by stuckinarut2 45 Replies latest watchtower bible
It is funny to see someone put so many negative votes on most of our comments.
I respect others right to disagree with the thread, but can they offer a better explanation of the "facts" about Mary's conception?
How is the conduct of "The Almighty" acceptable? How is it appropriate?
yep, 100% spot on. Best part is she was probably super underage if she existed!
I'm not sure it could be classed as rape. Surely rape involves physical contact?
It does highlight the second-class nature of women in bible times.
He could have at least done it after dinner and a movie -
I am Mr. Dunn, David's friend. I'm searching for a way to get his profile removed.
I'm an atheist. I'm 50 years old, holding several degrees from three universities, never grew up in a religion, especially not one such as the Jehovah's Witnesses.
But even I as an educated atheist man know that this entire thread is actually highly problematic in its arguments.
I respect others right to disagree with the thread, but can they offer a better explanation of the "facts" about Mary's conception?
Yes. There is. Even though I hold no belief in Christianity or Jesus or the New Testament myths, this story from the Gospel of Luke (the only place it occurs) is called "The Annunciation." It is all about Mary saying "yes" to God's invitation to become the mother of Jesus.
In fact, it is so much the opposite of a rape, that the "yes" Mary gives to God in this short story is theologically celebrated as a Holy Day of Obligation in the Roman Catholic Church (a day where all Catholics MUST attend Mass regardless of what day of the year this day falls on).
On this day Mary's "yes" is contrasted to Eve's "no" in following God's invitation to obedience. One woman is asked to not eat of a certain tree that leads to death and she says "no." Another woman is asked to become the mother of a child who will bring life to all humankind and this other woman says "yes." (See the following information on the theological contrast between the two women, though this article is about the Immaculate Conception.)
In my view as an atheist, it's a myth. But I'm also an EDUCATED ATHEIST. That means I know the myth, just like I know the Greek and Roman myths. To get the myths wrong would make me sound like an ignorant asshole. I'm not an ignorant asshole. I know my mythology.
Now I'm not saying any of you are ignorant assholes. This idea for this thread is likely due to being exposed to nothing but the limited world of your Jehovah's Witnesses cult. You folks wouldn't be writing this thread if you had heard of The Annunciation. It's probably printed as a day on your secular calendars too but you've never noticed it or knew what it was. That's what living in a deep, dark hole in the ground, cut off from the real world does to you. You don't even learn the mythology of the world correctly.
The Annunciation is not a story of a rape. It's a story of a woman who said "yes" to a deity when asked if she would act as that deity's handmaiden. She bravely and honorably gave her consent in contrast to Eve, and that's the point of the myth.
Now if someone can tell me how to disconnect David's account. I won't bother you again.
@David_Jay - your arguments sound very much the same style as your 'Jewish viewpoints' from before, the same application to education, the same apologist arguments.
I'm sure "being all educated" you have read the account. The account according to Luke goes as such:
Angel visits Mary and says "you WILL conceive a son, you have to call him Jesus etc" (it's not a request, it's an after-the-fact announcement). She asks "How is that possible, I'm a freakin' virgin" and then the angel says "Holy spirit will come into you" and then says "For no word from God will ever fail". Mary hasn't consented yet, but the angel already says, regardless of what your answer is, God's not going to take no. Then Mary says "I'm the Lord's servant" clearly indicating an uneven power dynamic between the parties and then she says "may it be according to your word" which is not a very enthusiastic consent, just a statement that there is nothing she can change about it now.
Now, if you were to go with that to court, they would rule "yeah, this wasn't really consensual", basically her boss' secretary came down said he's going to make you pregnant and he always gets his way, her answer is, yep, I'm his slave, let him do what he says.
David is on the high functioning end of the autism scale, as I mentioned prior a few days before. I am his brother-in-law.
There was a letter in David's box here, and he wanted me to pass a message to someone named Cofty and Simon and say thank you and close the account. As I mentioned before I read quite a few of the threads before asking David to leave, and in the process I thought I would mention the above information since I saw the question in passing and had the information.
As for me sounding like David. I know we don't, definitely not in real life. But should we sound similar in writing to you maybe it is because we went to the same university, roomed together, and he married my sister. After she passed I have been watching him.
But while we may have similarities due to education, I am quite different than him, I promise you. I know how to call out weak-minded, chicken-shits who like to think people are fucking with them by pretending to be two or three people. You're just saying that because I present a good argument. It's an easy out for you, and I don't give a shit what you've written, Anonymous or whoever you are (with a screen name like that, you shouldn't be talking).
Now. if no one wants to help, and since I can't find a way to get his account removed, forget it. Apparently Jehovah's Witnesses are just as mean, untrusting, judgmental, and abusive to my brother-in-law outside their cult as they were when they were in it.
To those who made it hard on David: Shame on you. If anyone should be acting unlike those fucking Watchtower assholes it's you guys, but apparently you only left their doctrines behind. Their hatred for other religions, their enjoyment of judging others, their intolerance and bigotry, none of that washed off. Instead, from what I can see that you did to David, to an autistic man and with no shame, you revel in and improve their techniques of meanness like a sport.
And If you, Anonymous, still think I'm David, I'm gonna say something just to you that David would never say: Screw you, you cunt, and go to hell!
Forgive me, to you others that David liked, but I was merely looking for help and to help and now I even got a little taste of what he went through. Excuse my language too. But this is one of the most horrible places disguised as a support group I've ever seen!
@ David Jay/Mr. Dunn, just quit posting. Problem solved.
Anony Mous » I'm sure "being all educated" you have read the account. The account according to Luke goes as such....
Many stories in the Bible and elsewhere leave out details. God doesn't work through force, nor will he compel man in matters of salvation. And he honors man's free agency (thus the difference between Christianity and Islam, which compels man in all things).
Like the prophets, it's safe to assume that Mary was preordained to be the Mother of the Lord. (See Jeremiah 1:5) To think she would have to be forced into this assignment is pushing the bounds. Some scholars have even speculated that the reason so many women in Mary's day were named Mary was because of a possible messianic tradition that that would be the name of the Messiah's mother.
According to traditions that are extant, the Messiah would appear when a large Gentile military force would attack and destroy much of Jerusalem, the city being saved at the last moment. In Jesus' day, Rome was regarded as being a great contender for that role. In the latter times, this battle is known as Armageddon. Any Jewish mother would have been honored to have been the mother of the Deliverer.
I would think (hope?) that most people realize rape is first and foremost a crime of violence. Rapists typically pick their victims based on perceived vulnerability and sexual attraction is a secondary consideration, when and if it is a consideration at all. Eighty-year-old women are not safe from serial rapists.
As far as the virgin birth is concerned, you either accept the story or you don't. If you don't accept it, then the whole question becomes academic. Contrariwise, if you do accept it, then you also have to accept that Mary gave birth in a state of virginity. The supernatural manipulation of the DNA in a single cell (Or whatever other natural explanation makes your heart glad...) is not and cannot by definition be rape.
I understand that JW males are sexually repressed and maturity probably does not come easy. Please don't trivialize a horrible, horrible crime though.
I don’t think anyone here was mean to David. But I will say this if you can’t take criticism or disagreement then you should not post on a public forum. David had some really good comments and people appreciated them. Tell him we wish him the best!!
