather-bound book to make it look respectable would be a nice touch.
One alternative (and perhaps a middle ground if you just go for one book) would be The Jefferson Bible. Thomas Jefferson once took a pair of scissors to the New Testament, taking out all the supernatural stuff. You can get this version on Amazon.
43alley 1 year ago 6
@43alley That's a good idea I'll see if I can find a good looking copy, too bad the God Delusion doesn't come leather-bound.
timfmr 1 year ago
@43alley oh and in place of it
timfmr 1 year ago
@timfmr Er libelow Tim-maahh! (Oh, wrong timmy... ; )
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
they did not believe in much fore play back then.
just shut up it take it like a filthy slut, saith the lord.
kwiksteen 1 year ago
have you....the wing?
Sahuagin 1 year ago
@Sahuagin - Haha, I wish more people caught the reference.
43alley 1 year ago
This shit makes me sick. How can Christians defend this crap?!
supremethunderer 1 year ago
Alley, if an atheist takes up a moral charge against God Himself and yet condones abortion, then yes, I call them on their hypocrisy as often and as bluntly as I can. Your stance on abortion blows a hole through the premise of this video. Glad you have enough time to stalk me on Google, though...interesting.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue - I typed in your username to Google. Google owns YouTube, so they have it all to search. It took 5 seconds to do.
You've "raped" my comment section to this video with over 30 posts. That must have taken much longer.
Are you this annoying in the comments of other videos?
Never mind, don't answer.
Go troll off-topic somewhere else. I'm sure there's a guitar lesson video or that "Charlie Bit Me" video where you can go barf off-topic about abortion 30 times in one day.
43alley 1 year ago 5
@43alley You're awful thin-skinned, alley. You made a video defaming the Christian God and His Book; I am a Christian. Are you so fragile that if you're not constantly stroked by fellow atheists you must personally stalk and attack those who disagree with you and question your beliefs and assertions?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@43alley Also, it's so incredibly hypocritical for you to call my dissention "annoying". Your ENTIRE video collection is dissention! Of course, that's typical leftist secularist denial...it's "brilliant" for YOU to dissent, but simply annoying for me to do so. Free thought for me, not for thee. Dissention for me, not for thee.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue - It's not your dissention (which is quite welcome) that is annoying. It's that you posted 30-plus times, most of the time in these 6-7 consecutive post rants. How any times do I have to say it, Sue?
YOU POSTED MORE THAN 30 TIMES IN ONE DAY. YOU ARE ANNOYING. YOU POSTED MORE THAN 30 TIMES IN ONE DAY. YOU ARE ANNOYING.
Sue ... you're annoying. You posted more than 30 times in one day.
Have I gotten this through to you yet?
43alley 1 year ago 6
@43alley best not to feed trolls and lowly imbeciles who still believe in this hate called christianity. any woman who believes in this shit is a disgrace to my gender.
zoe2020 1 year ago
@zoe2020 Have you anything of substance to offer, or just name-calling, hyperbole and hatred?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Oh, loud and clear. You are focused on character assassination rather than my argument. How can you be disgusted by a God who orders dirty laundry aired,yet condone the dismemberment of unborn human life? I know it's a dichotomy for you to live with. I know it causes cognitive, pyschological and moral dissonance. I know you'd rather mock me than deal with hypocrisy in your worldview.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue if a christian takes up a moral charge against abortion and yet condones all the rape, genocide, animal and human sacrifice, incest, misogyny, torture and slavery in some book written 2,000 years ago by Bronze-age peasants, then yes, I call them on their hypocrisy. Your stance on human and animal rights blows a hole through the premise of your entire thought process. Go troll somewhere else.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago 22
@AtheistBrit It's amazing how simplistic atheists are. Just because it's recorded in the Bible does NOT mean that God condones it. On the few occasions He did order a nation judged, can you not see that it was just punishment for depravity and incomprehensible evil? Oh but right, that's horrible.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue But a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby? The innocent unborn life inside of her? Well, just off it. No harm, no foul. Just like alley, methinks you're a little touchy. That tends to happen when the conscience is pricked. Abortion is your downfall, leftist atheists. You cannot defend it. And it demolishes your pathetic moral posturizing.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue "Just because it's recorded in the Bible does NOT mean that God condones it." - You obviously haven't ever read the passages I quoted. Many of those atrocities were done DIRECTLY by god, like killing the innocent firstborn Egyptians for something that Pharaoh had done which god had made him do! You call ME simplistic, yet you're so simple you can't even see what awful things were done directly by your so-called loving god.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago 2
Of course this would all be fine if you realised it was just a story like the rest of us do. Problem is, you decide to hold up this book of blood sacrifice and say it's the only source of morality in the world. REALLY?
You call atheists simplistic yet you can only see abortion in black and white instead of the myriad of shades of grey it actually is. Try telling a mentally disabled teenage rape victim that she can't abort her child even though carrying it to term would kill her.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit So let me get this straight. When WE kill innocent babies it's just "shades of grey"--sometimes wrong, sometimes right. But when GOD does it--He who has all knowledge, all understanding, and all widsom--that is wrong? You contradict yourself with every post.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue No. Again you're being so simplistic it's almost laughable. God kills innocent children for the most petty reasons imaginable as I have TWICE pointed out (killing the Egyptian first-borns because of something god actually caused pharaoh to do). When a woman requires an abortion it's usually the lesser of many evils and may often actually be necessary to save her life.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago 2
And yes, of course the "creator of life" (although he doesn't exist, but whatever) would by necessity decide when and how it will end. But the fact is, according to your book, he frequently chooses ways that result in deliberate suffering. Then folks like you turn around and say that your god is all-loving and that the bible is the source of moral authority.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago 2
@AtheistBrit Talk about laughable. Why don't you do your statistical homework, Brit? the majority of abortions occur because partners were too negligent or lazy to use birth control. Please use FACT and not EMOTIONAL HYPERBOLE to make your arguments, okay? Defend to me why it's okay to have fun for a night, be irresponsible, then destroy the human being that results. Please, defend that.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue I'm IN the field of medical sciences, and this is just an utter crock. About half of all fertilized eggs die and are aborted spontaneously. 8 out of 10 times this occurs before the woman knows of her pregnancy. As for non-spontaneous abortions (i.e. the woman realizes she is pregnant) the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%; half due to age and genetics, 1/3 diabetes. Compare this to the 1.8% abortion-by-choice rate, and there you will find your "statistical homework" done for you.
rationalmuscle 1 year ago 9
@rationalmuscle Let me use YOUR reasoning in another context. All humans die. Therefore, it should be acceptable to kill them before they have the chance to expire of natural causes, particularly if they are inconvenient or unwanted. Wow. That was probably the saddest application of logic and the most coldhearted things I'ver read in a while. I will pray for you.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue I merely corrected re: abortion being the result of "not using the pill" and pointing out that GOD obviously built abortion into the "design of life."
What's you've done here, other than commit two logical fallacies (kudos!) is assume I am "pro" abortion-by-choice. This is not my point, nor my stance. Deal with the argument presented: Admit you were wrong about abortion stats, and address the issue of "god's" role in abortion.
Your ability to interpret "reason" is appalling.
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@rationalmuscle If you think I don't understand the difference between spontaneous abortion and abortion through medical procedure, you're wrong. I have no interest in being caught in the snare of your semantic games. No, really. You cannot defend the indefensible, so you resort to obfuscation. Kudos!
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Of course you have no interest, and what you call "obfuscation" is merely ignorance on your part of the subjects at hand. You also apparently have no interest in intellectual honesty, facts, or being bitch-slapped mentally speaking by someone who actually knows what they're talking about (the latter is understandable... heh... )
And you cannot defend my biblical retorts either, now can you?
So please... defend Deut. 22 with your concept of God's nature. Should be fun.
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@rationalmuscle I could easily do so, as every line reveals one of God's inherent characteristics of just, holy or loving. However, it would take pages of commentary, and I've been told to be concise (atheists are very intolerant, after all). So I will leave you with that: God is just. He is holy. And He is loving. Now chew on that.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue In other words... no, you cannot.
The "commentary" you would provide, if provided at all, would be cut and paste from the likes of apologetic sites or perhaps Swinburne if you're into the butchered idea of open theology. At least it is a defense.
And you could PM me personally, writing a novel if you like.
But again, you cannot. And this is but ONE passage.
Why do you lie to this extent just to protect your holy book? Do you not see the absolute contradiction in this behavior?
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@rationalmuscle We were talking about medically induced abortion, NOT spontaneous abortion. Being an bully, (perhaps particularly of women), you thought me too ignorant to know the difference. You thought I'd curl up in a ball, sobbing, when you "enlightened" me to the fact that, in your opinion, "God kills 80% of babies anyway!" Stinks when I don't play your games, doesn't it?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue 1. I addressed my personal thoughts on voluntary abortion to silence; 2. The original post was to CORRECT your lie re: the cause of most abortions AND to point out God's penchant for the act; 3. I don't play games. I point out absurd commentary from fundamentalists. On rare occasion they actually understand.
This is not one of those occasions.
P.S. No. 1 cause of death until the late 1800s? CHILDBIRTH (baby and/or mother.)
Swell designer god you have there... just swell.
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue In addition to all the other replies re: spontaneous and non-spontaneous abortion, just think for a minute about what you said. If you make abortion illegal, then the girls who were raped, no matter how small a proportion, would be forced to carry the child to term. That is NOT acceptable! If you made abortion legal only for rape victims, the victim would have to go about proving they were raped (and the conviction rate is laughable). Again, you're too simplistic and narrow-minded.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit The weak-minded call names when they are caught in their own fallacies. Calling me simplistic and narrow-minded does not advance your argument one iota. Please tell me what is worse: a rape victim carrying her child for nine months, or the slaughter of innocent human life--resulting in a life that can never be reclaimed. Put another way, if your mother because impregnanted through rape, do you wish she'd have aborted YOU to spare her the emotional pain?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Excuse me, I meant "became impregnated". Also--why must you continue to belabor the most extreme, smallest statistical sample of all abortions? Why don't you answer my question about negligent, lazy adults who can't be bothered with birth control and murder a developing human for convenience? Please defend abortion in that case--the most common reason women murder their own children in modern society.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue I do not applaud the decision made by most women, but you utterly fail to address the fact that your GOD aborts more children than women ever could through his (er-HUM) wonder of design. The body's response to 'any' foreign entity is to expel it, including children. Only under ideal circumstances is childbirth possible.
Some design, eh? Me... oh, I'd put a 2-child cap on it and then let the ovaries cease functioning. There. Birth AND population control.
(Yes, that's a joke.)
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue "The weak-minded call names when they are caught in their own fallacies." - it was you who first called me simplistic, I merely called out your hypocrisy.
"if your mother because impregnanted through rape, do you wish she'd have aborted YOU to spare her the emotional pain?" I'm glad you asked me that. Yes, I wish she had done. I would never have known any different and she would have been spared a whole lot of agony.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit Oh my goodness. Really? God does not condone those actions FOR US except in extreme circumstances. He is the Creator of life. Can not the Creator of life, the very Author of it, decide when it will end, and in what manner?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Please explain this passage: "If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her." Deut. 22
Note that this is Yahweh speaking, NOT the author, therefore the tired "God did not condone it" reasoning cannot be used.
Do you consider this the decree of a "moral", just god?
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue I fail to see what relevence a stance on abortion has with regards to the topics explored in this video. Regardless of what I think of abortion, killing someone just because they weren't a virgin when they got married or because they were raped is wrong. Forcing a woman to marry her rapist is wrong. And any being that condones such behavior is wrong.
FireDragons42 1 year ago
@FireDragons42 Alley has a case against God. So he uses God's guidelines of 4000 YEARS AGO--guidelines that were for that culture, in that time--to make a cartoon case against God. Meanwhile, alley is perfectly comfortable with the abortion business in the USA, where innocent babies go to die because they're "inconvenient". The hypocrisy just drips off my computer screen....I expose it, and atheistic "morality", at every turn....
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue - Every time I read a post from Sue, I picture this lady:
watch?v=bOpva_iit-8
43alley 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue
Really? So the New Testament was written 2000 years before the supposed birth of Jesus? And isn't it even more absurd to be defending a religion that holds as its foundation such writings that are, as you say, "guidelines that were for" such a barbaric society?
Mashiki 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Making a woman marry her rapist is evil. I disagree that this was for the provision of any children arising in the rape. The woman in the city could have conceived also and yet she would be stoned. The married women who committed adultery could have conceived also and yet she was also stoned.
Context: The woman was married off because she was seen as damaged property. No one wanted to marry a women who was not a virgin and her father compensated.
I find that evil. Do you?
imaginelolalola 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue How come God does not mind others stoning a woman who has committed adultery or been rape when it is probable she may be carrying a child?
Why is it one when God sent the Israelites to war they kill women pregnant or not simply because they were no maids(virgins)? They get to take the maids for themselves. He seems to regard the un-pregnant as greater than those with child? Why does he not care that children will be aborted too?
Obviously I am more against abortion than your God.
imaginelolalola 1 year ago
@imaginelolalola PM me if you'd like answers. I would try to be brief, but your questions would take at least three comments.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Really sue I don't mind. Three comments can't be too hard for you after you have left so many messages here and I'd like others to be able to see the answers to my questions also. No doubt many people have them.
imaginelolalola 1 year ago
@imaginelolalola PM me. Alley doesn't like hard questions about his worldview, and so has lampooned me personally. PM me if you want my answers.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue - Sounds like you don't answer the hard questions on here. The question was to you, not me.
And don't blame me for you not publicly answering. I lampooned you for your 30 posts in one day. You have to admit, Sue, a stretch like that is a little extreme and off-putting.
43alley 1 year ago 21
@Sweet92Sue Alley does not seem to be complaining. I also, as he correctly recognises did not question him. I would like you to give a public answer.
You have the right to PM me and give me an answer but if you do so I wish to post it. Don't you want others to have the answer to such common questions?
imaginelolalola 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@imaginelolalola I did give comprehensive, thoughtful answers--but when I reread your threat to post PMs, along with alley's continued complaining about my multiple comments, I reconsidered. I shall not throw my pearls before swine. Good bye.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue It was not a threat but a promise. I love to share knowledge. What do you have to tell me that I could not tell others?
I rather doubt you had any pearls. You don't want to give knowledge to those who want it. And you have used that phrase from the bible incorrectly. It is pointless to throw pearls before swine because they don't want nor appreciate them. Who that has answers to these common questions would keep them to themselves?
imaginelolalola 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue
stupidest comment of the year? so lets see sweet sue ... I THOUGHT that god's laws were his own, and not subject to the culture of mere mortals??? :P .... does this mean that god bends over to the whims of people? arent his laws supposed to shape the society as opposed to the other way around ... hahahah stupidest christian comment ive ever read lol!
13gdob88 1 year ago
So if you marry and your wife isn't a virgin, you and the men in your town can kill her. And if you find a girl in the country and rape her you can keep her. The Bible is a creepy book.
Angel0Martinez 1 year ago 2
People like Sue need to do their fucking research.
But as you said a bit ago, this video has nothing to do with abortion.
It's clearly very misogynistic and loaded with double-standards... I feel really bad for the women of that time who were virgins but didn't bleed on their wedding nights, weren't believed, and were killed in vain.
oliverj83 1 year ago 4
@oliverj83 - I feel bad for the women of THIS time that read these passages and aren't turned off and still try to defend it. I won't give any names, but if you look around, you'll see over 30 posts by her.
43alley 1 year ago 14
Sue you have no idea what you are talking about. THis video is about what the bible states about marrage, the rules surounding rape and nothing about abortion.
If you truly believe that your god has better morrals than alley, then you have NEVER read your bible. Your god condones rape, mas murder, genocide, slavery. . . on and on. Sorry but it was the bible itself that made me stop believing in a god.
jscanyon 1 year ago 4
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Alley can't live with that thorny problem, but he can surely live with an innocent life being destroyed if the mother in question is a young, mentally disabled person. In that case, yes, go ahead and destroy the innocent life in question, so sad, but whatareya gonna do. Right?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue Isn't that the VERY SAME THING you're doing when you condone abortion for that baby? Aren't YOU playing God, deciding which life is worth keeping and which is okay to destroy utterly and completely? Yet when God plays God...well, that's horrible and wrong.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue YOU did not create that aborted baby. YOU cannot assure that the mother's or the baby's life is kept whole and healthy and complete. YOU cannot bring blessing from the worst of life's circumstances--which, by the way, is God's specialty. Yet you're perfectly comfortable mocking the only One who offers the REAL solutions to life's problems.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue - My head hurts from reading your non sequitur (yet obsessive) ramblings.
You're using a christian fundamentalist debate tactic where you ask an off-topic question & then take the answer & spin it in your "fill-in-the-blank" straw man sermon.
Can you really not be concise enough for one posting? Do you really have to sound like a crazy homeless person with a handwritten cardboard sign?
No one will be able to follow your bleatings. I'm sorry that this is how you spend your time.
43alley 1 year ago
@43alley You cannot help but contradict yourself. You YOURSELF said that "solutions don't fit on bumper stickers". So when I offered a comprehensive response, you lampoon that too. Then you ad hominem, the fallback of every atheist caught in a web of their own imcomprehensible moral "standards", such as they are.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@43alley I'll make it simple for you. You accuse God of being evil for dealing with the fallout for human sin. Making a woman marry her rapist is evil, in your opinion. Yet YOUR solution for dealing with human sin is to kill an innocent baby. So. How is that better than what God does?
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue - Still don't have the "concise posting" thing down, do you?
Yes, my solution to deal with human sin is to kill an innocent baby ... (?)
You realize that the required marriage here has nothing to do with the woman getting pregnant, right? It has to do with ownership of the woman. If it was about impregnation, then the woman wouldn't be stoned to death for "not crying out loud enough in the city."
God was never much known for advocating children's rights.
43alley 1 year ago 2
@43alley 1. The required marriage has to do with a possible pregnancy AND with the woman's provision in that culture. I know that you believe "ownership" of a woman is much worse than the DESTRUCTION of 25 million future women since Roe Vs. Wade passed....
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago
@Sweet92Sue 2. You have a right to make videos mocking my faith; I have a right to respond. I know many atheists consider YT their "church". So you anticipate the back-patting over your "brilliant" videos. I do not find them brilliant; I find them intellectually lazy. You haven't fully thourght through these moral issues.
Sweet92Sue 1 year ago