| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"oldwetdog" |
| Date: |
26 Oct 2006 11:36:11 PM |
| Object: |
The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A Woman's
Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in the
Beginning.
In the Beginning God gave a wife to Adam, and he said:
"This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be
called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave
unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Gen 2:23-24.
Then it is written:
"thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."
There are two phrases in that statement:
"thy desire shall be to thy husband..."
and,
"he shall rule over thee." (This statement is not contested.)
It is, then, the Nature of woman for her desire to be to her husband.
Too many men do not understand that it is unnecessary to force a woman
to do something her nature will lead her to do willingly.
There are some false teachers who deny that the marriage relationship as
Created in the beginning by God was a consensual relationship. Yet there
is nothing to support such an interpretation until Paul wrote to the
Corinthians, and his words lead to misunderstanding.
This scripture (1 Cor 7:1-6) is often misinterpreted to mean that a
husband may deprive his wife of her consensual relationship, defraud her
of her right to say "no." and require unwilling participation in sexual
intercourse.
This scripture is often used in an attempt to alter marriage from the
consensual relationship known to Paul and the Jews into one based on
demanded obedience to Command, required obligation to Duty and unwilling
subjection to Duress. This is the Doctrine of Spousal Rape.
Those who teach this false doctrine say or infer that a wife has no
right to say "no." They say or imply that a wife has no right to give or
withhold consent. They say or imply that a wife must submit to unwilling
participation in sexual intercourse at the command or demand of her
husband.
Sex without consent or willing participation is spousal rape.
It is my position that spousal rape is an abomination in the eyes of
God, and NOT what Paul intended in his letter.
To the best of my knowledge all States in the United States have a law
or laws making spousal rape a criminal offense.
Paul instructs Christians to obey the rule of those in authority.
(Romans 13:1 and Tit 3:1) Christians are commanded: "Let every soul be
subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the
powers that be are ordained of God.
Therefore, unless someone can prove -- by the Word of God -- that the
Laws of the Land contradict or oppose the Law of God, we must obey.
Therefore:
Please explain how raping your wife does NOT contradict God's Word.
Please show how and where the Law of the Land contradicts God's Word by
making Spousal Rape a Crime.
Please show how a man refusing to rape his wife has failed to follow
God's Word?
I will be looking forward to your reply,
owd
.
|
|
| User: "Jude A.B.C. Cajun@middle of the swamp.com" |
|
| Title: Re: The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
27 Oct 2006 01:02:31 PM |
|
|
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k335sce0aq2ea@corp.supernews.com...
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A Woman's
Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in the
Beginning.
I want to be clear when I say what I have to say is that I haven't followed
every posts between you, Randy & Dave FOR SURE! There's been 100s!!!
What I want to say is that any doctrine, whatever it's source, that says
that a woman (or a man for that sake but let's be honest, how often is THAT
going to happen? lol) doesn't have the "right of consent" is just plain
wrong. Ownership of a spouse's body is just plain WRONG! This isn't about
whether the partner in the marriage tries to force what he/she thinks is
their right. There is NO RIGHT in the first place. Paul was NOT GOD! And,
even though Paul claimed that God spoke to him in a special way, in THIS
CASE, Paul says the statement is OF IS OWN OPINION! Yet, the craziest of
the Fundie take even a couple of times Paul declares that he is speaking on
his own behalf as the "word of God!"
Don't forget that. Even to those who believe that Paul was God's direct
mouthpiece, MUST remember that Paul said that his statemetn of "due
benevolence" was HIS OWN OPINION! Randy and Dave conveniently forgot this
although I KNOW Diana and I said it several times and perhaps others also.
What Dave & Randy (what am I NOT surprised) don't realize is the day in
which Paul spoke these words. Women are loved or unloved property. How a
man FELT about his wife is really not the issue. It's obvious that many men
have loved their wives. It's that, LEGALLY, women were the wards of some
man, be it father, brother or husband and even SONS until her death (there
are stories of rare exceptions and no explanation as to why the exception.)
The issue of women's rights is a deal because it's been denied for almost
all of human history by almost ALL SOCIETIES, whether they were the most
brutal of the brutes or "religious." NOW, what does THAT tell you? That
the desire for domination doesn't mean it's from God! DUH
There IS not issue of men's rights. Oh, you get a few whinners who have
started the "men's movement" but most people laugh at the notion that
American men are a discrminated group of people! lol
.
|
|
|
| User: "oldwetdog" |
|
| Title: Re: The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
27 Oct 2006 02:12:41 PM |
|
|
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k335sce0aq2ea@corp.supernews.com...
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A Woman's
Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in the
Beginning.
Jude, I know you and I do not agree on everything -- so I will make a
few comments here on what I think we do agree about, and leave the
nit-picking details of disagreement for another time ;-)
First, I now realize that I should not have used the phrase "A Woman's
Right of Consent" -- because it contains the word "right." That is an
unfortunate mistake in my word selection.
When God breathed the breath of Life into the first human, did He give
us the "Right" to breathe?
See, using the word "right" in inaccurate, it clouds our thoughts, it
results in confusion because we only think of that term "rights" by the
modern definition...
No. We don't have the "right" (by that modern definition) to breathe."
Human beings are given certain "duties, responsibilities and privileges"
as a matter of our basic human nature. Having two feet is not a "right."
Having two eyes and two ears is not a "right." Using our feet to walk,
our ears to hear and our eyes to see is not a "right" -- but it is a
natural consequence of life.
Our having a "mind" and being able to "reason" is not a "right." Our
ability to use our mind, to reason, to make choices is not a right, IS a
God-given, God-intended consequence of His gift of Life.
It would be more accurate to say we have the "Duty" to breath.
So is the ability to reason, make choices and give or withhold consent.
I want to be clear when I say what I have to say is that I haven't followed
every posts between you, Randy & Dave FOR SURE! There's been 100s!!!
I haven't read them all myself (of course I read mine -- but i tried to
ignore a few of Randy and Dave's. ;-)
What I want to say is that any doctrine, whatever it's source, that says
that a woman (or a man for that sake but let's be honest, how often is THAT
going to happen? lol) doesn't have the "right of consent" is just plain
wrong. Ownership of a spouse's body is just plain WRONG! This isn't about
whether the partner in the marriage tries to force what he/she thinks is
their right. There is NO RIGHT in the first place.
As I mentioned in another thread, the idea and concept of "rights" are
modern (since maybe 1200) and not "God-given." (Descendant, perhaps,
from the idea of "divine "right" of Kings.)
What some now attempt to claim as "rights" are a distortion of, or a
conversion of what are actually "privileges, responsibilities and
duties," and the authority to execute, or power to accomplish, those.
All of man's duties, responsibilities and privileges are in fact in
relationship to God -- while the modern concept of "rights" make man a
little tin god.
Paul was NOT GOD! And,
even though Paul claimed that God spoke to him in a special way, in THIS
CASE, Paul says the statement is OF IS OWN OPINION! Yet, the craziest of
the Fundie take even a couple of times Paul declares that he is speaking on
his own behalf as the "word of God!"
I'd like to comment that just because something in found in the Bible
does NOT make it "God's Word."
This, of course, will cause some people to howl at the moon in anger,
confusion, and sheer panic!
But allow me to prove that point before dipping me in tar!
Moses, in recording the story of Creation, recorded the serpents words:
"You shall not surely die..." Gen 3:4.
YET THESE WORDS ARE IN THE BIBLE!
Are we to claim, now, that the words "You shall not surely die" ARE GOD
BREATHED! No, a thousand times "No!"
What about Pharaoh?
How many times did Pharaoh say, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his
voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel go."
What shall we conclude? Are these God's words" Did God Breathe the words
spoken by Pharaoh? No, a thousand times "No!"
What about the wise men?
They said: "for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to
worship him." Mat 2:2
But it was a lie...there was NO star! Astrologers are liars. These liars
were sent by Satan to discover the resting place of the Child so he
could attempt to murder Him -- as he attempted to murder Moses at his birth.
Were the lying words of the astrologers "God breathed"? No, a thousand
times "No!"
So there ARE words and statements in the Bible which are NOT the Word of
God, but are faithfully and accurately (truthfully) recorded for our use
and benefit.
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
But, Randy and Dave (among other men) can not allow the distinction to
be recognized because they have based lies on words and "commands" which
are not God-given... and to allow the truth to be know would destroy
their false doctrine.
Don't forget that. Even to those who believe that Paul was God's direct
mouthpiece, MUST remember that Paul said that his statemetn of "due
benevolence" was HIS OWN OPINION! Randy and Dave conveniently forgot this
although I KNOW Diana and I said it several times and perhaps others also.
What Dave & Randy (what am I NOT surprised) don't realize is the day in
which Paul spoke these words. Women are loved or unloved property. How a
man FELT about his wife is really not the issue. It's obvious that many men
have loved their wives. It's that, LEGALLY, women were the wards of some
man, be it father, brother or husband and even SONS until her death (there
are stories of rare exceptions and no explanation as to why the exception.)
The issue of women's rights is a deal because it's been denied for almost
all of human history by almost ALL SOCIETIES, whether they were the most
brutal of the brutes or "religious." NOW, what does THAT tell you? That
the desire for domination doesn't mean it's from God! DUH
There IS not issue of men's rights. Oh, you get a few whinners who have
started the "men's movement" but most people laugh at the notion that
American men are a discrminated group of people! lol
No, i think it is an issue of some men misusing Paul's words to pervert
the God-given consensual, loving, relationship into a Command and Demand
relationship with the wife having no right to say "no," and therefore
unable to give or withhold Consent -- a rape relationship which the man
controls and dominates.
That actually turns marriage into an excuse and tool for the
gratification of the lust of the flesh. This misinterpretation of Paul's
words turns Christian marriage into something worse than the "chattel
and ward" relationship of the dark ages.
owd
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jude A.B.C. Cajun@middle of the swamp.com" |
|
| Title: Re: The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
27 Oct 2006 03:21:53 PM |
|
|
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com...
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k335sce0aq2ea@corp.supernews.com...
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A Woman's
Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in the
Beginning.
Jude, I know you and I do not agree on everything -- so I will make a few
comments here on what I think we do agree about, and leave the nit-picking
details of disagreement for another time ;-)
First, I now realize that I should not have used the phrase "A Woman's
Right of Consent" -- because it contains the word "right." That is an
unfortunate mistake in my word selection.
When God breathed the breath of Life into the first human, did He give us
the "Right" to breathe?
See, using the word "right" in inaccurate, it clouds our thoughts, it
results in confusion because we only think of that term "rights" by the
modern definition...
No. We don't have the "right" (by that modern definition) to breathe."
Human beings are given certain "duties, responsibilities and privileges"
as a matter of our basic human nature. Having two feet is not a "right."
Having two eyes and two ears is not a "right." Using our feet to walk, our
ears to hear and our eyes to see is not a "right" -- but it is a natural
consequence of life.
Our having a "mind" and being able to "reason" is not a "right." Our
ability to use our mind, to reason, to make choices is not a right, IS a
God-given, God-intended consequence of His gift of Life.
It would be more accurate to say we have the "Duty" to breath.
So is the ability to reason, make choices and give or withhold consent.
I want to be clear when I say what I have to say is that I haven't
followed every posts between you, Randy & Dave FOR SURE! There's been
100s!!!
I haven't read them all myself (of course I read mine -- but i tried to
ignore a few of Randy and Dave's. ;-)
What I want to say is that any doctrine, whatever it's source, that says
that a woman (or a man for that sake but let's be honest, how often is
THAT going to happen? lol) doesn't have the "right of consent" is just
plain wrong. Ownership of a spouse's body is just plain WRONG! This
isn't about whether the partner in the marriage tries to force what
he/she thinks is their right. There is NO RIGHT in the first place.
As I mentioned in another thread, the idea and concept of "rights" are
modern (since maybe 1200) and not "God-given." (Descendant, perhaps, from
the idea of "divine "right" of Kings.)
What some now attempt to claim as "rights" are a distortion of, or a
conversion of what are actually "privileges, responsibilities and duties,"
and the authority to execute, or power to accomplish, those.
All of man's duties, responsibilities and privileges are in fact in
relationship to God -- while the modern concept of "rights" make man a
little tin god.
Paul was NOT GOD! And, even though Paul claimed that God spoke to him in
a special way, in THIS CASE, Paul says the statement is OF IS OWN
OPINION! Yet, the craziest of the Fundie take even a couple of times
Paul declares that he is speaking on his own behalf as the "word of God!"
I'd like to comment that just because something in found in the Bible does
NOT make it "God's Word."
This, of course, will cause some people to howl at the moon in anger,
confusion, and sheer panic!
But allow me to prove that point before dipping me in tar!
Moses, in recording the story of Creation, recorded the serpents words:
"You shall not surely die..." Gen 3:4.
YET THESE WORDS ARE IN THE BIBLE!
Are we to claim, now, that the words "You shall not surely die" ARE GOD
BREATHED! No, a thousand times "No!"
What about Pharaoh?
How many times did Pharaoh say, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his
voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel
go."
What shall we conclude? Are these God's words" Did God Breathe the words
spoken by Pharaoh? No, a thousand times "No!"
What about the wise men?
They said: "for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship
him." Mat 2:2
But it was a lie...there was NO star! Astrologers are liars. These liars
were sent by Satan to discover the resting place of the Child so he could
attempt to murder Him -- as he attempted to murder Moses at his birth.
Were the lying words of the astrologers "God breathed"? No, a thousand
times "No!"
So there ARE words and statements in the Bible which are NOT the Word of
God, but are faithfully and accurately (truthfully) recorded for our use
and benefit.
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT writing
his opinion as if it was God breathed...
But, Randy and Dave (among other men) can not allow the distinction to be
recognized because they have based lies on words and "commands" which are
not God-given... and to allow the truth to be know would destroy their
false doctrine.
Don't forget that. Even to those who believe that Paul was God's direct
mouthpiece, MUST remember that Paul said that his statemetn of "due
benevolence" was HIS OWN OPINION! Randy and Dave conveniently forgot
this although I KNOW Diana and I said it several times and perhaps others
also.
What Dave & Randy (what am I NOT surprised) don't realize is the day in
which Paul spoke these words. Women are loved or unloved property. How
a man FELT about his wife is really not the issue. It's obvious that
many men have loved their wives. It's that, LEGALLY, women were the
wards of some man, be it father, brother or husband and even SONS until
her death (there are stories of rare exceptions and no explanation as to
why the exception.) The issue of women's rights is a deal because it's
been denied for almost all of human history by almost ALL SOCIETIES,
whether they were the most brutal of the brutes or "religious." NOW,
what does THAT tell you? That the desire for domination doesn't mean
it's from God! DUH
There IS not issue of men's rights. Oh, you get a few whinners who have
started the "men's movement" but most people laugh at the notion that
American men are a discrminated group of people! lol
No, i think it is an issue of some men misusing Paul's words to pervert
the God-given consensual, loving, relationship into a Command and Demand
relationship with the wife having no right to say "no," and therefore
unable to give or withhold Consent -- a rape relationship which the man
controls and dominates.
That actually turns marriage into an excuse and tool for the gratification
of the lust of the flesh. This misinterpretation of Paul's words turns
Christian marriage into something worse than the "chattel and ward"
relationship of the dark ages.
OWD,
I wasn't at all going in the direction you went.
I wasn't out to debate the meaning of "rights." In fact, I wasn't after
disagreeing with you at all. In fact, I thought the whole of my post was in
agreement with you stand on this issue, so I'm confused.
Anyway, I can agree to disagree with you as far as the distinction between
ancient times and modern times in relationship to the word "rights." From
everything I understand and have read, the people of ancient times knew what
the word "rights" meant. Obviously, personal rights were rarely given to
people as we understand them today in a democracy.
Anyway, "rights" wasn't my point.
I really had two basic points:
1. No matter the source, the concept or belief or whatever you want to call
it of ownership of another's body, be it as slavery or of a spouse to their
partner's body is immoral. The very idea of ownership of any or all of a
part of antoher human being is immoral. The golden rule dictates that.
2. Even to those who believe that everything that Paul spoke was from God,
and Paul distinctly claimed that God spoke to him and that he many
"spiritual" experiences, Paul, in THIS CASE declared that "due benevolence"
was his opinion and not a commandment of God.
Take care.
.
|
|
|
| User: "oldwetdog" |
|
| Title: Re: The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
27 Oct 2006 03:56:33 PM |
|
|
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com...
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k335sce0aq2ea@corp.supernews.com...
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A Woman's
Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in the
Beginning.
Jude, I know you and I do not agree on everything -- so I will make a few
comments here on what I think we do agree about, and leave the nit-picking
details of disagreement for another time ;-)
First, I now realize that I should not have used the phrase "A Woman's
Right of Consent" -- because it contains the word "right." That is an
unfortunate mistake in my word selection.
When God breathed the breath of Life into the first human, did He give us
the "Right" to breathe?
See, using the word "right" in inaccurate, it clouds our thoughts, it
results in confusion because we only think of that term "rights" by the
modern definition...
No. We don't have the "right" (by that modern definition) to breathe."
Human beings are given certain "duties, responsibilities and privileges"
as a matter of our basic human nature. Having two feet is not a "right."
Having two eyes and two ears is not a "right." Using our feet to walk, our
ears to hear and our eyes to see is not a "right" -- but it is a natural
consequence of life.
Our having a "mind" and being able to "reason" is not a "right." Our
ability to use our mind, to reason, to make choices is not a right, IS a
God-given, God-intended consequence of His gift of Life.
It would be more accurate to say we have the "Duty" to breath.
So is the ability to reason, make choices and give or withhold consent.
I want to be clear when I say what I have to say is that I haven't
followed every posts between you, Randy & Dave FOR SURE! There's been
100s!!!
I haven't read them all myself (of course I read mine -- but i tried to
ignore a few of Randy and Dave's. ;-)
What I want to say is that any doctrine, whatever it's source, that says
that a woman (or a man for that sake but let's be honest, how often is
THAT going to happen? lol) doesn't have the "right of consent" is just
plain wrong. Ownership of a spouse's body is just plain WRONG! This
isn't about whether the partner in the marriage tries to force what
he/she thinks is their right. There is NO RIGHT in the first place.
As I mentioned in another thread, the idea and concept of "rights" are
modern (since maybe 1200) and not "God-given." (Descendant, perhaps, from
the idea of "divine "right" of Kings.)
What some now attempt to claim as "rights" are a distortion of, or a
conversion of what are actually "privileges, responsibilities and duties,"
and the authority to execute, or power to accomplish, those.
All of man's duties, responsibilities and privileges are in fact in
relationship to God -- while the modern concept of "rights" make man a
little tin god.
Paul was NOT GOD! And, even though Paul claimed that God spoke to him in
a special way, in THIS CASE, Paul says the statement is OF IS OWN
OPINION! Yet, the craziest of the Fundie take even a couple of times
Paul declares that he is speaking on his own behalf as the "word of God!"
I'd like to comment that just because something in found in the Bible does
NOT make it "God's Word."
This, of course, will cause some people to howl at the moon in anger,
confusion, and sheer panic!
But allow me to prove that point before dipping me in tar!
Moses, in recording the story of Creation, recorded the serpents words:
"You shall not surely die..." Gen 3:4.
YET THESE WORDS ARE IN THE BIBLE!
Are we to claim, now, that the words "You shall not surely die" ARE GOD
BREATHED! No, a thousand times "No!"
What about Pharaoh?
How many times did Pharaoh say, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his
voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel
go."
What shall we conclude? Are these God's words" Did God Breathe the words
spoken by Pharaoh? No, a thousand times "No!"
What about the wise men?
They said: "for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship
him." Mat 2:2
But it was a lie...there was NO star! Astrologers are liars. These liars
were sent by Satan to discover the resting place of the Child so he could
attempt to murder Him -- as he attempted to murder Moses at his birth.
Were the lying words of the astrologers "God breathed"? No, a thousand
times "No!"
So there ARE words and statements in the Bible which are NOT the Word of
God, but are faithfully and accurately (truthfully) recorded for our use
and benefit.
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT writing
his opinion as if it was God breathed...
But, Randy and Dave (among other men) can not allow the distinction to be
recognized because they have based lies on words and "commands" which are
not God-given... and to allow the truth to be know would destroy their
false doctrine.
Don't forget that. Even to those who believe that Paul was God's direct
mouthpiece, MUST remember that Paul said that his statemetn of "due
benevolence" was HIS OWN OPINION! Randy and Dave conveniently forgot
this although I KNOW Diana and I said it several times and perhaps others
also.
What Dave & Randy (what am I NOT surprised) don't realize is the day in
which Paul spoke these words. Women are loved or unloved property. How
a man FELT about his wife is really not the issue. It's obvious that
many men have loved their wives. It's that, LEGALLY, women were the
wards of some man, be it father, brother or husband and even SONS until
her death (there are stories of rare exceptions and no explanation as to
why the exception.) The issue of women's rights is a deal because it's
been denied for almost all of human history by almost ALL SOCIETIES,
whether they were the most brutal of the brutes or "religious." NOW,
what does THAT tell you? That the desire for domination doesn't mean
it's from God! DUH
There IS not issue of men's rights. Oh, you get a few whinners who have
started the "men's movement" but most people laugh at the notion that
American men are a discrminated group of people! lol
No, i think it is an issue of some men misusing Paul's words to pervert
the God-given consensual, loving, relationship into a Command and Demand
relationship with the wife having no right to say "no," and therefore
unable to give or withhold Consent -- a rape relationship which the man
controls and dominates.
That actually turns marriage into an excuse and tool for the gratification
of the lust of the flesh. This misinterpretation of Paul's words turns
Christian marriage into something worse than the "chattel and ward"
relationship of the dark ages.
OWD,
I wasn't at all going in the direction you went.
I wasn't out to debate the meaning of "rights." In fact, I wasn't after
disagreeing with you at all.
me either.
In fact, I thought the whole of my post was in
agreement with you stand on this issue, so I'm confused.
no need for confusion...
I wasn't disagreeing -- just making comments because I thought there
is/was a problem was _MY_ use of the word "right" (not yours....)
Anyway, I can agree to disagree with you as far as the distinction between
ancient times and modern times in relationship to the word "rights." From
everything I understand and have read, the people of ancient times knew what
the word "rights" meant. Obviously, personal rights were rarely given to
people as we understand them today in a democracy.
Anyway, "rights" wasn't my point.
I really had two basic points:
1. No matter the source, the concept or belief or whatever you want to call
it of ownership of another's body, be it as slavery or of a spouse to their
partner's body is immoral. The very idea of ownership of any or all of a
part of another human being is immoral. The golden rule dictates that.
Agreed that _today_ the ownership of another person is immoral and (in a
majority of the world) illegal.... (slavery, under certain conditions,
was permitted in the OT)
....and more importantly, a man never "owned" a wife like he owned a slave.
2. Even to those who believe that everything that Paul spoke was from God,
and Paul distinctly claimed that God spoke to him and that he many
"spiritual" experiences, Paul, in THIS CASE declared that "due benevolence"
was his opinion and not a commandment of God.
agreed...
Take care.
and you
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jude A.B.C. Cajun@middle of the swamp.com" |
|
| Title: Re: The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
27 Oct 2006 04:43:56 PM |
|
|
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4sk540po49cf@corp.supernews.com...
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com...
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k335sce0aq2ea@corp.supernews.com...
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A
Woman's Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in
the Beginning.
Jude, I know you and I do not agree on everything -- so I will make a
few comments here on what I think we do agree about, and leave the
nit-picking details of disagreement for another time ;-)
First, I now realize that I should not have used the phrase "A Woman's
Right of Consent" -- because it contains the word "right." That is an
unfortunate mistake in my word selection.
When God breathed the breath of Life into the first human, did He give
us the "Right" to breathe?
See, using the word "right" in inaccurate, it clouds our thoughts, it
results in confusion because we only think of that term "rights" by the
modern definition...
No. We don't have the "right" (by that modern definition) to breathe."
Human beings are given certain "duties, responsibilities and privileges"
as a matter of our basic human nature. Having two feet is not a "right."
Having two eyes and two ears is not a "right." Using our feet to walk,
our ears to hear and our eyes to see is not a "right" -- but it is a
natural consequence of life.
Our having a "mind" and being able to "reason" is not a "right." Our
ability to use our mind, to reason, to make choices is not a right, IS a
God-given, God-intended consequence of His gift of Life.
It would be more accurate to say we have the "Duty" to breath.
So is the ability to reason, make choices and give or withhold consent.
I want to be clear when I say what I have to say is that I haven't
followed every posts between you, Randy & Dave FOR SURE! There's been
100s!!!
I haven't read them all myself (of course I read mine -- but i tried to
ignore a few of Randy and Dave's. ;-)
What I want to say is that any doctrine, whatever it's source, that
says that a woman (or a man for that sake but let's be honest, how
often is THAT going to happen? lol) doesn't have the "right of
consent" is just plain wrong. Ownership of a spouse's body is just
plain WRONG! This isn't about whether the partner in the marriage
tries to force what he/she thinks is their right. There is NO RIGHT in
the first place.
As I mentioned in another thread, the idea and concept of "rights" are
modern (since maybe 1200) and not "God-given." (Descendant, perhaps,
from the idea of "divine "right" of Kings.)
What some now attempt to claim as "rights" are a distortion of, or a
conversion of what are actually "privileges, responsibilities and
duties," and the authority to execute, or power to accomplish, those.
All of man's duties, responsibilities and privileges are in fact in
relationship to God -- while the modern concept of "rights" make man a
little tin god.
Paul was NOT GOD! And, even though Paul claimed that God spoke to him
in a special way, in THIS CASE, Paul says the statement is OF IS OWN
OPINION! Yet, the craziest of the Fundie take even a couple of times
Paul declares that he is speaking on his own behalf as the "word of
God!"
I'd like to comment that just because something in found in the Bible
does NOT make it "God's Word."
This, of course, will cause some people to howl at the moon in anger,
confusion, and sheer panic!
But allow me to prove that point before dipping me in tar!
Moses, in recording the story of Creation, recorded the serpents words:
"You shall not surely die..." Gen 3:4.
YET THESE WORDS ARE IN THE BIBLE!
Are we to claim, now, that the words "You shall not surely die" ARE GOD
BREATHED! No, a thousand times "No!"
What about Pharaoh?
How many times did Pharaoh say, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his
voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel
go."
What shall we conclude? Are these God's words" Did God Breathe the words
spoken by Pharaoh? No, a thousand times "No!"
What about the wise men?
They said: "for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to
worship him." Mat 2:2
But it was a lie...there was NO star! Astrologers are liars. These liars
were sent by Satan to discover the resting place of the Child so he
could attempt to murder Him -- as he attempted to murder Moses at his
birth.
Were the lying words of the astrologers "God breathed"? No, a thousand
times "No!"
So there ARE words and statements in the Bible which are NOT the Word of
God, but are faithfully and accurately (truthfully) recorded for our use
and benefit.
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
But, Randy and Dave (among other men) can not allow the distinction to
be recognized because they have based lies on words and "commands" which
are not God-given... and to allow the truth to be know would destroy
their false doctrine.
Don't forget that. Even to those who believe that Paul was God's
direct mouthpiece, MUST remember that Paul said that his statemetn of
"due benevolence" was HIS OWN OPINION! Randy and Dave conveniently
forgot this although I KNOW Diana and I said it several times and
perhaps others also.
What Dave & Randy (what am I NOT surprised) don't realize is the day in
which Paul spoke these words. Women are loved or unloved property.
How a man FELT about his wife is really not the issue. It's obvious
that many men have loved their wives. It's that, LEGALLY, women were
the wards of some man, be it father, brother or husband and even SONS
until her death (there are stories of rare exceptions and no
explanation as to why the exception.) The issue of women's rights is a
deal because it's been denied for almost all of human history by almost
ALL SOCIETIES, whether they were the most brutal of the brutes or
"religious." NOW, what does THAT tell you? That the desire for
domination doesn't mean it's from God! DUH
There IS not issue of men's rights. Oh, you get a few whinners who have
started the "men's movement" but most people laugh at the notion that
American men are a discrminated group of people! lol
No, i think it is an issue of some men misusing Paul's words to pervert
the God-given consensual, loving, relationship into a Command and Demand
relationship with the wife having no right to say "no," and therefore
unable to give or withhold Consent -- a rape relationship which the man
controls and dominates.
That actually turns marriage into an excuse and tool for the
gratification of the lust of the flesh. This misinterpretation of Paul's
words turns Christian marriage into something worse than the "chattel
and ward" relationship of the dark ages.
OWD,
I wasn't at all going in the direction you went.
I wasn't out to debate the meaning of "rights." In fact, I wasn't after
disagreeing with you at all.
me either.
In fact, I thought the whole of my post was in agreement with you stand
on this issue, so I'm confused.
no need for confusion...
I wasn't disagreeing -- just making comments because I thought there
is/was a problem was _MY_ use of the word "right" (not yours....)
Anyway, I can agree to disagree with you as far as the distinction
between ancient times and modern times in relationship to the word
"rights." From everything I understand and have read, the people of
ancient times knew what the word "rights" meant. Obviously, personal
rights were rarely given to people as we understand them today in a
democracy.
Anyway, "rights" wasn't my point.
I really had two basic points:
1. No matter the source, the concept or belief or whatever you want to
call it of ownership of another's body, be it as slavery or of a spouse
to their partner's body is immoral. The very idea of ownership of any or
all of a part of another human being is immoral. The golden rule
dictates that.
Agreed that _today_ the ownership of another person is immoral and (in a
majority of the world) illegal.... (slavery, under certain conditions,
was permitted in the OT)
Well, where I stand about that is that it shouldn't have been permitted. Do
you mean permitted by God? All I can when I come across stuff like that in
the bible is chuck it up to men projecting their own wishes to God. I don't
believe for a second that Creator God gave the Jews statutes in which to
enslave others.
...and more importantly, a man never "owned" a wife like he owned a slave.
Yeah, there's a distinct difference and then there are parallels and then
there are differences that will never merge.
It's the parallels that are worrisome and what's even more worrisome than
that is that 20th century men STILL want to follow that way of living and
misinterpreting God and projecting their own wishes onto God.
2. Even to those who believe that everything that Paul spoke was from
God, and Paul distinctly claimed that God spoke to him and that he many
"spiritual" experiences, Paul, in THIS CASE declared that "due
benevolence" was his opinion and not a commandment of God.
agreed...
But, it's it' crazy making when those particular kinds of Fundies IGNORE
even the 2/3 (not sure) times in which Paul said he was speaking his own
mind and not claiming what he said was coming from God?
Take care.
and you
.
|
|
|
| User: "oldwetdog" |
|
| Title: Re: The DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE |
27 Oct 2006 04:56:07 PM |
|
|
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4sk540po49cf@corp.supernews.com...
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com...
Jude A.B.C. wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k335sce0aq2ea@corp.supernews.com...
THE DOCTRINE OF SPOUSAL RAPE
In a few words, the "Doctrine of Spousal Rape" is a denial of A
Woman's Right of Consent and A Woman's Human Nature as given by God in
the Beginning.
Jude, I know you and I do not agree on everything -- so I will make a
few comments here on what I think we do agree about, and leave the
nit-picking details of disagreement for another time ;-)
First, I now realize that I should not have used the phrase "A Woman's
Right of Consent" -- because it contains the word "right." That is an
unfortunate mistake in my word selection.
When God breathed the breath of Life into the first human, did He give
us the "Right" to breathe?
See, using the word "right" in inaccurate, it clouds our thoughts, it
results in confusion because we only think of that term "rights" by the
modern definition...
No. We don't have the "right" (by that modern definition) to breathe."
Human beings are given certain "duties, responsibilities and privileges"
as a matter of our basic human nature. Having two feet is not a "right."
Having two eyes and two ears is not a "right." Using our feet to walk,
our ears to hear and our eyes to see is not a "right" -- but it is a
natural consequence of life.
Our having a "mind" and being able to "reason" is not a "right." Our
ability to use our mind, to reason, to make choices is not a right, IS a
God-given, God-intended consequence of His gift of Life.
It would be more accurate to say we have the "Duty" to breath.
So is the ability to reason, make choices and give or withhold consent.
I want to be clear when I say what I have to say is that I haven't
followed every posts between you, Randy & Dave FOR SURE! There's been
100s!!!
I haven't read them all myself (of course I read mine -- but i tried to
ignore a few of Randy and Dave's. ;-)
What I want to say is that any doctrine, whatever it's source, that
says that a woman (or a man for that sake but let's be honest, how
often is THAT going to happen? lol) doesn't have the "right of
consent" is just plain wrong. Ownership of a spouse's body is just
plain WRONG! This isn't about whether the partner in the marriage
tries to force what he/she thinks is their right. There is NO RIGHT in
the first place.
As I mentioned in another thread, the idea and concept of "rights" are
modern (since maybe 1200) and not "God-given." (Descendant, perhaps,
from the idea of "divine "right" of Kings.)
What some now attempt to claim as "rights" are a distortion of, or a
conversion of what are actually "privileges, responsibilities and
duties," and the authority to execute, or power to accomplish, those.
All of man's duties, responsibilities and privileges are in fact in
relationship to God -- while the modern concept of "rights" make man a
little tin god.
Paul was NOT GOD! And, even though Paul claimed that God spoke to him
in a special way, in THIS CASE, Paul says the statement is OF IS OWN
OPINION! Yet, the craziest of the Fundie take even a couple of times
Paul declares that he is speaking on his own behalf as the "word of
God!"
I'd like to comment that just because something in found in the Bible
does NOT make it "God's Word."
This, of course, will cause some people to howl at the moon in anger,
confusion, and sheer panic!
But allow me to prove that point before dipping me in tar!
Moses, in recording the story of Creation, recorded the serpents words:
"You shall not surely die..." Gen 3:4.
YET THESE WORDS ARE IN THE BIBLE!
Are we to claim, now, that the words "You shall not surely die" ARE GOD
BREATHED! No, a thousand times "No!"
What about Pharaoh?
How many times did Pharaoh say, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his
voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel
go."
What shall we conclude? Are these God's words" Did God Breathe the words
spoken by Pharaoh? No, a thousand times "No!"
What about the wise men?
They said: "for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to
worship him." Mat 2:2
But it was a lie...there was NO star! Astrologers are liars. These liars
were sent by Satan to discover the resting place of the Child so he
could attempt to murder Him -- as he attempted to murder Moses at his
birth.
Were the lying words of the astrologers "God breathed"? No, a thousand
times "No!"
So there ARE words and statements in the Bible which are NOT the Word of
God, but are faithfully and accurately (truthfully) recorded for our use
and benefit.
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
But, Randy and Dave (among other men) can not allow the distinction to
be recognized because they have based lies on words and "commands" which
are not God-given... and to allow the truth to be know would destroy
their false doctrine.
Don't forget that. Even to those who believe that Paul was God's
direct mouthpiece, MUST remember that Paul said that his statemetn of
"due benevolence" was HIS OWN OPINION! Randy and Dave conveniently
forgot this although I KNOW Diana and I said it several times and
perhaps others also.
What Dave & Randy (what am I NOT surprised) don't realize is the day in
which Paul spoke these words. Women are loved or unloved property.
How a man FELT about his wife is really not the issue. It's obvious
that many men have loved their wives. It's that, LEGALLY, women were
the wards of some man, be it father, brother or husband and even SONS
until her death (there are stories of rare exceptions and no
explanation as to why the exception.) The issue of women's rights is a
deal because it's been denied for almost all of human history by almost
ALL SOCIETIES, whether they were the most brutal of the brutes or
"religious." NOW, what does THAT tell you? That the desire for
domination doesn't mean it's from God! DUH
There IS not issue of men's rights. Oh, you get a few whinners who have
started the "men's movement" but most people laugh at the notion that
American men are a discrminated group of people! lol
No, i think it is an issue of some men misusing Paul's words to pervert
the God-given consensual, loving, relationship into a Command and Demand
relationship with the wife having no right to say "no," and therefore
unable to give or withhold Consent -- a rape relationship which the man
controls and dominates.
That actually turns marriage into an excuse and tool for the
gratification of the lust of the flesh. This misinterpretation of Paul's
words turns Christian marriage into something worse than the "chattel
and ward" relationship of the dark ages.
OWD,
I wasn't at all going in the direction you went.
I wasn't out to debate the meaning of "rights." In fact, I wasn't after
disagreeing with you at all.
me either.
In fact, I thought the whole of my post was in agreement with you stand
on this issue, so I'm confused.
no need for confusion...
I wasn't disagreeing -- just making comments because I thought there
is/was a problem was _MY_ use of the word "right" (not yours....)
Anyway, I can agree to disagree with you as far as the distinction
between ancient times and modern times in relationship to the word
"rights." From everything I understand and have read, the people of
ancient times knew what the word "rights" meant. Obviously, personal
rights were rarely given to people as we understand them today in a
democracy.
Anyway, "rights" wasn't my point.
I really had two basic points:
1. No matter the source, the concept or belief or whatever you want to
call it of ownership of another's body, be it as slavery or of a spouse
to their partner's body is immoral. The very idea of ownership of any or
all of a part of another human being is immoral. The golden rule
dictates that.
Agreed that _today_ the ownership of another person is immoral and (in a
majority of the world) illegal.... (slavery, under certain conditions,
was permitted in the OT)
Well, where I stand about that is that it shouldn't have been permitted. Do
you mean permitted by God? All I can when I come across stuff like that in
the bible is chuck it up to men projecting their own wishes to God. I don't
believe for a second that Creator God gave the Jews statutes in which to
enslave others.
...and more importantly, a man never "owned" a wife like he owned a slave.
Yeah, there's a distinct difference and then there are parallels and then
there are differences that will never merge.
It's the parallels that are worrisome and what's even more worrisome than
that is that 20th century men STILL want to follow that way of living and
misinterpreting God and projecting their own wishes onto God.
Yes, and if it is not (perverted) men, then it is Satan.
2. Even to those who believe that everything that Paul spoke was from
God, and Paul distinctly claimed that God spoke to him and that he many
"spiritual" experiences, Paul, in THIS CASE declared that "due
benevolence" was his opinion and not a commandment of God.
agreed...
But, it's it' crazy making when those particular kinds of Fundies IGNORE
even the 2/3 (not sure) times in which Paul said he was speaking his own
mind and not claiming what he said was coming from God?
they misinterpret it so they can gratify the lusts of their mind and
flesh -- "crazy making?" ---- oh yea n' u betcha!
Take care.
and you
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: "All" Scripture is God Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), and Paul's writings are Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16). |
27 Oct 2006 02:40:35 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16), and
Paul's writings *are* Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16). When Paul said he
was not giving a command, he was talking about getting married, and/or
abstaining from due benevolence. Getting married and abstaining from
due benevolence when you are married, is a concession, not a command.
Rendering due benevolence is in the imperative voice, and is a
command. In other places, when Paul says things like "I speak not the
Lord", he just means he is addressing subjects that the Lord didn't
address, not that what he is saying is not God breathed or the
authoritative word of God.
Regarding your statement about how the words of Satan, for example, as
recorded in Genesis, are not God breathed, you confuse being God
breathed with being God's thoughts. God breathed the record of what
factually happened, even though what was said was the words of Satan.
God breathed the truthful record about what Satan said, just the way a
news reporter can factually tell you about a murder, without being a
murderer, and that does not mean that God is the one who said what
Satan said. While you talk about others not being able to discern the
difference, it is you who don't see this distinction between factually
reporting what happens, even when it is a lie, and being the person
who thought up the lie.
Once you open the door to start deciding for yourself, what Scripture
is and is not God breathed, you place yourself above the Scripture, as
an authority, and there's no limit to what you can then claim the
Bible means.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sensi" |
|
| Title: Re: "All" Scripture is God Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), and Paul's writings are Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16). |
27 Oct 2006 03:08:07 PM |
|
|
"Randy" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5en4k2tgh18usv3675sfpfqe7obkc3d1s4@pulpitfire.org...
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed
sensi:
Care to explain God breathed? What does your picture look like in your mind?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Qadosh Stephanos" |
|
| Title: Re: "All" Scripture is God Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), and Paul's writings are Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16). |
27 Oct 2006 09:10:25 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:40:35 -0500, Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com>
wrote:
"All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16), and
Paul's writings *are* Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16).
In computer science, they call that a circular reference.
But in human terms, it is infamously known as a Catch-22.
All scripture is God breathed, except for those errors.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: "All" Scripture is God Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), and Paul's |
30 Oct 2006 10:31:11 PM |
|
|
Qadosh Stephanos wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:40:35 -0500, Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com>
wrote:
"All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16), and
Paul's writings *are* Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16).
In computer science, they call that a circular reference.
But in human terms, it is infamously known as a Catch-22.
All scripture is God breathed, except for those errors.
===>The whole argument is ridiculous.
Basically, it is just one man's opinion about some unspecified
"writings". The original word is "GRAPHE", meaning "writings".
The English word "sripture" was given a special meaning, to
refer to the Bible, but if so, thenm it is a false translation.
Given the original word, it would imply that anything and
everything ever "written", including Hitler's Mein Kampf,
your shopping list, or Grimms' Fairy Tales, are ALL
"God breathed". -- L.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: "All" Scripture is God Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), and Paul's |
28 Oct 2006 09:21:37 PM |
|
|
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16), and
Paul's writings *are* Scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16).
===>WHAT A GOOD LAUGH!
You justify ONE FAKE "epistle", written in the name of
"Paul", with ANOTHER FAKE "spistle", written in the name of "Peter"!
BOTH of those phony "letters" are from the SECOND CENTURY, when BOTH
"Paul" AND "Peter" would have been LONG DEAD!
Of course the REAL Big Lie is that all that HUMAN literature selected,
edited and compiled by HUMAN Church authorities, is
"the Wored of God". -- L.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "oldwetdog" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
27 Oct 2006 04:05:41 PM |
|
|
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered
unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt
worship me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Diana" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
27 Oct 2006 04:19:01 PM |
|
|
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com...
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700, in article
<12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto
me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship
me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
Didn't find Randy's definition of "God Breathed" but this...
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Peter 3:15-17
20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private
interpretation.
21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Seems to me Randy and Dave both are giving their own "private interpretaion"
of what the Scriptures mean.
.
|
|
|
| User: "oldwetdog" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
27 Oct 2006 04:40:56 PM |
|
|
Diana wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com...
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700, in article
<12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto
me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship
me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
Didn't find Randy's definition of "God Breathed" but this...
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Peter 3:15-17
20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private
interpretation.
21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Seems to me Randy and Dave both are giving their own "private interpretaion"
of what the Scriptures mean.
Yes.... they use /THEIR OWN/ definition to support their own false
doctrine....
......and they must turn Satan's lies (Gen 3:4, Luke 4:6-8) into
"God-breathed" because otherwise their false doctrine falls.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
27 Oct 2006 06:30:56 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:40:56 -0700,
in article <12k4v7apmafs53e@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Diana wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com...
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700, in article
<12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto
me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship
me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
Didn't find Randy's definition of "God Breathed" but this...
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Peter 3:15-17
20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private
interpretation.
21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Seems to me Randy and Dave both are giving their own "private interpretaion"
of what the Scriptures mean.
Yes.... they use /THEIR OWN/ definition to support their own false
doctrine....
.....and they must turn Satan's lies (Gen 3:4, Luke 4:6-8) into
"God-breathed" because otherwise their false doctrine falls.
Look, Owd, just because you're too lazy or arrogant to look up the
word "theopneustos" (theos = God, pneo = to breath), doesn't mean
we're obligated to be idiots. You are too much of an idiot to even
carry on a Bible discussion with.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "oldwetdog" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
27 Oct 2006 07:58:14 PM |
|
|
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:40:56 -0700,
in article <12k4v7apmafs53e@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Diana wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com...
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700, in article
<12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto
me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship
me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
Didn't find Randy's definition of "God Breathed" but this...
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Peter 3:15-17
20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private
interpretation.
21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Seems to me Randy and Dave both are giving their own "private interpretaion"
of what the Scriptures mean.
Yes.... they use /THEIR OWN/ definition to support their own false
doctrine....
.....and they must turn Satan's lies (Gen 3:4, Luke 4:6-8) into
"God-breathed" because otherwise their false doctrine falls.
Look, Owd, just because you're too lazy or arrogant
Look Randy, you are so in love with your own intelligence that your
arrogance blinds you. The proof of the condition of your soul is
revealed by your sophistry and lies, and your self righteousness is
exposed by your contempt and slander of others...
Truth is revealed by the Spirit of God, not your dictionary.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN Owd LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
27 Oct 2006 08:24:35 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:58:14 -0700,
in article <12k5ap98l7dg3e1@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:40:56 -0700,
in article <12k4v7apmafs53e@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Diana wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com...
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700, in article
<12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto
me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship
me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
Didn't find Randy's definition of "God Breathed" but this...
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Peter 3:15-17
20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private
interpretation.
21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Seems to me Randy and Dave both are giving their own "private interpretaion"
of what the Scriptures mean.
Yes.... they use /THEIR OWN/ definition to support their own false
doctrine....
.....and they must turn Satan's lies (Gen 3:4, Luke 4:6-8) into
"God-breathed" because otherwise their false doctrine falls.
Look, Owd, just because you're too lazy or arrogant
Look Randy, you are so in love with your own intelligence that your
arrogance blinds you.
You're the one, who, because you do not consult what the Greek means,
is relying on your own understanding, and is therefore arrogant.
The proof of the condition of your soul is
revealed by your sophistry and lies, and your self righteousness is
exposed by your contempt and slander of others...
You're the one, who because you don't take the time to learn what any
free Bible program will reveal, has to replace the real meaning of the
Bible with your own half baked sophistry.
Truth is revealed by the Spirit of God, not your dictionary.
And the Spirit of God reveals understanding through the words of
Scripture (1 Cor. 2:4, 13), which you can learn the meaning of through
any free Bible program. It doesn't take a genius to use a free Bible
lexicon. You're an heretical idiot for denying God breathed "all"
Scripture.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
28 Oct 2006 08:07:14 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:58:14 -0700, while bungee jumping,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> shouted thusly:
Look Randy, you are so in love with your own intelligence that your
arrogance blinds you.
This from the man who has been trying to argue
that Paul's writings equate to Satan's lies?
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: AGAIN RANDY LIES ABOUT THE WORD OF GOD! |
28 Oct 2006 08:18:05 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:58:14 -0700, while bungee jumping,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> shouted thusly:
Look Randy, you are so in love with your own intelligence that your
arrogance blinds you.
This from the man who has been trying to argue
that Paul's writings equate to Satan's lies?
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: Owd is an heretic for denying all scripture is God breathed |
27 Oct 2006 06:25:25 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:05:41 -0700,
in article <12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered
unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt
worship me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke 4:6)
God breathing an accurate and truthful account of what happened when
Satan spoke lies, does not make God the author of his lies. You are
an heretical idiot for claiming any part of Scripture is not God
breathed. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Owd is an heretic for denying all scripture is God breathed |
27 Oct 2006 07:43:05 PM |
|
|
"Randy" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7a55k21g10okt7278l31le6egav0qptjb8@pulpitfire.org...
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:05:41 -0700,
in article <12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered
unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt
worship me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke
4:6)
God breathing an accurate and truthful account of what happened when
Satan spoke lies, does not make God the author of his lies. You are
an heretical idiot for claiming any part of Scripture is not God
breathed. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).
But the issue is; that you say (according to your 'own' perverted exegesis)
Paul's (so called) new commandment (not supported anywhere else in
scripture) of un-consented sex against the spouse, is a commandment from
God, because it is God breathed, despite Paul himself saying 'I say' not the
Lord.
Your accusation is against Paul, in that he is suppose to have created a new
commandment, when all he was doing was giving his own advice.
Are you still not yet able to claim (as Paul did) that:
Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but
Christ liveth in me:
Does Christ in you, not have self control, and lust's after the flesh?
Are you still incontinent? "that the Adversary may not tempt you *because*
of your incontinence;"
1Cor 7:6 and this I say by way of concurrence--not of command,
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Diana" |
|
| Title: Re: Owd is an heretic for denying all scripture is God breathed |
27 Oct 2006 09:33:20 PM |
|
|
"Randy" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7a55k21g10okt7278l31le6egav0qptjb8@pulpitfire.org...
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:05:41 -0700,
in article <12k4t567nhg2obd@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Randy wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:12:41 -0700,
in article <12k4mheds676od5@corp.supernews.com>,
oldwetdog <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote:
Paul knew this: And Paul took great pain to be certain he was NOT
writing his opinion as if it was God breathed...
You are a liar. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Tim. 3:16),
So you are claiming that "you shall not surely die" (as spoken by Satan,
Gen 3:4) was God Breathed?
So you are saying that the words "Curse God and Die" (as spoken by Satan
out of the mouth of Job's wife, Job 2:9) are "God Breathed"?
SO YOU ARE CLAIMING that when Satan tempted Jesus, and said, "All this
power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered
unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. 7 If thou therefore wilt
worship me, all shall be thine." Satan's WORDS WERE GOD-BREATHED? (Luke
4:6)
God breathing an accurate and truthful account of what happened when
Satan spoke lies, does not make God the author of his lies. You are
an heretical idiot for claiming any part of Scripture is not God
breathed. "All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).
It does NOT say breathed
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Qadosh Stephanos" |
|
| Title: Re: Owd is an heretic for denying all scripture is God breathed |
28 Oct 2006 11:50:45 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:25:25 -0500, Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com>
wrote:
"All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16)
Yea, it does not say "breathed".
2nd Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: Owd is an heretic for denying all scripture is God breathed |
28 Oct 2006 12:54:06 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:50:45 GMT,
in article <4l27k2ls6n5ihe90f7pgmsnqs9ma98oqnc@4ax.com>,
Qadosh Stephanos <qadosh.stephanos@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:25:25 -0500, Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com>
wrote:
"All" Scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16)
Yea, it does not say "breathed".
2nd Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness:
The Greek word "theopneustos" is from "Theos" (God), and "pneo" (to
breath).
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Owd is an heretic for denying all scripture is God breathed |
28 Oct 2006 06:29:11 PM |
|
|
"Randy" <pulpitfire@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:l867k2t3curfu37ggngc2h2m2kkqa98l62@pulpitfire.org...
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:50:45 GMT,
in article <4l27k2ls6n5ihe90f7pgmsnqs9ma98oqnc@4ax.com>,
Qadosh Stephanos <qadosh.stephanos@yahoo.ca> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:25:25 -0500, Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com | | | | | | | | |
