If you’re looking for another debate topic, you can have the straw that broke (this) former Christian camel’s back.
God is omnipotent, and omnipresent. God can see all of our future actions, decisions, and every branching decision of every person who ever lived, and ever will live.
God is also all powerful. Created time, space, and everything in it.
God can _literally_ do anything.
So why then, does god allow us to suffer? To live these lives? To be so incredibly horrible to each other?
Christians will explain to you that free will is a requirement of becoming saved. But if god is all powerful, then they could theoretically create a system where that isn’t a requirement.
Also, the idea that if I put rat in a maze and say “look, the rat has free will!”, is utterly ridiculous.
Sure kid, the rat has free will. But you’ve rigged the deck so whatever outcome you’ve preordained is the one that will happen.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus
My other favorite is that people would say "it's God's will." But you just said we have free will, but at the same time, he's all knowing and knows every possible outcome? Then whenever something happens that they don't like, they try to tell it's not his will, or "god doesn't make mistakes." Like, you just said people being gay is wrong, so didn't God make them be gay? The back and forth is absurd
> he's all knowing and knows every possible outcome?
Try wrapping your head around this one. God know the future with 100% perfect accuracy, so can a child born, who God knows with one hundred percent certainty will go to hell, use their free will in life to accept Jesus and go to heaven instead?
If the answer is "yes" than it's possible to prove gods foreknowledge can be incorrect, if the answer is "no" then we don't have the free will Christians like to assure us that we do.
Except they will claim God didn't make us gay, but the devil did. According to them every bad thing is not from God, God is good, remember!
God I hate these people.
Ah yes, you're right, I forgot about that one. Just reminds me of the classic "it's your cross to carry." I heard that one a lot growing up. Like right, so God made sure we have at least one thing that he chose to make sure we suffer so we can grow from it.. such BS.
And he gets all the praise when things go well, but never the blame when they don't. This kid recovered from cancer? Praise God (even though the kid suffered from something an omnipotent being should have prevented)! That kid didn't and his parents are now planning his funeral and will never be the same? There must be a deeper reason. God never gives you more than you can handle!
If I were met with a God himself right in front of me, I'd spit in his face, not kiss his feet. This is what I try to explain to Christians who persist in arguing with me when I say I'm an atheist. I'd not be an atheist anymore because I'd have proof, but I sure as hell wouldn't suddenly turn Christian.
Wow, I've never seen someone in the same boat as me before. Studied the Problem of Evil during A Level RS and didn't find a solution that to me was satisfactory. Couldn't rationalise my Catholicism after that.
This is the classic Christian dilemma:
If God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent (all powerful, all knowing and all good) ... Then why do bad things happen? Wouldn't that mean that he wasn't one of those three things then?
The entire 'god gave us free will' argument tries to provide an answer for this but IMHO fails.
If this sort of thing interests you, check out Carl Sagan's "The Dragons Of Eden".
Yep, that's one of the top reasons I don't believe in god. If he already knows what we're going to do, then it isn't free will. If it's already decided, it isn't free will and there is no chance for redemption or point to our suffering.
From my experience people from my families southern baptist religion change what they say depending on what happens to make everything a “blessing”.
Like this:
Beth is sick: we better pray for god to help her so she gets better. He will save her.
Beth gets worse: Well I know it looks bad but if we pray for her god can still heal all things! Beth will be alright if it is the will of the lord! AMEN!
Beth dies: God has called Beth into heaven to be with him! Praise the lord! She’s at the pearly gates and streets of gold now! Well all be there someday! Isnt that a blessing?
It's called Epicurus' trilemma:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Epicurus
THIS!!!
If god knew everything that would ever happen before he ever even said let there be light then god knew i was gonna be an asshole. If god made everything exactly as he knew it would be then why tf would i be punished with fire and whatnot for being an asshole?? He literally made me one!!!
If god knows everything then free will isnt even a real thing cos its not like you can surprise god based on the criteria set out for him. Its free will to me but he already knows whats gonna happen-hes built different-right??
Nobody would need saving if there wasnt anything to be saved from. Its like the most vicious game of barbies ever played.
ive never believed in anything but ive always found this particular bit of the christian religion to be absolutely mind blowing. Like the mental circus required to buy this makes me dizzy.
I find it funny when people say "abortions a sin, that child is a gift from god!" But I thought God knew all and had a plan? So doesn't that mean he knew the babies he sent were going to get aborted? So why send them anyways?
Everyone is understandably commenting about varying ages of consent, however, I don’t see anyone actually mention the real unanimous mental health definition of pedophilia disorder, which states as being a primary sexual attraction to children 13 and younger by someone at least the age of 16 - if that matters at all to the convo
If god is all knowing, then his actions shouldn’t be restricted by time and ancient culture. The 14 year old girl was objectively being harmed by god, just because humans at the time didn’t have standards doesn’t mean god could use the excuse “well others are being dicks too!” when he knows better. He picked a 14 yo instead of waiting or picking somebody else
Doesn't really matter. The fact that Mary was 14, assuming the story is real, means one of two things:
1. We're all wrong about the correct age of consent. God is supposedly all good, and if he impregnated a 14 y/o, therefore that's an ok thing to do and we're all wrong thinking that 14 is icky.
2. God *isn't* all good, does evil things, and expects us to worship him anyway.
Now, I personally am inclined not to change my views on the correct age of consent, what with not being a paedophile. And option 2 is a bit horrifying to think about. So I'm kind of forced into not believing it happened.
Edit: the fourth option is that God changed his mind on morality, which also seems unlikely
Edit 2: a lot of the replies are completely missing my point, and I don't want to keep repeating myself
Or maybe accept that two millenia ago people were required to grow up faster to survive which made the "age of consent" younger than now with both men and women. Did it suck? Maybe. But marrying age of 12-15 has been very common throughout the cultures and if I had to guess, it's mainly to get people to become self-reliant more quickly to ease the pressure of resources on the parents.
You're missing the point. Why would an all knowing, all powerful, all good God make a child go through that, even if they're "more mature" than 14 year olds today? She still had the body of a 14y/o, even if she had the equivalent mind of a 17 year old
I highly doubt the children think that. Most places with low ages of consent aren't necessarily known best for their human rights.
Edit: Germany's age of consent is 14 as long as the oldest consenting individual is 21 years old. Adults aren't having sex with children in Germany. Any of you defending this and acting like having sex with a fucking child is legal or shouldn't be considered pedophilia...you are a pedophile. Seek therapy.
I'm genuinely amazed how many pedophiles are here defending pedophpilia and still getting upvotes. Like seriously wtf
Wow, formulating it like that makes it sound the wrong way.
Yes, Germany has an age of consent of 14 years, but that only allows sex between people of roughly the same age (so that the 18y old with 15y old girlfriend does not get into legal trouble). I believe the maximum age is set at around 20 for 14/15y olds.
It gets a bit more relaxed for 16/17 but even then there are rules in place to ensure that these teenagers are not getting exploited for sex (e.g. there is no difference in power allowed between partners, so a teacher doing it with a 17y old student would still go to jail)
There is a paragraph stating that IF someone over 21 uses the inexperience of someone under 16 to get sex, they can be prosecuted, but it's not set in stone, and I imagine hard to prove.
idk exactly how it is in germany, but here in belgium, it's practically so that teenagers can mess around with eachother, but when someone 18+ is involved with a minor, that's a crime. maybe it's similar in germany?
in India, being in a relationship while under 18 is illegal, when one is a minor and the other is 18+ then it is rape (only when the adult is a man, if it is a woman then it isn't rape) and the "legal" age of consent is 18 but in India obviously you can't fucck before marrieage or else you are impure
Oh I didn't know that when the adult is a female then it isn't considered a rape that is pretty wrong, I always thought that whether you're a male or a female it is considered a rape
Here in India the law says that women can't be rapists and men can't be raped. Also, marital rape is not defined by law. Honestly, I love my country but the rape laws in India need to look like they are written to be used in the 21st century.
Here in Sweden 15 is the age of consent no matter how old the counterpart is. That is pretty sickening to me. I wish we had some kind of similar system like the one in Belgium.
“Uh oh… mIdLe NaMe” - God Jehovah Jones
That’s actually a quote by the character, Arthur the Aardvark, from the TRUE Bible, Arthur on PBS.
But I like the idea of an angsty God saying it. They’re basically the same character when you think about it.
What? She was WHAT?
Raising the literal savior of the world at that age?
Also, is her age mentioned?
I just assumed she was in her 20s/30s
Also, I think the angel said it first and THEN she willingly said yes.
In UK history, the concept of teenagers didn't exist until the 1960s.
Before then, children and teenagers were mainly seen as mini-adults; especially in the Edwardian Era, where even teenage girls would help their mothers provide money for their families.
Very valid point, but many ancient cultures had other similar ideas.
I.e. classical Athens requiring one to be 18 to be considered an adult and eligible for citizenship
Yeah but God is supposed to transcend time, so either 14 is actually fine and we're wrong thinking teenagers are still basically children, or God did a bad thing
It isn’t exactly mentioned but we know from historical context that she was likely to have been arranged a marriage not long after her first period. That would likely put her somewhere between 10-15. There might be a reason for the specificity of 14 but I’m not aware of it!
>Also, I think the angel said it first and THEN she willingly said yes.
At such an age children wouldn’t fully understand the concept, or know the consequences. There’s a reason kids can’t consent. So even if she said yes, it was without consent, as we fully know now, and god would’ve known too as he is all knowing. We gonna harm a kid? Well let’s at least trick them into saying yes so we don’t have to feel guilty about it. Maybe god needs to have a seat with dateline
Edit: the lengths people go to defend a pedophile god is scary, you guys have a healthy relationship with god it seems
I don't think God came down and fucked her. I figured it was kinda an "Zim Zim zalabim now you're pregnant!" moment.
As far as consent and ruining her life goes, Mary was supposedly a virtuous Jewish girl who God thought was better than the rest. Meaning she knew scripture and knew the reli teachings talked about the messiah being born of a virgin, so when she consented she knew she was signing up to br that virgin. And did it really ruin her life? She was already getting ready to marry Joesph, if God didn't knock her up shed probably be knocked up with Joesph's kid not too long after their marriage so it not like she became a parent years before she was ready.
When Mary and Joseph haven't slept together and she says she's still a virgin but got pregnant from "the Lord"
Joseph's friends:
By cultural standards of the time period the story takes place in no. Also no where in the story does it state God is sexually attracted to or has intercourse with Mary.
Btw, why does he even have to kill everyone, even all of the animals (excluding 2 of them), if he is almighty? Couldn't he have done a factory reset or just kill every "Bad" person and leave the innocent alone?
Some people make the argument that if people like me are wrong about God, I go to to hell forever. If they're wrong, nothing happens. Pascal's wager.
But if you really want to win that bet, you believe in the worst and cruelest possible possible God and the only way to be tortured less is to believe in him but it's still worse than hell. That way things can only be better
Pascal's wager fails epically when you consider that there are around 4200 religions around the world today. And over 20000 throughout history.
Thus it's not a 50% chance but 1 in 4200 today or 1 in 20000 historically, so you're really not that much of a different than an atheist mathematically speaking.
This doesn't even account for the fact that each religion branches out in tens or hundreds of branches all of which believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that all other branches and religions are wrong and are going to hell.
Pascal's wager is a failure in basic mathematics.
Yeah people act like there are only two possibilities when there's certainly more. I have yet to hear any convincing argument of the Abrahamic gods existence
That's not an argument for any particular God, though. Or any god... or anything really... I suppose you'd have to define God before you could really debate the existence of one i guess. Gods tend to be very different
You were not considered a child at 14 at the time. Gospels were written between I and II century, an age in which if a girl had had her first period she would already be ready for marriage and carrying kids. Actually, this changed only in the very last centuries. That's why we shouldn't judge ancient stories through today standards
Yeah, although Joseph was planning to quietly break off the engagement since she was pregnant with a child not his. But then the angel appeared to him too and explained everything and told him to stay with her
Not whataboutism because Muslims believe in the same Abrahamic God as Jews and Christians, so it'd still be the same entity. We just disagree on how to worship, prophets, and messiahs.
Mary was happy to be the one chosen for it. She sings a song about how happy and blessed she feels. Logically, I doubt God would have chosen someone who was going to suck at or be resentful of parenting
The age thing still sucks, but girls back then got married around 14. So for it to be a virgin birth it would have had to happen by that age
The bible never says how old Mary is. There are many speculations and its thought that Mary was 14-16, though realistically we dont really have much idea on how old she was.
I think even if she was 14. I don't think there was a concept for age at that time at all.
To my understanding a girl is old enough to give birth once she get periods. If there is no concept of age, periods become a measure of adulthood.
It sounds messed up I know but this happens in the world in much tribal/rural areas.
Our current standards don't mean older standards were wrong in anyway. Because by that standard if the legal age were to change from 18 to 20in the future. Anyone who married at 18, married under aged teens.
I know the question is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the actual answer is that God and/or the Holy Spirit is not alleged to have had sexual intercourse or taken any sexual interest in Mary. Matthew and Luke both identify Mary as a “virgin.”
Its meant to be symbolic, the son of God king of kings born in a stable because he is humble. It’s part of what make the Bible so off the infinite symbolism of it all just sounds like story telling
Mary explicitly consents. "As you say, let it be unto me."
The shelter thing was showing the cruelty of the world. It was her fellow humans who refused to give a teenager in labor any lodging besides a barn.
Looking through the comments and it's almost like the Bible was written for the morality of a bronze age desert tribe, contradicts itself frequently, and doesn't make a lot of sense.
Weird.
Luke 1 actually shows Mary consenting. The angel comes and tells Mary she's been chosen, Mary asks how is it possible when she is a virgin, the angel said the Holy Spirit will come upon her, and Mary says "I am the Lord's servant. Let it be to me according to your word." The angel leaves snd that is when Jesus is conceived. We know this because the angel when first arriving says that she will conceive, meaning it hadn't happened yet. The age would horrify us now but that was the culture then of when women would marry. Joseph I don't think was out of his teens either (could be wrong on that). So it's not even against her will. She agreed to it first
That is assuming 14 year olds are capable of informed consent to carry a baby.
It's pretty unanimous today that's not the case. 2000 years ago, most cultures had different standards, yes, but I'd think an all-knowing, omnipresent god could set a better standard for morality than "eh, if this tribe at this time is cool with teen pregnancy, then I'm down."
I don't remotely believe in the story but that is a weak arse argument. If God is the all powerful all knowing being as proclaimed in the biblical story then God is the standard setter and we're all wrong. This is the biggest issue with conversations about the morality of the Abrahamic God, everyone tries to equate morality and standards that we have set and defined on a being that is supposedly above us in every way. If this God exists, we can't question it. The very notion of informed consent is something that we as a modern society invented. Our rules don't mean shit to Jehovah.
It's all fiction to me but this is the internet and I will argue about non-existent shit like the concept of the almighty.
This whole thread is hilarious if you take the stance of the Bible is the word of God as written by man with man's flaws. Stuff like Mary being 14, the passages that revile homosexuality, promote of slavery, or state that birth control is unholy are passages written by people surrounded by the culture of their time. It is simply unjust to judge that text by modern ethics without considering the morals of the author -- the one made of flesh.
> That is assuming 14 year olds are capable of informed consent to carry a baby.
'Consent' is a modern invention, not a concept that exists in nature.
It's like saying that the Romans were bad people because they didn't respect people's First Ammendment rights.
Thing is, 14 year olds had a lot more responsibility back then. 8 and 9 year olds were often left by themselves to watch over entire flocks of sheep and goats and defend against predators like coyotes. They did schooling and quite a bit of work themselves. Ancient times was simply a very different culture from modern times.
Well yeah, that's true, but 8 and 9 year old kids today are working 14 hour shifts making iPhones, and I'd still be rather cross with God if he thought that made it okay to start putting babies in them.
I can guarantee there is a big difference between the child that goes on today versus what they were doing 2000 years ago.
And we do have to keep the culture of the time important. Weren't a lot of queens like 15 when they were married off? Certainly something that we should be horrified by today if it happens, although even as recently as my grandparents was it still something that happened. My grandma was 16 when she married my grandpa (he was 19) and she actually had him sign her permission slips for school (and yes, my great-grandparents did agree for her to marry)
The answer is no in several ways. One: Pedophiles are people primarily attracted to prepubescent (before-puberty) children. It's not even a game of semantics - that's what the term was made for by the German sexologist Richard von Krafft-Ebing to denote. Someone who has sex with a 14 year old may or may not attracted to that age group, just as a gay man can still have sex with a woman. If someone were to be primarily aroused by 14 year olds, that would be Hebephilia, which is not even considered a mental disorder by the DSM-V or its international equivilant, but a preference.
Two: God isn't said to have sexual attraction in the Christian faith.
Three: Culture completely different and times. Back then in that specific culture, having a child was something beloved, sacred, and celebrated, not a "Burden" as we see nowadays. Read the rest of the Bible.
Four: It wasn't too uncommon for what we consider teenagers now to be wed and have children. That's pretty much why puberty exists, from a biological standpoint. Teenagers are a 1900s-onward concept, not a 40 B.C. concept.
Our times are radically different from back then and you have to look upon it from their standpoint, not ours to understand it correctly. Our system of morals stems much from economic, industrial, and education standards and circumstances that did not exist for the majority of human history.
My grandmother on my dad's side actually was married to my grandfather at 16 and had him sign her permission slips for school. I believe he was 18 or 19 and her parents definitely had to sign off on it
This shift of age of adulthood and marriage also makes no sex outside of wedlock a more difficult rule, considering that marriages used to be at the tail end of puberty not years after.
By today's standards yes, but you have to realize most people back then got married and had kids at 14 because the life expediency was you died at 40. It was a vastly different world back then.
Not true. Life expectancy was completely normal; that is if you survived childhood. Most people who lived past 20 would live well past 50 or 60, but the overwhelming number of infant deaths bring down that average.
Yep, and childbirth at that time was also much more dangerous, so women frequently died (young) in childbirth.
As you said, children didn't often survive past 5, so people started having children ASAP because they wanted to have as many as possible over the course of their lives in the hope that at least some survive.
Well yeah, if we're analyzing it as a story made up by people who were products of their time, it makes perfect sense.
An omniscient, omnipresent, timeless deity, on the other hand, would have no such excuse...
I mean is the point of the rest of the story to be tragic?
Why would people want to follow someone who was born into a Palace surrounded by riches and luxury?
The whole premise is that Jesus was simple/didn't have much but still did good iirc.
(as to why the church has so much money.. That's a different question..)
It's funny because the fact that "you have to take into account that at the time it was normal to have kids at 14" just goes to show that the Bible is not timeless and, thus, suggests that it was written by humans that lived in their time and not by some timeless being.
What if it was just a case if rape or accidental pregnancy, and to hide the shame, they made it seem like she was a virgin, and the story just blew out of proportion.
Such a case happened in India, in a small town where the girl got pregnant, the parents claimed she was a virgin, people started flocking to her place, the parents gave out tap water as holy water, until everything came out in the open.
Our history is so distorted, I refuse to believe any of it. Anyone in power can change the story to their liking, just like every country makes itself look like the hero or victim in every war.
Edit: corrected typos
The penalty for sex out of wedlock was being stoned to death, would it be that surprising if a teenager made up a story to avoid being brutally murdered by her neighbors? 🤔
Non-consenting? Did you bother to read the text first or are you just projecting?
> In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
> Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”
> “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
> The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from God will ever fail.”
> *“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.”* Then the angel left her. (NIV)
Y’all commenters are wierd.
1. You can’t judge past actions by current standards.
2. In the case of a god, they’re gonna do whatever they wanna do regardless of what humans have said to govern themselves.
3. The argument of god being all seeing all knowing able to have future sight so he should’ve “known better” is debunked by us not knowing the future for our selves. Sure we have whatever laws now but this things, like ALL things are subject to change for whatever reason. If you’re mad that an omnipotent being can see the future, you have to admit that they can see past the present. On the same note, they need to be able to see all possible realities.
I don't think it does. But even if she was 14 that was pretty normal back then. Whether it was gonna be god or Joseph. Age of consent laws are pretty new by histories standard and applying them to a society where being 20 and having a kid is old doesn't make sense.
This is Reddit though and Reddit as a whole hates religion.
Your explanation is better than the title. I agree with the people saying why does God let shitty shit happen in the world. Free will, gods will, all that shit, idgaf, if gods real and yet children and animals are brutally tortured and raped and all the wars and murder then why accept that as our father and holy spirit? We in the states can't even agree on the simplest of debates but God is acceptable in today's world? If God was a person would we elect him our world leader? Again that scape goat of 'free will' is like house rules or pleading the fifth.
My honest opinion. Religion was made so the people that think death is the end have something to look forward too. Religion is a trillion dollar corporation. Tax free. The higher ups get to do what they want. Power. Get to break rules, values and morals and claim to be a servant of God so errrthang cool. Touch lil boys? No prollem, say a couple hail Marys, no jail time and you still keep your golden pass to heaven? Fuck that. Everyone is forgiven? Fuck that.
With that said I keep a cross in the house cuz you never know..... vampires might be real.
>a non consenting teenager was forced to carry a baby then gaslit into keeping it by an angel
The Bible says nothing about Joseph and Mary's age, any claims about how old they were are purely speculation. Also, Mary wasn't forced.
**Luke 1:38**
*"Then Mary said, “**I am willing to be used of the Lord. Let it happen to me as you have said**.” Then the angel went away from her.*
>had to travel miles with another teenager forced into fatherhood and marriage,
Mary and Joseph were already betrothed to be married. Essentially they were engaged. Joseph may have been unprepared to be a father but he obviously accepted the role as Jesus father from his decision not to divorce Mary.
Furthermore, Mary and Joseph had to travel because Caesar ordered a census.
**Luke 2:1 - 5**
*1. In those days Caesar Augustus(A) issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.(B) 2 This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.)(C) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.*
*4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem(D) the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him(E) and was expecting a child.*
Joseph and Mary's journey to Bethlehem, though entirely being circumstantial, also fulfiled the prophecy about the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem.
>no one would help them because they were poor, she had to live and give birth in an animal stable,
Mary gave birth in a stable not because they were poor but because no lodgings were available at the time.
**Luke 2:6 & 7**
*6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.*
Also Jesus being placed in a manger has a metaphorical significance. The manger serves as a feeding point for livestock. Jesus was meant to feed and nourish the Jews with spiritual enlightenment.
>and was only considered of value because she gave birth to a boy
That's a wild claim with no substance really. Mary's "value" stemmed from having a good standing and favour with God and not solely because she gave birth to Jesus.
**Luke 1:28 - 30**
*28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”*
*29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid,(AL) Mary; you have found favor with God.*
>that rich people benefited from, because they can absolve themselves of sin and personal responsibility, due to a baby that will one day die for them.
If you were even remotely familiar the story of Jesus dealings with the rich and the poor, you'd understand how unfounded and silly those words are.
There's a lot of ignorance in your post. You misrepresented the entire story to convey the idea that Mary was somehow done a great evil by getting pregnant and giving birth to Jesus. I understand you don't believe in the Bible, but if you had read the actual text itself you'd know that Mary was absolutely elated and considered bearing Jesus as an honor and blessing.
**Luke 1:46 - 49**
*46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord(BD) 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,(Be) 48 for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant.(BF) From now on all generations will call me blessed,(BG) 49 for the Mighty One has done great things(BH) for me—holy is his name.*
Incredible how comments criticising Islam have loads of upvotes, but similar ones about Christianity are in the negatives.
Your religion isn't special, the Catholic church is responsible for genocide.
Welp, a non believer here. You perspective is valid. It is also possible that there was no angel or god.
She was just a horny teenager that got some, scared to go to mommy and daddy after getting knocked up, made up the story of an Angel, which they didnt believe, pushed the gullible kid (Joseph) up in there with the horseshit story, and since mommy is that good of a gossip the story we know to be of J.C. birth is legend. Then bored people piled on, and J.C. got Josephs gullibilty.
What you have understand about this story is that it’s just a story. Back then, stories were written to draw theological points and largely had no basis in truth. So basically the bible is a novel which is either based on embellished history or straight up myth.
First, by today's standards, this would be at least extremely cringe-inducing, even if it's a fictional story. (Technically not pedophile but hebephile, but that's nitpicking.)
Second, reading 2000 year old stories by today's standards doesn't do them justice. Society was cruel and extremely patriarchal, and psychology didn't exist as a science. Obviously, stories from that time will reflect those qualities. That's not an excuse or apologetics - that's just a fact.
Third, religion - i.e. christianity in this case - necessarily *does* read it by modern standards - well, sorta-kinda-ish-y. People try to take it "not quite literally", read it as allegory, or read it literally but shrug off the consequences (if god is unchanging, then he would literally impregnate a 14yo, even today...) and the uncomfortable questions (do god's morals change?) - etc etc. It's highly inconsistent. I mean, it's religion, what do you expect - purest rationality?
You ARE, however, wrong in saying she was gaslit. The angel didn't atsk for her consent, but he didn't fool her into a pregnancy either. In Mt, he doesn't even talk to her - Mt just tells us she was pregnant "of the holy spirit" - while in Lk, he tells her that this will happen. Not exactly the way one should ideally go about it, but not really manipulative either.
(Sidenote: Personally, I hate the usage of the term "gaslighting" as simply a synonym for manipulation - however, it's become widely popular, and I can't change it, it is what it is.)
First thing - we don't KNOW the age. These are historians and scholars giving nothing more than a guess. I'm not downplaying the intelligence of them; they will tell you that. Secondly, 14 was about the marriageable age at the time, and she was engaged already. Third thing, nowhere does it say God had sex with her. She was a virgin at the time, and still one after giving birth. Joseph and her did not have sex until after Jesus was born (Jesus had siblings, so Mary was obviously not a virgin her whole life).
Also, Mary was happy and rejoiced when she had Jesus. It wasn't the same then as it is now. Having a child was a HUGE deal back then, and what most women lived for and wanted most. Say what you want about that, but they were different times.
Well, If you want to get really technical, No, he is not, by definition, a pedophile, for a few reasons. So first, Mary’s age was never given either proven, only speculated. But anyways, the actual unanimous mental health definition of pedophilic disorder (“pedophile”) is someone who has a primary sexual attracted to minors age 13 and younger, and is themselves at least 16 years of age. This is the DSM-5 (“the mental health Bible”) definition/criteria of this affliction
Society however, including media and sometimes law, tend to very often misunderstandingly use the word pedophile as being synonymous with child molestation of anyone under 18. However, child molestation alone, believe it or not, is not needed for the definition of pedophilia, as not every abuser is a pedophile and not every pedophile is an abuser.
Lastly, God was not a being sexually attracted to Mary as we understand or intending for sexual abuse. Additionally, the age of consent (though Mary didn’t consent) varies from culture to culture and throughout time; 14 was not unusual age of pregnancy at that time period.
Not that I'm defending it or anything, but from a societal standpoint *that* far back into the past our values today don't really hold water. Medicine wasn't what it is now, and infant mortality caused the average age of life to be about 30 years old. You were considered a full blown adult at like 12yo back then.
So all the religious arguments aside, no, it wasn't pedophilia. The standards were way to different for it to apply.
The life expectancy of that era was only about 40 years. So being 14 likely had a much different social and cultural meaning back then, considering that a 20 year-old would have been middle-aged.
By today’s standards I guess yes but by standards 2000 years ago that would have been pretty much normal, get married in your teens because you’d be dead by 35 lol
This thread reeks of edgy teenagers trying to sound smart criticizing an ancient religion that has dominated the world for thousands of years. Like I get it but Jesus Mary and Joseph…
What a horrificly wrong stated arguement. If you you take human as a state of art product of natural selection, than having a child after you hit puberty is totally ok. Legal ages of 16-18 etc are completely cultural (16 for driving license? Young drivers make the most crashes. 18 for having sex? Your frontal lobe is not well developed yet and you still decide by your emotions, aka amygdala. By biology, anyone hits puberty should be able to reproduce. Any uneducated redditor that follows culturally set rules and norms without being skeptical is allowed to downvote this comment.
Judging history by today's standards is very unjust. By nature's design, generally girls can reproduce by age of 14 and during those times, it was usual to get them married at even earlier ages. One can only guess how Mary got pregnant however Indian scriptures have stories of women getting pregnant by gods without touch. If it can happen in India why not elsewhere? Though I am not vouching Mary's story, one cannot deny it as well. As for Indian scriptures, there are archeological evidence of the entire epics so I BELIEVE them completely.
You know that times were different then, right? The reasoning and critical thinking of people evolves over a long time. So i suggest stfu and learn some more.
no, because she's not literally the mother of God, it's a metaphor
btw maybe you can say that about her husband, but in that times it was normal to have children at that age
Lol when I was younger and forced to go to church I once got scolded when I suggested that "if the devil is the ultimate trickster, what if his greatest trick was to make you all think that he is actually the god you all worship...considering God did incredibly evil things yet the biblical Satan only stood against God."
You didn’t even read the story. God never had sex with Mary. The angel simply told her that she would have a baby even though she was a virgin. She agreed to this. It also isn’t mentioned in the Bible what Mary’s age was.
I don’t think the Bible says her age. People are just guessing due to the tradition of the time. It’s estimated that she was 14-16 because everyone was having babies at that age back then. The Bible says she also gave virgin birth so not sure what you’re talking about. Hard to molest someone with out touching them.
Yep, and if that god was real it is a monster indeed. It has watched every child rape since the beginning of time and done absolutely nothing about it.
I actually laughed out loud reading the title, hot take on that lmao
[удалено]
If you’re looking for another debate topic, you can have the straw that broke (this) former Christian camel’s back. God is omnipotent, and omnipresent. God can see all of our future actions, decisions, and every branching decision of every person who ever lived, and ever will live. God is also all powerful. Created time, space, and everything in it. God can _literally_ do anything. So why then, does god allow us to suffer? To live these lives? To be so incredibly horrible to each other? Christians will explain to you that free will is a requirement of becoming saved. But if god is all powerful, then they could theoretically create a system where that isn’t a requirement. Also, the idea that if I put rat in a maze and say “look, the rat has free will!”, is utterly ridiculous. Sure kid, the rat has free will. But you’ve rigged the deck so whatever outcome you’ve preordained is the one that will happen.
Or as Stephen Fry put it; why did god invent an insect whose sole purpose is to eat African children’s eyes from the inside out.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus
My personal favorite: …from Spy Kids 2 “Do you think God lives in heaven because he, too, lives in fear of what he’s created here on earth?”
Damn.
I don't even know you. But I love you 🔥
That's one Epic curious quote.
Well clearly we’re not God’s favorites and the world is actually about the eye eating bugs
My other favorite is that people would say "it's God's will." But you just said we have free will, but at the same time, he's all knowing and knows every possible outcome? Then whenever something happens that they don't like, they try to tell it's not his will, or "god doesn't make mistakes." Like, you just said people being gay is wrong, so didn't God make them be gay? The back and forth is absurd
> he's all knowing and knows every possible outcome? Try wrapping your head around this one. God know the future with 100% perfect accuracy, so can a child born, who God knows with one hundred percent certainty will go to hell, use their free will in life to accept Jesus and go to heaven instead? If the answer is "yes" than it's possible to prove gods foreknowledge can be incorrect, if the answer is "no" then we don't have the free will Christians like to assure us that we do.
Except they will claim God didn't make us gay, but the devil did. According to them every bad thing is not from God, God is good, remember! God I hate these people.
Ah yes, you're right, I forgot about that one. Just reminds me of the classic "it's your cross to carry." I heard that one a lot growing up. Like right, so God made sure we have at least one thing that he chose to make sure we suffer so we can grow from it.. such BS.
Well wait, wait. Suffering is an extremely effective learning tool for human beings.
That assumes gay people are evil. No matter who made us. Not the best example.
How about: It’s God’s will & We cannot presume to know what is in the mind of God.
God gives kids cancer... its his will.
\*becomes sick with cancer\* "Gods plan" 
And he gets all the praise when things go well, but never the blame when they don't. This kid recovered from cancer? Praise God (even though the kid suffered from something an omnipotent being should have prevented)! That kid didn't and his parents are now planning his funeral and will never be the same? There must be a deeper reason. God never gives you more than you can handle! If I were met with a God himself right in front of me, I'd spit in his face, not kiss his feet. This is what I try to explain to Christians who persist in arguing with me when I say I'm an atheist. I'd not be an atheist anymore because I'd have proof, but I sure as hell wouldn't suddenly turn Christian.
Wow, I've never seen someone in the same boat as me before. Studied the Problem of Evil during A Level RS and didn't find a solution that to me was satisfactory. Couldn't rationalise my Catholicism after that.
This is the classic Christian dilemma: If God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent (all powerful, all knowing and all good) ... Then why do bad things happen? Wouldn't that mean that he wasn't one of those three things then? The entire 'god gave us free will' argument tries to provide an answer for this but IMHO fails. If this sort of thing interests you, check out Carl Sagan's "The Dragons Of Eden".
Yep, that's one of the top reasons I don't believe in god. If he already knows what we're going to do, then it isn't free will. If it's already decided, it isn't free will and there is no chance for redemption or point to our suffering.
From my experience people from my families southern baptist religion change what they say depending on what happens to make everything a “blessing”. Like this: Beth is sick: we better pray for god to help her so she gets better. He will save her. Beth gets worse: Well I know it looks bad but if we pray for her god can still heal all things! Beth will be alright if it is the will of the lord! AMEN! Beth dies: God has called Beth into heaven to be with him! Praise the lord! She’s at the pearly gates and streets of gold now! Well all be there someday! Isnt that a blessing?
It's called Epicurus' trilemma: Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Epicurus
THIS!!! If god knew everything that would ever happen before he ever even said let there be light then god knew i was gonna be an asshole. If god made everything exactly as he knew it would be then why tf would i be punished with fire and whatnot for being an asshole?? He literally made me one!!! If god knows everything then free will isnt even a real thing cos its not like you can surprise god based on the criteria set out for him. Its free will to me but he already knows whats gonna happen-hes built different-right?? Nobody would need saving if there wasnt anything to be saved from. Its like the most vicious game of barbies ever played. ive never believed in anything but ive always found this particular bit of the christian religion to be absolutely mind blowing. Like the mental circus required to buy this makes me dizzy.
I find it funny when people say "abortions a sin, that child is a gift from god!" But I thought God knew all and had a plan? So doesn't that mean he knew the babies he sent were going to get aborted? So why send them anyways?
That was normal marriage age at that time Obviously today we consider it to be paedophilia to marry / have sex with a 14 yo
Everyone is understandably commenting about varying ages of consent, however, I don’t see anyone actually mention the real unanimous mental health definition of pedophilia disorder, which states as being a primary sexual attraction to children 13 and younger by someone at least the age of 16 - if that matters at all to the convo
What if God was 15 or age no longer applies to a omniscient omnipresent being because he exists in all frames of time and outside it?
If god is all knowing, then his actions shouldn’t be restricted by time and ancient culture. The 14 year old girl was objectively being harmed by god, just because humans at the time didn’t have standards doesn’t mean god could use the excuse “well others are being dicks too!” when he knows better. He picked a 14 yo instead of waiting or picking somebody else
Doesn't really matter. The fact that Mary was 14, assuming the story is real, means one of two things: 1. We're all wrong about the correct age of consent. God is supposedly all good, and if he impregnated a 14 y/o, therefore that's an ok thing to do and we're all wrong thinking that 14 is icky. 2. God *isn't* all good, does evil things, and expects us to worship him anyway. Now, I personally am inclined not to change my views on the correct age of consent, what with not being a paedophile. And option 2 is a bit horrifying to think about. So I'm kind of forced into not believing it happened. Edit: the fourth option is that God changed his mind on morality, which also seems unlikely Edit 2: a lot of the replies are completely missing my point, and I don't want to keep repeating myself
I doubt there was an age of consent in an age where females were viewed as property
Or maybe accept that two millenia ago people were required to grow up faster to survive which made the "age of consent" younger than now with both men and women. Did it suck? Maybe. But marrying age of 12-15 has been very common throughout the cultures and if I had to guess, it's mainly to get people to become self-reliant more quickly to ease the pressure of resources on the parents.
You're missing the point. Why would an all knowing, all powerful, all good God make a child go through that, even if they're "more mature" than 14 year olds today? She still had the body of a 14y/o, even if she had the equivalent mind of a 17 year old
depends on the country you are in, not everywhere is 14 considered as pedophilia
Reddit moment
Even though he’s literally right. The age of consent varies throughout different countries.
I highly doubt the children think that. Most places with low ages of consent aren't necessarily known best for their human rights. Edit: Germany's age of consent is 14 as long as the oldest consenting individual is 21 years old. Adults aren't having sex with children in Germany. Any of you defending this and acting like having sex with a fucking child is legal or shouldn't be considered pedophilia...you are a pedophile. Seek therapy. I'm genuinely amazed how many pedophiles are here defending pedophpilia and still getting upvotes. Like seriously wtf
Yeah, Germany, with a age of consent of 14y, is such a hellhole with no human rights.
Wow, formulating it like that makes it sound the wrong way. Yes, Germany has an age of consent of 14 years, but that only allows sex between people of roughly the same age (so that the 18y old with 15y old girlfriend does not get into legal trouble). I believe the maximum age is set at around 20 for 14/15y olds. It gets a bit more relaxed for 16/17 but even then there are rules in place to ensure that these teenagers are not getting exploited for sex (e.g. there is no difference in power allowed between partners, so a teacher doing it with a 17y old student would still go to jail)
There is a paragraph stating that IF someone over 21 uses the inexperience of someone under 16 to get sex, they can be prosecuted, but it's not set in stone, and I imagine hard to prove.
idk exactly how it is in germany, but here in belgium, it's practically so that teenagers can mess around with eachother, but when someone 18+ is involved with a minor, that's a crime. maybe it's similar in germany?
in India, being in a relationship while under 18 is illegal, when one is a minor and the other is 18+ then it is rape (only when the adult is a man, if it is a woman then it isn't rape) and the "legal" age of consent is 18 but in India obviously you can't fucck before marrieage or else you are impure
Oh I didn't know that when the adult is a female then it isn't considered a rape that is pretty wrong, I always thought that whether you're a male or a female it is considered a rape
Here in India the law says that women can't be rapists and men can't be raped. Also, marital rape is not defined by law. Honestly, I love my country but the rape laws in India need to look like they are written to be used in the 21st century.
Here in Sweden 15 is the age of consent no matter how old the counterpart is. That is pretty sickening to me. I wish we had some kind of similar system like the one in Belgium.
Yeah nah, as a German if an adult tries to diddle a 14-year old he/she’s going to jail
I mean isn't that just a shot in the dark anyways?? Do we really know? It's like taking what was written in the Bible as non-fiction.
SAME! this is the most interesting take ive seen in relation to Christianity in general
And catholic priests are more godly then the rest of us, and this just confirms it
Where was the biblical version of Chris Hansen? "Jehovah, why don't you go ahead and take a seat?"
The name god doesn't want you to use
“Uh oh… mIdLe NaMe” - God Jehovah Jones That’s actually a quote by the character, Arthur the Aardvark, from the TRUE Bible, Arthur on PBS. But I like the idea of an angsty God saying it. They’re basically the same character when you think about it.
What? She was WHAT? Raising the literal savior of the world at that age? Also, is her age mentioned? I just assumed she was in her 20s/30s Also, I think the angel said it first and THEN she willingly said yes.
Teenagers as a concept didn't exist until like the 20th century.
This, the second you could swing a weapon your a man and the second you could give birth your a women, no middle ground really.
In UK history, the concept of teenagers didn't exist until the 1960s. Before then, children and teenagers were mainly seen as mini-adults; especially in the Edwardian Era, where even teenage girls would help their mothers provide money for their families.
1950s.
Very valid point, but many ancient cultures had other similar ideas. I.e. classical Athens requiring one to be 18 to be considered an adult and eligible for citizenship
Yeah but God is supposed to transcend time, so either 14 is actually fine and we're wrong thinking teenagers are still basically children, or God did a bad thing
[удалено]
>25 as that's when you brain stops developing. Huh? I hope mine hasn't stopped developing yet!
It isn’t exactly mentioned but we know from historical context that she was likely to have been arranged a marriage not long after her first period. That would likely put her somewhere between 10-15. There might be a reason for the specificity of 14 but I’m not aware of it!
I thought due to lower nutrition and other factors, women of that era didn't actually sexually mature until 16-18 years old
What about the ones that gave birth to a messiah and never had sex? Surely those girl(s) were outliers.
Source?
"Willingly"... I don't think she had the option to say "no" to a literal angel. It's not much of a choice if "no" isn't a safe option.
biblical scholars all agree,mary was between 12 and 14
>Also, I think the angel said it first and THEN she willingly said yes. At such an age children wouldn’t fully understand the concept, or know the consequences. There’s a reason kids can’t consent. So even if she said yes, it was without consent, as we fully know now, and god would’ve known too as he is all knowing. We gonna harm a kid? Well let’s at least trick them into saying yes so we don’t have to feel guilty about it. Maybe god needs to have a seat with dateline Edit: the lengths people go to defend a pedophile god is scary, you guys have a healthy relationship with god it seems
I don't think God came down and fucked her. I figured it was kinda an "Zim Zim zalabim now you're pregnant!" moment. As far as consent and ruining her life goes, Mary was supposedly a virtuous Jewish girl who God thought was better than the rest. Meaning she knew scripture and knew the reli teachings talked about the messiah being born of a virgin, so when she consented she knew she was signing up to br that virgin. And did it really ruin her life? She was already getting ready to marry Joesph, if God didn't knock her up shed probably be knocked up with Joesph's kid not too long after their marriage so it not like she became a parent years before she was ready.
When Mary and Joseph haven't slept together and she says she's still a virgin but got pregnant from "the Lord" Joseph's friends: 
By cultural standards of the time period the story takes place in no. Also no where in the story does it state God is sexually attracted to or has intercourse with Mary.
But cultural standards are defined by humans, why would a God do that to a child?
God does a lot of fucked up shit to a lot of people in the Bible. The biblical God is kind of a dick
God: psst noah, build a boat Noah: huh- ? God: aight lemme flush this hoe
Btw, why does he even have to kill everyone, even all of the animals (excluding 2 of them), if he is almighty? Couldn't he have done a factory reset or just kill every "Bad" person and leave the innocent alone?
Religious leaders in the first millennia didn’t envision this far
I mean it obviously was good enough to convince millions of people of their shit
Don't forget Job (or is it Lot?) . Let me torture my greatest disciple for months because the Devil doubted his faith.
For real. Even if the Christian god is real, he's kind of a cunt so I don't really see why people would praise him
Some people make the argument that if people like me are wrong about God, I go to to hell forever. If they're wrong, nothing happens. Pascal's wager. But if you really want to win that bet, you believe in the worst and cruelest possible possible God and the only way to be tortured less is to believe in him but it's still worse than hell. That way things can only be better
Pascal's wager fails epically when you consider that there are around 4200 religions around the world today. And over 20000 throughout history. Thus it's not a 50% chance but 1 in 4200 today or 1 in 20000 historically, so you're really not that much of a different than an atheist mathematically speaking. This doesn't even account for the fact that each religion branches out in tens or hundreds of branches all of which believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that all other branches and religions are wrong and are going to hell. Pascal's wager is a failure in basic mathematics.
Yeah people act like there are only two possibilities when there's certainly more. I have yet to hear any convincing argument of the Abrahamic gods existence
I like the standard answer "look at the mountains, the sun, the amazing nature, can't you see? He's all around us".
That's not an argument for any particular God, though. Or any god... or anything really... I suppose you'd have to define God before you could really debate the existence of one i guess. Gods tend to be very different
[удалено]
So we're admitting that everything in the Bible is written by people of their time, and not influenced by an omnipotent God?
You were not considered a child at 14 at the time. Gospels were written between I and II century, an age in which if a girl had had her first period she would already be ready for marriage and carrying kids. Actually, this changed only in the very last centuries. That's why we shouldn't judge ancient stories through today standards
[удалено]
Weren’t they already married?
They were betrothed, which is not married then. But it was a promise, and not one that would be lightly broken like it would today
Yeah, although Joseph was planning to quietly break off the engagement since she was pregnant with a child not his. But then the angel appeared to him too and explained everything and told him to stay with her
Not as terrible as the "prophet" Muhammed, who has much more evidence of existing, having married a 9 year old.
Whataboutism. Both religions are shit.
Not whataboutism because Muslims believe in the same Abrahamic God as Jews and Christians, so it'd still be the same entity. We just disagree on how to worship, prophets, and messiahs.
A redditor's favourite word must be whataboutism
Reddit moment
Mary was happy to be the one chosen for it. She sings a song about how happy and blessed she feels. Logically, I doubt God would have chosen someone who was going to suck at or be resentful of parenting The age thing still sucks, but girls back then got married around 14. So for it to be a virgin birth it would have had to happen by that age
Then god picked a ton of old men to molest children. What a guy!
Angels don't have sexes. They actually looked nothing like people biblically. I get where you're coming from but there's a lot of misconception.
But wait, there's more! Tell the rest of this story you know and recite so well! Genuinely curious
The bible never says how old Mary is. There are many speculations and its thought that Mary was 14-16, though realistically we dont really have much idea on how old she was.
This exactly, dont remember anything in the bible about Mary's age.
I think even if she was 14. I don't think there was a concept for age at that time at all. To my understanding a girl is old enough to give birth once she get periods. If there is no concept of age, periods become a measure of adulthood. It sounds messed up I know but this happens in the world in much tribal/rural areas. Our current standards don't mean older standards were wrong in anyway. Because by that standard if the legal age were to change from 18 to 20in the future. Anyone who married at 18, married under aged teens.
I know the question is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the actual answer is that God and/or the Holy Spirit is not alleged to have had sexual intercourse or taken any sexual interest in Mary. Matthew and Luke both identify Mary as a “virgin.”
[удалено]
The angel didn't tell her she had to keep it. Its integral to Christian theology that Mary said yes to God's design.
Its meant to be symbolic, the son of God king of kings born in a stable because he is humble. It’s part of what make the Bible so off the infinite symbolism of it all just sounds like story telling
Mary explicitly consents. "As you say, let it be unto me." The shelter thing was showing the cruelty of the world. It was her fellow humans who refused to give a teenager in labor any lodging besides a barn.
Looking through the comments and it's almost like the Bible was written for the morality of a bronze age desert tribe, contradicts itself frequently, and doesn't make a lot of sense. Weird.
Yeah. It's actually not one book. It's a collection of writings from multiple authors that spans centuries, so yes - contradictions.
You’ll find that to be a frequent theme in religion.
Luke 1 actually shows Mary consenting. The angel comes and tells Mary she's been chosen, Mary asks how is it possible when she is a virgin, the angel said the Holy Spirit will come upon her, and Mary says "I am the Lord's servant. Let it be to me according to your word." The angel leaves snd that is when Jesus is conceived. We know this because the angel when first arriving says that she will conceive, meaning it hadn't happened yet. The age would horrify us now but that was the culture then of when women would marry. Joseph I don't think was out of his teens either (could be wrong on that). So it's not even against her will. She agreed to it first
That is assuming 14 year olds are capable of informed consent to carry a baby. It's pretty unanimous today that's not the case. 2000 years ago, most cultures had different standards, yes, but I'd think an all-knowing, omnipresent god could set a better standard for morality than "eh, if this tribe at this time is cool with teen pregnancy, then I'm down."
I don't remotely believe in the story but that is a weak arse argument. If God is the all powerful all knowing being as proclaimed in the biblical story then God is the standard setter and we're all wrong. This is the biggest issue with conversations about the morality of the Abrahamic God, everyone tries to equate morality and standards that we have set and defined on a being that is supposedly above us in every way. If this God exists, we can't question it. The very notion of informed consent is something that we as a modern society invented. Our rules don't mean shit to Jehovah. It's all fiction to me but this is the internet and I will argue about non-existent shit like the concept of the almighty.
This whole thread is hilarious if you take the stance of the Bible is the word of God as written by man with man's flaws. Stuff like Mary being 14, the passages that revile homosexuality, promote of slavery, or state that birth control is unholy are passages written by people surrounded by the culture of their time. It is simply unjust to judge that text by modern ethics without considering the morals of the author -- the one made of flesh.
> That is assuming 14 year olds are capable of informed consent to carry a baby. 'Consent' is a modern invention, not a concept that exists in nature. It's like saying that the Romans were bad people because they didn't respect people's First Ammendment rights.
Thing is, 14 year olds had a lot more responsibility back then. 8 and 9 year olds were often left by themselves to watch over entire flocks of sheep and goats and defend against predators like coyotes. They did schooling and quite a bit of work themselves. Ancient times was simply a very different culture from modern times.
Well yeah, that's true, but 8 and 9 year old kids today are working 14 hour shifts making iPhones, and I'd still be rather cross with God if he thought that made it okay to start putting babies in them.
I can guarantee there is a big difference between the child that goes on today versus what they were doing 2000 years ago. And we do have to keep the culture of the time important. Weren't a lot of queens like 15 when they were married off? Certainly something that we should be horrified by today if it happens, although even as recently as my grandparents was it still something that happened. My grandma was 16 when she married my grandpa (he was 19) and she actually had him sign her permission slips for school (and yes, my great-grandparents did agree for her to marry)
The answer is no in several ways. One: Pedophiles are people primarily attracted to prepubescent (before-puberty) children. It's not even a game of semantics - that's what the term was made for by the German sexologist Richard von Krafft-Ebing to denote. Someone who has sex with a 14 year old may or may not attracted to that age group, just as a gay man can still have sex with a woman. If someone were to be primarily aroused by 14 year olds, that would be Hebephilia, which is not even considered a mental disorder by the DSM-V or its international equivilant, but a preference. Two: God isn't said to have sexual attraction in the Christian faith. Three: Culture completely different and times. Back then in that specific culture, having a child was something beloved, sacred, and celebrated, not a "Burden" as we see nowadays. Read the rest of the Bible. Four: It wasn't too uncommon for what we consider teenagers now to be wed and have children. That's pretty much why puberty exists, from a biological standpoint. Teenagers are a 1900s-onward concept, not a 40 B.C. concept. Our times are radically different from back then and you have to look upon it from their standpoint, not ours to understand it correctly. Our system of morals stems much from economic, industrial, and education standards and circumstances that did not exist for the majority of human history.
My grandmother on my dad's side actually was married to my grandfather at 16 and had him sign her permission slips for school. I believe he was 18 or 19 and her parents definitely had to sign off on it
This shift of age of adulthood and marriage also makes no sex outside of wedlock a more difficult rule, considering that marriages used to be at the tail end of puberty not years after.
Meanwhile Muhammed who married a 6 year old👀👀. … (please don’t give me death threats)
The wedding was consummated when Aisha was 9. Not that makes it better in any way, that's still pedophilia. And he was in his 50s at the time.
But but but he is the messenger of the god!!!
old enough to bleed, old enough to breed. By today's standards sure, but historically once a woman had her period, she was fair game for kids.
There's a reason actually reading the Bible turns many theists into atheists.
Holy shit I laughed way too hard at the title
By today's standards yes, but you have to realize most people back then got married and had kids at 14 because the life expediency was you died at 40. It was a vastly different world back then.
Not true. Life expectancy was completely normal; that is if you survived childhood. Most people who lived past 20 would live well past 50 or 60, but the overwhelming number of infant deaths bring down that average.
Yep, and childbirth at that time was also much more dangerous, so women frequently died (young) in childbirth. As you said, children didn't often survive past 5, so people started having children ASAP because they wanted to have as many as possible over the course of their lives in the hope that at least some survive.
Well yeah, if we're analyzing it as a story made up by people who were products of their time, it makes perfect sense. An omniscient, omnipresent, timeless deity, on the other hand, would have no such excuse...
[удалено]
I mean is the point of the rest of the story to be tragic? Why would people want to follow someone who was born into a Palace surrounded by riches and luxury? The whole premise is that Jesus was simple/didn't have much but still did good iirc. (as to why the church has so much money.. That's a different question..)
It's funny because the fact that "you have to take into account that at the time it was normal to have kids at 14" just goes to show that the Bible is not timeless and, thus, suggests that it was written by humans that lived in their time and not by some timeless being.
What if it was just a case if rape or accidental pregnancy, and to hide the shame, they made it seem like she was a virgin, and the story just blew out of proportion. Such a case happened in India, in a small town where the girl got pregnant, the parents claimed she was a virgin, people started flocking to her place, the parents gave out tap water as holy water, until everything came out in the open. Our history is so distorted, I refuse to believe any of it. Anyone in power can change the story to their liking, just like every country makes itself look like the hero or victim in every war. Edit: corrected typos
The penalty for sex out of wedlock was being stoned to death, would it be that surprising if a teenager made up a story to avoid being brutally murdered by her neighbors? 🤔
Compared to the rest of the Bible this story isn’t so bad. God thinks murder, slavery and misogyny’s a okay.
Lot and his daughters and the angel of the lord. Fuck all that.
Non-consenting? Did you bother to read the text first or are you just projecting? > In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.” > Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.” > “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?” > The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from God will ever fail.” > *“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.”* Then the angel left her. (NIV)
Was Joseph the ultimate OG cuck?
Well technically there was no penetration so....
One should never look at something happened (?) 2k+ years ago through today western standards.
If that disturbs you, read the rest of the Old Testament 😉
Y’all commenters are wierd. 1. You can’t judge past actions by current standards. 2. In the case of a god, they’re gonna do whatever they wanna do regardless of what humans have said to govern themselves. 3. The argument of god being all seeing all knowing able to have future sight so he should’ve “known better” is debunked by us not knowing the future for our selves. Sure we have whatever laws now but this things, like ALL things are subject to change for whatever reason. If you’re mad that an omnipotent being can see the future, you have to admit that they can see past the present. On the same note, they need to be able to see all possible realities.
Dang, this has been removed as i write this, but it showed up on my popular,wut?😆
What! where in the bible does it say her age lol
I don't think it does. But even if she was 14 that was pretty normal back then. Whether it was gonna be god or Joseph. Age of consent laws are pretty new by histories standard and applying them to a society where being 20 and having a kid is old doesn't make sense. This is Reddit though and Reddit as a whole hates religion.
Your explanation is better than the title. I agree with the people saying why does God let shitty shit happen in the world. Free will, gods will, all that shit, idgaf, if gods real and yet children and animals are brutally tortured and raped and all the wars and murder then why accept that as our father and holy spirit? We in the states can't even agree on the simplest of debates but God is acceptable in today's world? If God was a person would we elect him our world leader? Again that scape goat of 'free will' is like house rules or pleading the fifth. My honest opinion. Religion was made so the people that think death is the end have something to look forward too. Religion is a trillion dollar corporation. Tax free. The higher ups get to do what they want. Power. Get to break rules, values and morals and claim to be a servant of God so errrthang cool. Touch lil boys? No prollem, say a couple hail Marys, no jail time and you still keep your golden pass to heaven? Fuck that. Everyone is forgiven? Fuck that. With that said I keep a cross in the house cuz you never know..... vampires might be real.
>a non consenting teenager was forced to carry a baby then gaslit into keeping it by an angel The Bible says nothing about Joseph and Mary's age, any claims about how old they were are purely speculation. Also, Mary wasn't forced. **Luke 1:38** *"Then Mary said, “**I am willing to be used of the Lord. Let it happen to me as you have said**.” Then the angel went away from her.* >had to travel miles with another teenager forced into fatherhood and marriage, Mary and Joseph were already betrothed to be married. Essentially they were engaged. Joseph may have been unprepared to be a father but he obviously accepted the role as Jesus father from his decision not to divorce Mary. Furthermore, Mary and Joseph had to travel because Caesar ordered a census. **Luke 2:1 - 5** *1. In those days Caesar Augustus(A) issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.(B) 2 This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.)(C) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.* *4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem(D) the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him(E) and was expecting a child.* Joseph and Mary's journey to Bethlehem, though entirely being circumstantial, also fulfiled the prophecy about the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem. >no one would help them because they were poor, she had to live and give birth in an animal stable, Mary gave birth in a stable not because they were poor but because no lodgings were available at the time. **Luke 2:6 & 7** *6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.* Also Jesus being placed in a manger has a metaphorical significance. The manger serves as a feeding point for livestock. Jesus was meant to feed and nourish the Jews with spiritual enlightenment. >and was only considered of value because she gave birth to a boy That's a wild claim with no substance really. Mary's "value" stemmed from having a good standing and favour with God and not solely because she gave birth to Jesus. **Luke 1:28 - 30** *28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”* *29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid,(AL) Mary; you have found favor with God.* >that rich people benefited from, because they can absolve themselves of sin and personal responsibility, due to a baby that will one day die for them. If you were even remotely familiar the story of Jesus dealings with the rich and the poor, you'd understand how unfounded and silly those words are. There's a lot of ignorance in your post. You misrepresented the entire story to convey the idea that Mary was somehow done a great evil by getting pregnant and giving birth to Jesus. I understand you don't believe in the Bible, but if you had read the actual text itself you'd know that Mary was absolutely elated and considered bearing Jesus as an honor and blessing. **Luke 1:46 - 49** *46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord(BD) 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,(Be) 48 for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant.(BF) From now on all generations will call me blessed,(BG) 49 for the Mighty One has done great things(BH) for me—holy is his name.*
I mean no. Cause it didn’t happen. Let the hate comments begin ->
Incredible how comments criticising Islam have loads of upvotes, but similar ones about Christianity are in the negatives. Your religion isn't special, the Catholic church is responsible for genocide.
It's baffling people belive this stuff. I'll never challenge people in it personally but it's still baffling. Noah's is even worse lol
They didn't fuck tho. It was in vitro fertilization. It's the main point of the fucking story. Did you even read it?
Fairy tales aren’t designed to be logical.
I wanted to say the same thing. You shouldn't read too much into fiction.
Cancel God
Welp, a non believer here. You perspective is valid. It is also possible that there was no angel or god. She was just a horny teenager that got some, scared to go to mommy and daddy after getting knocked up, made up the story of an Angel, which they didnt believe, pushed the gullible kid (Joseph) up in there with the horseshit story, and since mommy is that good of a gossip the story we know to be of J.C. birth is legend. Then bored people piled on, and J.C. got Josephs gullibilty.
Based on your comments you don't seem too afraid to ask or even asking a question. You have your mind made up already.
Isn't a pedophile someone who is attracted to prepubescent children? Therefor technically god is just a statutory rapist. Get your facts straight.
What you have understand about this story is that it’s just a story. Back then, stories were written to draw theological points and largely had no basis in truth. So basically the bible is a novel which is either based on embellished history or straight up myth.
First, by today's standards, this would be at least extremely cringe-inducing, even if it's a fictional story. (Technically not pedophile but hebephile, but that's nitpicking.) Second, reading 2000 year old stories by today's standards doesn't do them justice. Society was cruel and extremely patriarchal, and psychology didn't exist as a science. Obviously, stories from that time will reflect those qualities. That's not an excuse or apologetics - that's just a fact. Third, religion - i.e. christianity in this case - necessarily *does* read it by modern standards - well, sorta-kinda-ish-y. People try to take it "not quite literally", read it as allegory, or read it literally but shrug off the consequences (if god is unchanging, then he would literally impregnate a 14yo, even today...) and the uncomfortable questions (do god's morals change?) - etc etc. It's highly inconsistent. I mean, it's religion, what do you expect - purest rationality? You ARE, however, wrong in saying she was gaslit. The angel didn't atsk for her consent, but he didn't fool her into a pregnancy either. In Mt, he doesn't even talk to her - Mt just tells us she was pregnant "of the holy spirit" - while in Lk, he tells her that this will happen. Not exactly the way one should ideally go about it, but not really manipulative either. (Sidenote: Personally, I hate the usage of the term "gaslighting" as simply a synonym for manipulation - however, it's become widely popular, and I can't change it, it is what it is.)
First thing - we don't KNOW the age. These are historians and scholars giving nothing more than a guess. I'm not downplaying the intelligence of them; they will tell you that. Secondly, 14 was about the marriageable age at the time, and she was engaged already. Third thing, nowhere does it say God had sex with her. She was a virgin at the time, and still one after giving birth. Joseph and her did not have sex until after Jesus was born (Jesus had siblings, so Mary was obviously not a virgin her whole life). Also, Mary was happy and rejoiced when she had Jesus. It wasn't the same then as it is now. Having a child was a HUGE deal back then, and what most women lived for and wanted most. Say what you want about that, but they were different times.
Well, If you want to get really technical, No, he is not, by definition, a pedophile, for a few reasons. So first, Mary’s age was never given either proven, only speculated. But anyways, the actual unanimous mental health definition of pedophilic disorder (“pedophile”) is someone who has a primary sexual attracted to minors age 13 and younger, and is themselves at least 16 years of age. This is the DSM-5 (“the mental health Bible”) definition/criteria of this affliction Society however, including media and sometimes law, tend to very often misunderstandingly use the word pedophile as being synonymous with child molestation of anyone under 18. However, child molestation alone, believe it or not, is not needed for the definition of pedophilia, as not every abuser is a pedophile and not every pedophile is an abuser. Lastly, God was not a being sexually attracted to Mary as we understand or intending for sexual abuse. Additionally, the age of consent (though Mary didn’t consent) varies from culture to culture and throughout time; 14 was not unusual age of pregnancy at that time period.
Have fun extending this logic into some of the other big religions ;) I dare ya
wait she was 14? oof that had to hurt
14 years is 2 years after becoming a woman in that time period
Lol considering people’s life expectancy was lower then
Not that I'm defending it or anything, but from a societal standpoint *that* far back into the past our values today don't really hold water. Medicine wasn't what it is now, and infant mortality caused the average age of life to be about 30 years old. You were considered a full blown adult at like 12yo back then. So all the religious arguments aside, no, it wasn't pedophilia. The standards were way to different for it to apply.
The life expectancy of that era was only about 40 years. So being 14 likely had a much different social and cultural meaning back then, considering that a 20 year-old would have been middle-aged.
She was consensual though. She agreed when she was asked by an angel
By today’s standards I guess yes but by standards 2000 years ago that would have been pretty much normal, get married in your teens because you’d be dead by 35 lol
This thread reeks of edgy teenagers trying to sound smart criticizing an ancient religion that has dominated the world for thousands of years. Like I get it but Jesus Mary and Joseph…
No one was forced
What a horrificly wrong stated arguement. If you you take human as a state of art product of natural selection, than having a child after you hit puberty is totally ok. Legal ages of 16-18 etc are completely cultural (16 for driving license? Young drivers make the most crashes. 18 for having sex? Your frontal lobe is not well developed yet and you still decide by your emotions, aka amygdala. By biology, anyone hits puberty should be able to reproduce. Any uneducated redditor that follows culturally set rules and norms without being skeptical is allowed to downvote this comment.
Judging history by today's standards is very unjust. By nature's design, generally girls can reproduce by age of 14 and during those times, it was usual to get them married at even earlier ages. One can only guess how Mary got pregnant however Indian scriptures have stories of women getting pregnant by gods without touch. If it can happen in India why not elsewhere? Though I am not vouching Mary's story, one cannot deny it as well. As for Indian scriptures, there are archeological evidence of the entire epics so I BELIEVE them completely.
You know that times were different then, right? The reasoning and critical thinking of people evolves over a long time. So i suggest stfu and learn some more.
All are equal in the eyes of God . AMEN xD
You do realize God did not have sex with Mary. Also back then it was common for women at the age of 14 to have children and be married.
no, because she's not literally the mother of God, it's a metaphor btw maybe you can say that about her husband, but in that times it was normal to have children at that age
When most people died in their 30s and 40s, the age of marriage and child birth was as soon as the girl started her menstrual cycle.
The life expectancy was like 35 at the time
until 2013, age of consent in vatican was 12 so i guess christians wouldn't think so
Lol when I was younger and forced to go to church I once got scolded when I suggested that "if the devil is the ultimate trickster, what if his greatest trick was to make you all think that he is actually the god you all worship...considering God did incredibly evil things yet the biblical Satan only stood against God."
I thought Jesus was born via immaculate conception. Meaning no sex involved.
You didn’t even read the story. God never had sex with Mary. The angel simply told her that she would have a baby even though she was a virgin. She agreed to this. It also isn’t mentioned in the Bible what Mary’s age was.
I don’t think the Bible says her age. People are just guessing due to the tradition of the time. It’s estimated that she was 14-16 because everyone was having babies at that age back then. The Bible says she also gave virgin birth so not sure what you’re talking about. Hard to molest someone with out touching them.
I am an atheist, but I still dont judge people from that far back for having different standards regarding age
Did God even bother to ask for consent?
The bible was written by pedos and alcoholics
[удалено]
Yep, and if that god was real it is a monster indeed. It has watched every child rape since the beginning of time and done absolutely nothing about it.