metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Nor did I ask you to comment on what I posted. This is not a DIR forum, so maybe just get over it.
Gee, do all Episcopalians in your cult act like you do?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are rapists going to Hell?
Gee, do all Episcopalians in your cult act like you do?
Grumpuss
Active Member
You commented to me directly. By responding, I was being polite. You ought to try it sometime.
I am not in a cult. Do all the insecure jerks in your inner circle respond to a challenge with petty personal attacks?
Rape is forbidden in Islam:
What Happened To The Captive Women In Awtas Incident?
Conclusion
We see from the dozen or more evidences, the hadith in regards to the incident on Awtas, their capture was as a result of them helping and aiding their people in warfare against the Muslims. The Hadith does not, nor was it understood historically by scholars of Islam to permit rape. Furthermore, Prophet Muhammed, prohibited slapping a captive, it is as mentioned, inconceivable for the Prophet (p) to have allowed much bigger, heinous crime of rape.
Similarly, the early scholars of Islam commenting on the Hadith and sexual relations, clearly prohibited any physical contact with the polytheistic women. This again, shows the true context in regards to the Hadith on Awtas, that relations between them only occurred if she voluntarily, freely converted to Islam. [23] Otherwise it was prohibited.
Lastly, reading from earlier reports on the Awtas incident, all the women were set free and handed back to their families. So for those to claim that the Prophet (p) allowed intimacy front of their husbands, or forceful sexual intimacy, this has no historical truth to the incident in Awtas. As shown, the evidences refute this malicious lie. Islam treated criminals, war captives with respect, dignity, kindness and goodness.
Rajinder Nijjhar
New Member
As enlightened and compassionate as modern society has become towards gender equality, women continue in many ways to be second class citizens, if not outright slaves. Women in some countries and cultures obviously have it better than others. The extent to which family and obligation play into the formula often include the presence of a religion. Segregation, arranged marriages and even underage coupling are all widespread practices, even today, depending on which parts of the world you're referring to, and through which cultural lens. The crimes may seem quite serious to a more objective, 3rd party observer, but it is entirely possible, even likely that many of the people perpetrating them maintain a personal belief in God. They may even be devout members of an established religion, which may or may not provide internal guidance on how a woman's sexual rights are respected.
How one conducts himself/herself in life would therefore follow some kind of path to salvation, whether it be an Abrahamic God, Hindu pantheon, Buddhist spirit, etc. It would follow for those believers who are not living gods, that the rules were designed by others and we can not rewrite them to suit our own subject experience of judgment of ourselves. Being respectful to the part of society that is more than 50% of the population and not violating them, as we are told the god(s) of our faith want can and will clash against what many consider to be being a good acolyte. While we hope and expect we have kind and merciless deities to at least partially absolve us when mental derangement is a mitigating factor, what is the effect upon our immortal souls and/or spiritual afterlife when we force women to have sex against their will?
Yeah, maybe she was beaten and gang-raped. But... religion says it's her fault for going out unescorted after dark?
Please know that what one religion may consider foul and sin-worthy can be quite different than what another may consider tolerable. I am not looking for any rants explaining why one religion's worldview is superior to all others, or how defensible you consider it to rape someone, based on the woman's place in society, her permissiveness or previous conduct. It's always complicated, but the presence of a crying victim kind of speaks for itself, no matter how the rapist rationalizes it to himself. Myself, I believe this is a question left up to God to judge who shall be rewarded with bliss and who is damned. To pass judgment on others for what happens in the afterlife, is to speak for God, and is a sin. But we can of course keep asking questions and try to live well, free from chaos.
Is it a sin to rape a woman in all situations, and to procreate, even when it involves doing so against a woman's will? Arranged marriages and expected obligations of women are still very much common practice. And to what extent are the machinations of demons (if you believe in their influence) to be blamed or mitigated against?
Rajinder Nijjhar
New Member
Hi Brethren,
If you know that in our supernatural Father, we are all his sons and no daughters?
My answer to Rapists going to hell, etc. is Luke 16v16 that Law and Prophets were till John, the Baptist. Then, who was Jesus? A Prophet or not. If there is no law after John, the Baptist, then there is no sin too but blasphemy or hypocrisy. So, there is no heaven and hell up in the sky but over here on land. Those who go against the Gospel suffer Hell as you can see in Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc. Ask those people where Hell is?
Heaven is among the tribal people of Africa and Brazil that have the tribal marks for identification of the plants planted by Yahweh.
If you know that in our supernatural Father, we are all his sons and no daughters?
My answer to Rapists going to hell, etc. is Luke 16v16 that Law and Prophets were till John, the Baptist. Then, who was Jesus? A Prophet or not. If there is no law after John, the Baptist, then there is no sin too but blasphemy or hypocrisy. So, there is no heaven and hell up in the sky but over here on land. Those who go against the Gospel suffer Hell as you can see in Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc. Ask those people where Hell is?
Heaven is among the tribal people of Africa and Brazil that have the tribal marks for identification of the plants planted by Yahweh.
Grumpuss
Active Member
Amen, my brother. The overbearing control oligarchs in the rich lands know well what They do. The concealed images reveal too much, so we are force-fed drugs in our vegetables and tooth-paste to distract our attention. Know well that the ending in Everybody Loves Raymond and the moon landings and the 51st Super Bowl were tremendous frauds. Wearing the correct sunglasses between the hours of 09:00 to 19:30 or drinking original, pre-2010 formulation Four Loko is one way to expose yourself to the TRUTH!
My wristwatch once used to be keyed into the frequencies that the reptilian aliens used to disguise their movements, but They have since figured it out and are observing me through the IRS, CIA, NFL, AFLCIO and the PBA. Make quick your movements in the bathroom. Do not linger too long in the center aisles of convenience stores. Four-legged pets are not to be trusted. Megatron!
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
Since none of us have anything more than faith there is a hell, or that violations of our Will shall impact our soul, obviously everything being posted here so far is opinion.
So, what do we have in the way of retribution?
We have the here and now in the form of any Laws set up for marital rape and / or revenge of the perpetrator (think Lorraine Bobbit).
Unfortunately, we have these poorly thought out faiths that promote patriarchal dominance.
So, what do we have in the way of retribution?
We have the here and now in the form of any Laws set up for marital rape and / or revenge of the perpetrator (think Lorraine Bobbit).
Unfortunately, we have these poorly thought out faiths that promote patriarchal dominance.
anonymous9887
bible reader
If by hell you mean gehenna the 2nd death then it is possible. It all depends if the person is truly repentant from the heart. we may have our opinions on a person, but only god truly knows. A scripture to back up my pointAs enlightened and compassionate as modern society has become towards gender equality, women continue in many ways to be second class citizens, if not outright slaves. Women in some countries and cultures obviously have it better than others. The extent to which family and obligation play into the formula often include the presence of a religion. Segregation, arranged marriages and even underage coupling are all widespread practices, even today, depending on which parts of the world you're referring to, and through which cultural lens. The crimes may seem quite serious to a more objective, 3rd party observer, but it is entirely possible, even likely that many of the people perpetrating them maintain a personal belief in God. They may even be devout members of an established religion, which may or may not provide internal guidance on how a woman's sexual rights are respected.
How one conducts himself/herself in life would therefore follow some kind of path to salvation, whether it be an Abrahamic God, Hindu pantheon, Buddhist spirit, etc. It would follow for those believers who are not living gods, that the rules were designed by others and we can not rewrite them to suit our own subject experience of judgment of ourselves. Being respectful to the part of society that is more than 50% of the population and not violating them, as we are told the god(s) of our faith want can and will clash against what many consider to be being a good acolyte. While we hope and expect we have kind and merciless deities to at least partially absolve us when mental derangement is a mitigating factor, what is the effect upon our immortal souls and/or spiritual afterlife when we force women to have sex against their will?
Yeah, maybe she was beaten and gang-raped. But... religion says it's her fault for going out unescorted after dark?
Please know that what one religion may consider foul and sin-worthy can be quite different than what another may consider tolerable. I am not looking for any rants explaining why one religion's worldview is superior to all others, or how defensible you consider it to rape someone, based on the woman's place in society, her permissiveness or previous conduct. It's always complicated, but the presence of a crying victim kind of speaks for itself, no matter how the rapist rationalizes it to himself. Myself, I believe this is a question left up to God to judge who shall be rewarded with bliss and who is damned. To pass judgment on others for what happens in the afterlife, is to speak for God, and is a sin. But we can of course keep asking questions and try to live well, free from chaos.
Is it a sin to rape a woman in all situations, and to procreate, even when it involves doing so against a woman's will? Arranged marriages and expected obligations of women are still very much common practice. And to what extent are the machinations of demons (if you believe in their influence) to be blamed or mitigated against?
Mark 3:28
Ezekiel 18:23
2 Peter 3:9
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 highlights that, "thats what some of you were" So it shows that they can but if they were warned and morally knew that what they were doing was incorrect, and they are not mentally ill and still continued to do what was wrong, then they "might" not obtain forgiveness. But only god knows their particular situation, I could be wrong.
Jumi
Well-Known Member
We can certainly hope that people who do bad things to other people of their own volition would suffer some punishment. Eternal unforgiving torture without any possibility of redemption is beyond any evil I can imagine so I cannot wish it upon anyone. Such justice is in my mind flawed. I believe death is enough punishment for the worst.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I do apologize as I thought in your post #18 that you were telling me to basically shut up ["No one asked you to" I read as "No one asked you"].
When I went back and reread it this morning, I realized that it was I who messed up, so please accept my apology.
[
Ok, here it is.
1 Corinthians 7:4
Principles of Marriage
…The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife. Do not deprive one another, except by mutual consent for a limited time, so you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again, so that Satan will not tempt you through your lack of self-control.
Ok, here it is.
1 Corinthians 7:4
Principles of Marriage
…The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife. Do not deprive one another, except by mutual consent for a limited time, so you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again, so that Satan will not tempt you through your lack of self-control.
I agree. It is saddening.
Regardless of culture it is abhorrent in the 21st century.
Uhh, yeah. Belief in God doesn't automatically equate one as a "good person."
True.
Well, maybe. But words are cheap. Actions speak louder and all that.
Well.........Kind of sort of maybe. Scripture isn't written in stone, so to speak. And it's more complicated in most, if not all, belief systems than "woman must be submissive." I mean there are entire religions (and sects) that worship one or more Goddesses. Hell in some branches of Shaktism, a male must embrace their inner femininity in order to be even considered ready to worship Kali. And there are even female priests, a practice dating back centuries,
Also are you under the impression that all arranged marriages are religious? Some are purely cultural. Some are kind of a mix.
Depends on what belief of the afterlife (if at all) one possesses.
The Naraka (hell) has specific layers to it. One reserved for sexual crimes and even one for being forceful, sexually speaking.And one can easily interpret rape, including marital rape, as adharmic (sinful.) I think even the Karma Sutra says as much. A married person is obligated to fulfill their partner sexually, true. But if doing so causes harm, that is clearly against ahimsa. Which is like the literal backbone of virtues/morals/ethics in the Dharmic religions.
You're essentially trying to dilute a multitude of a wide variety of belief structures, from a completely different paradigm, through an Abrahamic lens, in order for this question to make sense. Maybe not intentionally, but still. Your question is actually quite complex. I mean "hell" isn't like some universal concept, even among sects of the same religion.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Thanks as I had completely forgotten that verse.
Grumpuss
Active Member
Thanks, but no need for an apology. I'm a big girl.
Grumpuss
Active Member
True, but that's besides the point of OP.
No. But it generally confers a sense of good and evil upon adherents. Those who consider themselves devout would typically think themselves good, wouldn't you agree?
For most, Scripture is written in stone. It's a problem with much of religion: modernizing simply means ignoring the inconvenient passages in holy documents.
No. But I was only ever concerned with the ones that are religious, as affects the argument. I sincerely doubt in all cases it would be possible for a defender of "cultural" arranged marriage to say that it isn't suborning rape, but I was interested in forced marriages in a religious context and how the parties involved consider their own conduct.
Yes.
I understand. It was an interfaith question of morality. I'm fully aware each religion has different belief structures, differing concepts of Hell and rules governing sin and salvation. That was presented in the OP, in case you missed it.
Well I would see that as arrogance. Many adherents would certainly strive towards being good (however that is defined in their religion.) Once one starts thinking they are good simply for being devout or whatever, then that is precisely when they are arguably the most grey in terms of morality. Suddenly they start justifying or excusing their abhorrent behavior. Again this might just be a paradigm thing, but adherents aren't supposed to think that by following their chosen religion/philosophy they are good just for doing so. That is giving into the ego, thereby stunting their chances of "salvation." So if one does think this, one is only shooting oneself in the foot. So to speak.
Not most, only the Abrahamics. (Unless you're being literal, so I suppose since they are the majority world wide, that's true.) But, I do agree that in order to modernize any scripture one needs to ignore certain parts. And really, the only objections to that are usually from other Abrahamics. Someone ignores scripture in say a Jain setting and other Jains usually just assume that by doing so, the adherent is simply evolving their own spirituality. So no one generally objects. Though you get Orthodox branches in everything, so that mindset is everywhere. And I view Orthodox sects (regardless of faith) as too inflexible to keep up with modern society. Not to say that I see them as wrong, or bad or anything, just a bit too "Old World."
Besides, one should not have to rely on a book to tell them that respecting a woman means not raping them. I mean that's just insanity, right?
Fair enough. I don't agree with arranged marriage. Though it has become more like arranged dating in modern times. I cannot fathom how one can justify forced marriage, though. That's just my own worldview.
I have met a few women in forced marriages. I will not presume to speak on their behalf. But in all honesty, they seemed a bit "beaten down" to me.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
You're cool in my book.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Do unto others as you would have it done unto youAs enlightened and compassionate as modern society has become towards gender equality, women continue in many ways to be second class citizens, if not outright slaves. Women in some countries and cultures obviously have it better than others. The extent to which family and obligation play into the formula often include the presence of a religion. Segregation, arranged marriages and even underage coupling are all widespread practices, even today, depending on which parts of the world you're referring to, and through which cultural lens. The crimes may seem quite serious to a more objective, 3rd party observer, but it is entirely possible, even likely that many of the people perpetrating them maintain a personal belief in God. They may even be devout members of an established religion, which may or may not provide internal guidance on how a woman's sexual rights are respected.
How one conducts himself/herself in life would therefore follow some kind of path to salvation, whether it be an Abrahamic God, Hindu pantheon, Buddhist spirit, etc. It would follow for those believers who are not living gods, that the rules were designed by others and we can not rewrite them to suit our own subject experience of judgment of ourselves. Being respectful to the part of society that is more than 50% of the population and not violating them, as we are told the god(s) of our faith want can and will clash against what many consider to be being a good acolyte. While we hope and expect we have kind and merciless deities to at least partially absolve us when mental derangement is a mitigating factor, what is the effect upon our immortal souls and/or spiritual afterlife when we force women to have sex against their will?
Yeah, maybe she was beaten and gang-raped. But... religion says it's her fault for going out unescorted after dark?
Please know that what one religion may consider foul and sin-worthy can be quite different than what another may consider tolerable. I am not looking for any rants explaining why one religion's worldview is superior to all others, or how defensible you consider it to rape someone, based on the woman's place in society, her permissiveness or previous conduct. It's always complicated, but the presence of a crying victim kind of speaks for itself, no matter how the rapist rationalizes it to himself. Myself, I believe this is a question left up to God to judge who shall be rewarded with bliss and who is damned. To pass judgment on others for what happens in the afterlife, is to speak for God, and is a sin. But we can of course keep asking questions and try to live well, free from chaos.
Is it a sin to rape a woman in all situations, and to procreate, even when it involves doing so against a woman's will? Arranged marriages and expected obligations of women are still very much common practice. And to what extent are the machinations of demons (if you believe in their influence) to be blamed or mitigated against?
so....hell could really turn out to be ....hell
and let's not overlook prison problems
Grumpuss
Active Member
A bit of both. One is told the conduct that is "good" and emulates it to the best of his/her ability. If they are devout and receiving no major feedback that they are not good, then that is usually sufficient to formulate an opinion. Once again, I'm not making a judgment call on what is good and what is bad- this is subjective in the mind of the racist religious guy.
I think you need to research Hinduism and some of the other non-Abrahamic religions then.
Perhaps this might be difficult for you to believe, but there was a time, not long ago, where men pretty much did as they pleased. Constitutions, the Magna Carta- these secular documents didn't exist. Where did morals come from then? A couple of hundred years ago we get electricity, motorized transport and the Internet, and we just throw those sources of knowledge and wisdom?
[/QUOTE]Fair enough. I don't agree with arranged marriage. Though it has become more like arranged dating in modern times. I cannot fathom how one can justify forced marriage, though. That's just my own worldview.
I have met a few women in forced marriages. I will not presume to speak on their behalf. But in all honesty, they seemed a bit "beaten down" to me.[/QUOTE]Yes. It's not like "arranged dating". There is no choice- families and communities pick the pair, often with a wide disparity of ages between the man and woman. Often, the woman is underage, and yet is expected to have sex with her husband. If a Muslim, Hindu or Mormon takes a crying 12-year-old girl to bed, does he still think he's not going to Hell?
Well, that's an interesting quandary. If the pervading culture around one does not implicitly condemn certain attitudes or actions then one can certainly think themselves as good, even if they harm others. For example, homophobic actions harm people. This has been studied and accepted by various scientific disciplines for decades. But even among people who define their morality literally by seeing what causes harm and what doesn't. If the surrounding culture condones homophobic behaviors, then even when one is supposed to strive to avoid causing harm, one can engage in homophobic behaviors and still consider themselves "being good." So then it becomes a question of culture vs religion. How much of such behavior is condoned by one's religion or Holy Book and how much of it is merely culture superseding the teachings of said religion. How much are they intertwined.
People will inevitable use some interesting interpretations in order to become more civilized (for lack of a better phrase.)
I guess it depends on how liberal one is about their religious beliefs and how much freedom they perceive themselves to have. For religions not really reliant on Scripture, this may be a little easier for them to do so. But there are many highly Liberal Churches of many religions, so.
Uhh, I was born and raised Hindu. Grew up around Hindus, Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists my entire life. (Granted, they were probably the more liberal sects to begin with, but still.) Like I will always research these things, because I am rather curious by nature. But you essentially told a Hindu they don't know much about Hinduism. Like I know Hinduism is rather.............vast, but what the hell man?
Well, yeah. We were a barbaric species for quite some time. With numerous atrocities committed by people of every religion one can think of. (Maybe with exception of Jains, they seem to hurt themselves more than others.)
But umm, aren't most religions older than the Middle Ages, anyway? I mean Hinduism is about 6,000 years, you have ancient "Pagan religions" Ancient Greek, Roman, Norse etc. Didn't they have their own moralities? I'm pretty sure Jesus is older than the Magna Carter by a long stretch.
So I don't quite understand what you're saying here.
Can't speak for a Muslim or Mormon, but unless a person is kind of a sociopath or a pedophile or really really really sexist, I can't imagine many Hindus considering taking a crying 12 year old to bed to be an action which is not "sinful." It's against the concept of Ahinsa to hurt a child, either way you look at it. And crying is sort of a universal human concept of harm taking place. So I don't know how culture could absolve them in that scenario.
(Please note, I am not saying it is the opposite is true for Muslims or Mormons. Obviously.)
Last edited: