Did God rape Mary?

[InformedIgnorance]

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

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

No rape.

I am contending that any entity capable of thinking (having intent and so forth as you have stated that this god is capable of) is capable of rape; and that rape not need be violent to still be rape (undue influence for example which would be the case ifmary believes that the being is god and that she MUST obey god).

 

[garrydons]

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

What a provocative question. This usually happens when we put God's mind to our own. Is it not possible for God to implant Mary with the Holy Spirit without touching here? Never in my entire life have I heard and read such an uncalled for statement. The all powerful Creator deserves full respect and honor.

 

[sojourner]

I am contending that any entity capable of thinking (having intent and so forth as you have stated that this god is capable of) is capable of rape; and that rape not need be violent to still be rape (undue influence for example which would be the case ifmary believes that the being is god and that she MUST obey god).

Rape is always violence, because it operates out of an objectification of the victim, who lacks sufficient physical, mental, or emotional means of protection.

 

[atropine]

What a provocative question. This usually happens when we put God's mind to our own. Is it not possible for God to implant Mary with the Holy Spirit without touching here? Never in my entire life have I heard and read such an uncalled for statement. The all powerful Creator deserves full respect and honor.

So if I impregnate a woman without her consent, as long as I don't touch her to do it, it's okay...?

Honestly, if you put a baby in someone's body without their consent, then it is a violation. Rape or not. She may have resigned to it, she may have grew to love the child, but that doesn't mean she wasn't violated. Plus really, she wasn't married at the time, yes? I can't imagine what the people around her, especially her husband, thought when she wound up pregnant... women used to get stoned to death for that sort of thing.

 

[Road Warrior]

I am contending that any entity capable of thinking (having intent and so forth as you have stated that this god is capable of) is capable of rape; and that rape not need be violent to still be rape (undue influence for example which would be the case ifmary believes that the being is god and that she MUST obey god).

An odd thing for a person who claims to not believe in God to be arguing. Just doing it for fun or stirring the pot? Can we next argue about how Superman cleans his red panties and cape? I'm sure you don't believe in Superman either. :angel2:

 

[sojourner]

So if I impregnate a woman without her consent, as long as I don't touch her to do it, it's okay...?

Honestly, if you put a baby in someone's body without their consent, then it is a violation. Rape or not. She may have resigned to it, she may have grew to love the child, but that doesn't mean she wasn't violated. Plus really, she wasn't married at the time, yes? I can't imagine what the people around her, especially her husband, thought when she wound up pregnant... women used to get stoned to death for that sort of thing.

Except that we're told that she consented to it.

 

[McBell]

So if I impregnate a woman without her consent, as long as I don't touch her to do it, it's okay...?

Honestly, if you put a baby in someone's body without their consent, then it is a violation. Rape or not. She may have resigned to it, she may have grew to love the child, but that doesn't mean she wasn't violated. Plus really, she wasn't married at the time, yes? I can't imagine what the people around her, especially her husband, thought when she wound up pregnant... women used to get stoned to death for that sort of thing.

since Mary gave consent, why bother with this blatant strawman?

 

[CasBee]

I completely agree with you. I have actually not read the entire bible but, and this might not fit here too well, one of my favorite comedians Dave Allen (youtube him if you want to) once talked about his introduction to the Catholic church and how he was confused by the fact that Mary was married to Joseph and yet had a child with God. He's told that Jesus is God's and Mary's child so he asks "So they were married?" and then the person says "No, Mary was married to Joseph". The look on his face which he copies from back when he was being told this (at age 5) is priceless and really makes one wonder.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Rape is always violence, because it operates out of an objectification of the victim, who lacks sufficient physical, mental, or emotional means of protection.

I see... so if a person "lacks sufficient physical, mental, or emotional means of protection" against the other, then it is an act of violence - well by that standard Mary would most certainly qualify as lacking such protection from 'God'. Thus meaning it was rape? Personally I do not believe that is the only possible answer so I can't say that I agree, even if it is plausible; as I have stated earlier, there are other possibilities.

An odd thing for a person who claims to not believe in God to be arguing. Just doing it for fun or stirring the pot? Can we next argue about how Superman cleans his red panties and cape? I'm sure you don't believe in Superman either. :angel2:

I am commenting on his absurd demarkations of rape; not that I believe in the being who is mentioned, but the ridiculous definition he is attempting to use for rape.

 

[kai]

I hesitate to enter into this again but its too tempting, and i have to ask.

For those who think she was in agreement, or consented , do you dismiss her being chosen to be the "vessel" to carry Christ from her own birth, ( the immaculate conception)?

its a genuine question.

 

[Prophet]

Isn't it possible that the virgin birth was simply one of the MANY magical events fictionally attributed to Jesus' life?

 

[kai]

Isn't it possible that the virgin birth was simply one of the MANY magical events fictionally attributed to Jesus' life?

Indeed it could ,and also to Mary's. but lets stay on topic, in particular the position of "consent"

 

[sojourner]

I see... so if a person "lacks sufficient physical, mental, or emotional means of protection" against the other, then it is an act of violence - well by that standard Mary would most certainly qualify as lacking such protection from 'God'. Thus meaning it was rape? Personally I do not believe that is the only possible answer so I can't say that I agree, even if it is plausible; as I have stated earlier, there are other possibilities.

Mary wasn't objectified. She was loved.
Nonetheless, what I'm getting at is that "rape" is a legal term, with specific definition. Mary, by definition, could not have been raped.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Of course.... and many rapists would say the same of their victims. No no, I wasn't raping her, I was just showing her how much I loved her.

And the definition of rape you gave is ridiculous, while the legal definition in many areas is also stupid beyond belief as it fails to account for a whole slew of actions most people would call rape (one typical example of an omission is that men cannot be raped according to many definitions of rape, an absurd position)

 

[sojourner]

Of course.... and many rapists would say the same of their victims. No no, I wasn't raping her, I was just showing her how much I loved her.

And the definition of rape you gave is ridiculous, while the legal definition in many areas is also stupid beyond belief as it fails to account for a whole slew of actions most people would call rape (one typical example of an omission is that men cannot be raped according to many definitions of rape, an absurd position)

Nonetheless, "rape" is a legal term, not a moral term. What it "is" and what you think it "ought" to be are two different things. The question was, "Did God rape Mary?" The painfully simple answer is: NO!

 

[InformedIgnorance]

However if the definition is flawed then that should be pointed out. Should the OP instead have asked 'Did God sexually abuse or exploit Mary?'

 

[CasBee]

How can you say rape is only a legal term? What would be the moral term be then? In my opinion it's definitely moral... it's like saying I am mentally or physically abused, that's speaking from the heart, abused... there's nothing legal about that either.

 

[Road Warrior]

However if the definition is flawed then that should be pointed out. Should the OP instead have asked 'Did God sexually abuse or exploit Mary?'

Certainly a less flammatory question which still begs the question of whether a sexless, ultimate creator can be held responsible for the results of its creation. I think not.

We know the Bible is full of contradictions. This isn't the fault of God, but the fault of man, the instrument writing the Bible. If the world's greatest author wrote a manuscript in one long flowing hand using a pen that skips then some of the manuscript would be unclear. Obviously God could have prevented this by writing proclamations in the sky but since this was not done, then the intent was to allow the imperfections to exist for some reason. My guess is that, like a good parent, God's children are being allowed the latitude to learn for themselves in order to better their understanding and maturity as souls.

That said, back on topic, how can a God which gave humans free will and is all merciful either go back on his word by taking away that free will? My belief is God would not do that, so either Mary consented or the story is flawed in some manner. For example, Mary may have already been impregnated by her husband but the soul of the fetus was directed by God. Not a major misunderstanding by those doing the writing at the time, but it would answer some of the questions.

 

[CasBee]

How could she have been impregnated by her husband when she was a virgin? I have a certain idea in my head of what could have happened between them that would have her remain a virgin haha but I'm not even gonna describe that here.

 

[McBell]

How could she have been impregnated by her husband when she was a virgin? I have a certain idea in my head of what could have happened between them that would have her remain a virgin haha but I'm not even gonna describe that here.

Seriously?
Perhaps it would be a really good idea for you to at least hear the story of the Virgin Mary at least once before you continue....

Just saying.