Did God rape Mary?

[TxRiverElf]

Perhaps, MissAlice, the Vile Atheist's snide remark is no less far fetched, actually, than the standard Christian contention?

With Logic and Imagination, A Divine Being (God or Goddess) with Divine Power could split a mortal woman's egg... without actual sexual intercourse... just as one might believe that ghosts can stack chairs, open and close drawers, and yell at other ghosts to get off of their train.

Obviously if one believes in Divinty... ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE... but of course, more than splitting the egg would be involved... for a woman to bear a son... as the mere splitting would result in an amazing clone... a genetic twin of Mary... hence a daughter... as evidenced for years, in Scotland, by scientists who split eggs professionally.... So, a little something something would have to be added to, or subtracted from, the DNA of the potential demi-God... Naturally, men automatically assume that their sperm (or Joseph's technically) is the magic ingredient... but truly, if one is to imagine such an occurrence at all, it can also be imagined that a Goddess split Mary's egg and altered the DNA... with Spiritual Power that can move mountains, so why not a few DNA strands?

So yeah, there may be something to that Divine Lesbian theory!

 

[TxRiverElf]

Yes, you know, because posts #35, #44, #76, #83 in this very thread do not exist...

Mestemia, Mestemia, Mestemia... dear Mestemia... Truly, I am not opposed to you being correct, although I do prefer that you actually be correct, if you expect me to acknowledge such contention. While those references might rock your world and appease your thought(s) on the matter, they do NOT satisfy my queries.

Here is a thought... different minds do not think alike...

Here is a question, "Do you verbally abuse all new comers to the forum, in hopes of a tennis game of rebuttals, so your 'points' escalate? Or do you sincerely believe what you type?"

 

[cablescavenger]

This is a truly offensive thread. I do not know to what depts one has to sink, to think that god would rape mary. The angel appeared to mary and told her that she would conceive. She said ''let it be done unto me as you have said''.

There was no sexual intercourse, and no violation of mary's will.

Geez...

Heneni

If religion provides answers then it should be open to questions. If we go down the route of censoring religious conversation then all we serve to do is exercise religious intolerance.

P.S. Can I ask what "Geez" means? Is it swearing? It is not something I am familiar with

 

[TxRiverElf]

This is a truly offensive thread. I do not know to what depts one has to sink, to think that god would rape mary. The angel appeared to mary and told her that she would conceive. She said ''let it be done unto me as you have said''.

There was no sexual intercourse, and no violation of mary's will.

Geez...

Heneni

Heneni, first and foremost know that my remarks have no intent to attack you, personally, but I would like to point out, that while the act is offensive, the question is a valid one, to ask.

How can we understand your religion if questions are deflected?

This is a legitimate question, because Biblical 'evidence' does point to the 'gospel' that God DID FORCE HIS WILL ON CHILDREN... as in the case of Jeremiah :

6 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I [am] a child.
7 But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I [am] a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.

So, God used a boy to 'spread his word'... essentially made Jeremiah a 'dummy' upon the lap of God... why the subterfuge? Why leave any doubt in any one's mind, as to whether the boy was 'right' or not? Why not simply speak directly to everyone HIMSELF... at the same time, so everyone is on the same page at the same time?

I hope you can see more clearly, why 'outsiders' such as myself, find it necessary to ask such questions, as it makes no sense... in fact, many so called myths or legends, make more sense.

Without further enlightenment, to me, that chapter of Jeremiah clearly supports the possibility that Mary had no choice.

It also encourages Christian acceptance of NOT having a choice... not having Free Will... everything is God's Will or Satan's Intervention... they have no responsibility because they are HAVING TO DO WHAT GOD SAYS THEY MUST DO... even if they are children and put into dangerous situations... which is well and good, I suppose, if God really has their back... but it also encourages the mentally ill to believe they have to do things... horrible things... that God is commanding them to do... I am sure that you have heard of some of the things done to innocent children, because of such 'belief'... and in disbelief we are forced to ask, why didn't God have the backs of those innocents?

Maybe it can be argued that spiritually He did... but why was it necessary for them to physically suffer so horribly? Why didn't God REALLY speak to those demented souls and fix them before they harmed innocents? I just don't understand it... at all.

And, as mentioned by others, if a winged giant (angel) shows up and tells you that God has chosen you to do something... whatever it is, it is surely implied that God Knows Best and You Can Not Say NO without incurring God's Wrath... In that same chapter of Jeremiah there is reference to .... God smiting entire groups of children... to punish their parents... now that is pretty offensive, to me!!

I am not a Christian, nor an affiliate of any given faction, aside from "individual"... so I don't know if Jesus came before or after Jeremiah... but I am sure there were plenty of other tales, that encouraged 'minding your Angels'...and successfully managed to put 'the fear of God into them'...

Therefore, in my opinion, Mary's response could clearly be viewed as 'resignation' to a 'dictate'... rather than affirmation of a willing consent...

I would be very grateful if you or any other Christian in this forum, could point out a Biblical Scripture that confirms the fact that Mary had a choice... aside from her remark, which I do not count as proof, for the reason stated.

i HAVE actually learned a few things, since my arrival here... for instance, I was guilty of 'understanding' that God via the Holy Spirit Impregnated Mary... I did not know that others contend that Joseph was the father and that Jesus was 'begotten at baptism' rather than conception... I honestly had never heard of that... so I am grateful for the education... but that does bring me to the following question:

Why would it be necessary for God to have a virgin have premarital sex, when her marriage was scheduled already and he could just as well have 'done what he did' on her wedding night, rather than with risk to the young girl's reputation and spoiling her 'right to wear white'... ?

I honestly do not understand... why God had to tell Mary anything, at the point that she was told... if Jesus was born of Joseph and not to become 'God's Son' until after his baptism... and why didn't God simply TELL EVERYONE... at the same time... "Listen up... My Son has something to say."....

Wouldn't that have made a greater impact than crucifying his Son? Seriously!!?? World wide... in all languages... at the same time... ? Since he makes children puppet his words... why not simply SAY HIS OWN WORDS TO EVERYONE instead of picking around on individuals? It just does not 'smack of Divine Grace' as much as it smacks of the confusions of transitioning a new religion onto the scene... by men... not God...

 

[Sunstone]

I understand that some experts consider Mary to be as young as 12 years old. However when God or the holy spirit inseminated Mary without her consent, was this rape?

Why, that's exactly the lesson I've always taken from the story of Mary! It seems obvious as daylight that the story was meant to be taken in precisely that way. I just don't understand why more people haven't noticed.

 

[TxRiverElf]

....God chose Mary for this job because He knew that she would say "yes". ......also, you will note that in Luke's Gospel, after the angel explains everything that will happen to Mary, Mary responds by saying "i am the Lord's servant, may it be to me as you have said".

You say, GOD Knew she would say ' yes '.... can you please tell me where she was given the opportunity to choose to say, ' yes '... or more exactly, where is the question, itself?

All that anyone has ever shown me... so far ... is as you have aptly put it... "the angel explains everything THAT WILL happen" ... which suggests there is no choice... and Mary's response, which supports that suggestion... "I am the Lord's servant"... Servants do not have the option to say, "NO"... SERVANTS do what they are told to do... to me her 'response' could be viewed as a young woman who knows she has no choice and can only hope that it will turn out as told...

I am not a Christian, so please forgive my ignorance, but somewhere within this very thread, someone stated that Jesus was the biological son of Joseph and did not become God's son, until he was baptized... I should not have trusted that to be true, but then, I have not read the Bible, except for snippets... so, since it sounded 'plausible' I accepted it... but... I have since referred to an old book that was printed in 1884... it is titled, Teacher's Edition, Bible Dictionary, Wm. Smith LLD... a lovely book, as books go... and it states "She was betrothed to Joseph of Nazareth; but before her marriage she became with child by the Holy Ghost and became the mother of Jesus Christ..."

To me that clearly suggests that Jesus WAS NOT the son of Joseph... according to the Bible... but it does raise some questions.

Can you or perhaps another Christian who reads this, please advise me as to why God would do such a thing... particularly at a time and place where women were 'stoned to death for adultery' and though she was not 'technically' with a 'man'... why place her at risk like that?

To suggest that it was done to establish the fact that he was not born to Joseph... seems lame... because instead of proving he was the son of God it merely draws into question whether Mary and Joseph were actually chaste until after their wedding... so why didn't God just approach the couple, on their wedding day, to advise them "what WILL happen?" ... to at least eliminate some of the countless questions that we, who do not understand, are inclined to ask, in order to understand?

Thanks

 

[Road Warrior]

Since it's God, it can't be rape by definition. Sorry, but I equate mortal questions such as this to be on the same order of asking if God was personally responsible for all 250,000+ deaths from the 2004 Tsunami. Neither becomes applicable given the traits and characteristics attributed to the Abrahamic God.

 

[McBell]

Since it's God, it can't be rape by definition. Sorry, but I equate mortal questions such as this to be on the same order of asking if God was personally responsible for all 250,000+ deaths from the 2004 Tsunami. Neither becomes applicable given the traits and characteristics attributed to the Abrahamic God.

Ah, something else that an all powerful deity cannot do?

 

[Road Warrior]

There's a difference between cannot and will not, but I can understand why some people would use that as tacit proof that God doesn't exist or is powerless to act.

One thing they seem to forget is that mortal life is temporary, but the afterlife is eternal. Therefore, saving a person's mortal life is heavily outweighed by saving their eternal soul.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

In that case what you are saying is not that god COULD NOT rape Mary, but rather 'would not', so there are only a few options:

Mary did not give her informed consent to impregnation and was thus raped
Mary did give her informed consent to impregnation, to bear a child despite being engaged to someone else (provided that it was not Joseph who fathered Jesus).

Those are the options; the former shows God to be a rather horrible being, while the later shows Mary to be a less than virtuous or faithful one; only if it was Joseph who fathered Jesus is there an alternative (in which case 'begotten not made' is false unless we claim that at least at that moment, Joseph WAS God and therefore it was Joseph's body, mind and 'soul' who fathered Jesus on Mary)

 

[Road Warrior]

If someone wants to believe God is a rapist and/or Mary is a ****, I'm sure they'll find a way to do so regardless of the facts or the larger picture.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I do not believe either (for starters I do not believe in the Abrahamic God) I am merely giving the possible alternatives if you accept that Mary gave birth to the begotten son of the Abrahamic God.

I think you will find that most people who 'wants to believe [the Abrahamic] God is a rapist and/or Mary is a ****' probably does not believe in that God in the first place and so therefore does not hold either to be true, but rather that they would approach such a scenario from a critical (or perhaps less desirably from a cynical) perspective; I am of the former group.

 

[Road Warrior]

I do not believe either (for starters I do not believe in the Abrahamic God) I am merely giving the possible alternatives if you accept that Mary gave birth to the begotten son of the Abrahamic God.

It was obvious you don't believe in the Abrahamic God and were simply pot-stirring. Thanks for coming clean about it.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

That should have been clear given the comment in my 'religion' field directly bellow my name.

Whereas the same cannot be said for your title in terms of how it reflects on your posts in this thread at least; though it seems less out of place in other threads.

And I was not 'pot stirring' I was simply giving a purely critical (in no way cynical) examination of the issue.

 

[sojourner]

Of what possible good use is the concept of rape to the spiritual sensibility?

 

[Road Warrior]

Of what possible good use is the concept of rape to the spiritual sensibility?

It's not, but it is certainly of good use to mortal sensibilities who want to discredit the concept of a spiritual component to existence.

 

[sojourner]

Since "rape" is a legal term, with very specific parameters, I don't see how the thing with Mary can qualify as a rape.
1) Since Mary supposedly consented, it's not rape.
2) Since God (at the time) was not human, it's not rape.
3) Since the act wasn't predicated upon violence, it's not rape.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Of those three points, only the first is valid (if indeed she consented and was capable of informed consent)

 

[sojourner]

Of those three points, only the first is valid (if indeed she consented and was capable of informed consent)

Are you contending that rape is not a human crime? Are you contending that violence was the intent?

If Mary could consent to be married, she could consent to sex.
Since your argument must be predicated upon the texts in which the story is found, then God's intent and God's nature must also be assumed by the text. That intent is not violent. That nature is not human (yet).

No rape.

 

[F0uad]

The title disgust me but i will reply.

You can approach this by asking what is the definition of rape it is: ''Unwilling sex''
The Christians and Muslims never claimed God had ''Sex'' or ''Impregnated'' Marry(p) unwillingly so therefore no.

The muslims also never claimed god ''Impregnated'' marry(p) but the Christians do (at-least there bible does). The muslims simply say He ''Jesus(p)'' is created and nothing about impregnating marry(p).


Biblical story about the birth:

Matthew 1:31-35

31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.” 34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.



Quranic story about the birth:

Surah 3:45-47

Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah;
"He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."
She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!


I would prefer the Quranic one.