On Deservedness

[musterion]

She deserves prison for crying rape

Yup.

 

[patrick jane]

Still and all, nobody deserves to be forcibly raped or sodomized. Deserve and earn are simply the wrong words to use. They are inflammatory words chosen to create dialogue.

 

[ok doser]

did the inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah - man, woman and child - deserve to be burned to death with molten sulfur?

 

[patrick jane]

did the inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah - man, woman and child - deserve to be burned to death with molten sulfur?

no, only some

 

[musterion]

did the inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah - man, woman and child - deserve to be burned to death with molten sulfur?

I used to subscribe to the hypotheses that such incidents were due to massive disease, idolatry and whatnot, which God wanted no risk of spreading to His chosen people through whom would come Messiah. There are places where such a case can be made, but I now realize most such speculation not only goes beyond what is written, it's just an attempt to mitigate God's (humanly) uncomfortable actions. So now I simply say what the wise of old said: if the Scriptures say God does it, it needs no excusing, explanation or defense. A holy, just and righteous God doesn't need it.

Now watch the artillery open up on that one.

 

[Greg Jennings]

did the inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah - man, woman and child - deserve to be burned to death with molten sulfur?

Depends on what exactly each man and woman did. Children I'd say are off limits, particularly because they can be rehabilitated even if they have started down a "wicked" path.

But each man and woman should be judged according to their own individual deeds. My method of execution (assuming any deserve it) would certainly not be the agony of molten sulfur, but I guess that does the trick too

 

[Rusha]

Still and all, nobody deserves to be forcibly raped or sodomized. Deserve and earn are simply the wrong words to use. They are inflammatory words chosen to create dialogue.

Actually, those use of those types words in such an instance are chose for the sole purpose of creating discord.

 

[musterion]

Actually, those use of those types words in such an instance are chose for the sole purpose of creating discord.

Perhaps, if someone doesn't actually believe such people (depending on the circumstances) have whatever's coming to them as a result of their own foolishness. In that case, they simply seeks to inflame. Others, however, sincerely believe such is the case, and so do not seek to be contentious. Forgive my saying but I don't think you gave that party nearly enough of a fair hearing, even though you disagreed. But it's over now.

Personally, I find deserve too fluid a term - meaning different things to different people - which is why I avoided using it.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Perhaps, if someone doesn't actually believe such people (depending on the circumstances) have whatever's coming to them as a result of their own foolishness. In that case, they simply seeks to inflame. Others, however, sincerely believe such is the case, and so do not seek to be contentious. Forgive my saying but I don't think you gave that party nearly enough of a fair hearing, even though you disagreed. But it's over now.

Personally, I find deserve too fluid a term - meaning different things to different people - which is why I avoided using it.

I noticed one party kept demanding the term "deserved" be used by their opposition. They knew it to be a fluid term, lacking in precise meaning, therefore they imposed their meaning upon it in order to cast their opponents in a monstrous light. What their opposition was actually saying is just common sense. All actions bring consequences. Knowing a certain consequence is a likely result of a certain behavior, gives a person some responsibility in bringing harm to themselves if they engage in the action anyway. Saying a person has a right to behave as they like doesn't take away this responsibility.

 

[patrick jane]

Actually, those use of those types words in such an instance are chose for the sole purpose of creating discord.

I was being nice with the word 'dialogue'

 

[glorydaz]

I used to subscribe to the hypotheses that such incidents were due to massive disease, idolatry and whatnot, which God wanted no risk of spreading to His chosen people through whom would come Messiah. There are places where such a case can be made, but I now realize most such speculation not only goes beyond what is written, it's just an attempt to mitigate God's (humanly) uncomfortable actions. So now I simply say what the wise of old said: if the Scriptures say God does it, it needs no excusing, explanation or defense. A holy, just and righteous God doesn't need it.

Now watch the artillery open up on that one.

:e4e:

 

[kmoney]

It's a great video, and it goes to show that a stripper being raped, even when a consequence of her bad behavior, will not keep her from knowing the love of God and the need she has for him. God ALLOWS suffering for a higher purpose, and the bystanders denying that happens won't help anyone....especially the woman who was raped.

Rather than try and tell the stripper she is fine doing what she's doing and has no fault, explain how Jesus sees her as a ruined and broken rose who is in need of His love. Explain how we all sin and come short....how we all deserve death, but are offered LIFE. The Gospel can't be preached without the recognition of our sin and our need for a Saviour. Telling a stripper she has no sin and doesn't deserve to suffer it's consequences is not the way to preach the Gospel to anyone.

My position has never been to tell promiscuous girls that what they are doing is fine. :idunno: I think you can believe that without thinking they have earned or deserved to be raped.

 

[kmoney]

I used to subscribe to the hypotheses that such incidents were due to massive disease, idolatry and whatnot, which God wanted no risk of spreading to His chosen people through whom would come Messiah. There are places where such a case can be made, but I now realize most such speculation not only goes beyond what is written, it's just an attempt to mitigate God's (humanly) uncomfortable actions. So now I simply say what the wise of old said: if the Scriptures say God does it, it needs no excusing, explanation or defense. A holy, just and righteous God doesn't need it.

Now watch the artillery open up on that one.

:CRASH:
:Grizzly:
:Clete:

 

[LoneStar]

My position has never been to tell promiscuous girls that what they are doing is fine. :idunno: I think you can believe that without thinking they have earned or deserved to be raped.

Right on.

 

[ClimateSanity]

My position has never been to tell promiscuous girls that what they are doing is fine. :idunno: I think you can believe that without thinking they have earned or deserved to be raped.

If you knowingly sin, then you have earned the consequences of that sin....and no sins are excluded from that principle.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Right on.

Right on .....that some sins are exempt from consequence. :sigh:

 

[LoneStar]

Right on .....that some sins are exempt from consequence. :sigh:

Your consequence seens to be sin for sin (rape for promiscuity). Far cry from justice.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Your consequence seens to be sin for sin (rape for promiscuity). Far cry from justice.

So is it your claim that God never uses someone's sins to punish the sins of another person?

 

[LoneStar]

So is it your claim that God never uses someone's sins to punish the sins of another person?

IF a just consequence is rape for promiscuity, then the rapist shoudn't be punished for doing God's will.

 

[ClimateSanity]

IF a just consequence is rape for promiscuity, then the rapist shoudn't be punished for doing God's will.

You can sin and being doing Gods will. The Babylonians were sinning when they invaded Judah and carried them away as slaves and yet ,unknowingly, they were carrying out Gods will.