PDA

View Full Version : Hanegraaff equates RAPE with LOVE



Richard Amiel McGough
10-14-2008, 09:11 AM
Hank Hanegraaff has done much to educate the modern evangelical mind that has been utterly corrupted by outrageously false, incoherent, and unbiblical doctrines. But in the process, he also has promulgated his own perversions of the truth that simply MUST be refuted. One such error that has "stuck in my craw" for many years is his assertion that RAPE is a form of LOVE. He has repeated this ad nausium ad infinitum in both print and voice. Here is a snippet from his article called Hank Speaks Out on the Problem of Evil (http://www.equip.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=muI1LaMNJrE&b=2616123&ct=5897175):



Christian theism acknowledges that God created the potential for evil because God created humans with freedom of choice. We choose to love, to hate, to do good or to do evil. The record of history bears eloquent testimony to the fact that humans, of their own free will, have actualized the reality of evil through such choices. Without choice love is meaningless. God is neither a cosmic rapist who forces his love on people, nor a cosmic puppeteer who forces people to love him. Instead, God, the personification of love, grants us the freedom of choice. Without such freedom, we would be little more than preprogrammed robots.

Do rapists force their "love" on people? Is rape defined as a form or expression of "love"? NO. NO! NO!!! Such an idea is perverse beyond all description! Here is how Webster's defines rape:

Main Entry: rape
Function: noun
Date: 14th century



1 : an act or instance of robbing or despoiling or carrying away a person by force
2 : unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consentRape is the opposite of love. Hanegraaff's statement that God is "not a cosmic rapist who forces his love on people" is not merely perverse and blasphemous, it also is logically incoherent in the extreme. It is a travesty to witness him repeating this absurdity over and over and over again in his attempt to justify his false doctrine that people "freely choose" to go to an eternal conscious torment and that the overwhelming Divine Grace of God through Christ would be equivalent to "rape" if He successfully redeemed His fallen creatures trapped in sin if they didn't "choose" to be redeemed.

Here's an analogy. Suppose a criminal runs into a burning building while attempting to evade the police. He refuses to come out because he fears the consequences of his crimes. Would it be "rape" for the police to go against the will of the criminal and to drag him out of the burning building to save him? Why would we think less of God?

Richard

Victor
10-14-2008, 11:15 AM
Thank you Richard.

I could remind readers that Richard published some comments one of Hanegraaff's books, The Apocalypse Code (http://www.biblewheel.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=6).

Silence
10-17-2008, 03:23 AM
The idea that love is meaningless without "free" choice is a paradox for us humans because God created us in His own image and we had no choice about that. And since we are created in the image of God, that leads to the question of just how "free" God is to "choose" what He will do. The scriptures say that God is love. Is He "free" to not love?
My belief is that the meaning in man's relationship to God is not found in any choice we make, but in the differences between us and Him. We are created in his image, but we are not exactly like Him and never can be because we did not create ourselves.

Christan
10-18-2008, 12:09 PM
Hank Hanegraaff has done much to educate the modern evangelical mind that has been utterly corrupted by outrageously false, incoherent, and unbiblical doctrines. But in the process, he also has promulgated his own perversions of the truth that simply MUST be refuted. One such error that has "stuck in my craw" for many years is his assertion that RAPE is a form of LOVE. He has repeated this ad nausium ad infinitum in both print and voice. Here is a snippet from his article called Hank Speaks Out on the Problem of Evil (http://www.equip.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=muI1LaMNJrE&b=2616123&ct=5897175):


Do rapists force their "love" on people? Is rape defined as a form or expression of "love"? NO. NO! NO!!! Such an idea is perverse beyond all description! Here is how Webster's defines rape:

Main Entry: rape
Function: noun
Date: 14th century



1 : an act or instance of robbing or despoiling or carrying away a person by force
2 : unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consentRape is the opposite of love. Hanegraaff's statement that God is "not a cosmic rapist who forces his love on people" is not merely perverse and blasphemous, it also is logically incoherent in the extreme. It is a travesty to witness him repeating this absurdity over and over and over again in his attempt to justify his false doctrine that people "freely choose" to go to an eternal conscious torment and that the overwhelming Divine Grace of God through Christ would be equivalent to "rape" if He successfully redeemed His fallen creatures trapped in sin if they didn't "choose" to be redeemed.

Here's an analogy. Suppose a criminal runs into a burning building while attempting to evade the police. He refuses to come out because he fears the consequences of his crimes. Would it be "rape" for the police to go against the will of the criminal and to drag him out of the burning building to save him? Why would we think less of God?

Richard
Hi Richard this guy is using a phenomenom that is unpleasant to further his own sickness. Cant we simply say that an unjust interpretation of the Bible by a person that then employs the interpretation as a tool to manipulate others can lead to outright rape , tortures of all kinds ,and murder ? It seems to me he is using a truth to clothe a lie.

Richard Amiel McGough
10-18-2008, 01:38 PM
The idea that love is meaningless without "free" choice is a paradox for us humans because God created us in His own image and we had no choice about that. And since we are created in the image of God, that leads to the question of just how "free" God is to "choose" what He will do. The scriptures say that God is love. Is He "free" to not love?
My belief is that the meaning in man's relationship to God is not found in any choice we make, but in the differences between us and Him. We are created in his image, but we are not exactly like Him and never can be because we did not create ourselves.
Hey there Silence,

Those are very good points. The questions of God's freedom in itself, and God's freedom in relation to human freedom are deep mysteries. It is unfortunate to see it trivialized and forced into a false "either/or" paradigm.

The Calvinist view has introduced the largest theological errors in this regard as far as I can tell. They have dogmatically declared (without any foundation in Scripture whatsoever) that "God has decreed whatsoever comes to pass" and so deny that God has the freedom or the ability to create truly free creatures. This immediately destroys all moral agency and all meaning to life. I began a discussion of this doctrine in a thread called The Doctrine of Eternal Decrees.

Richard

alec cotton
10-20-2008, 03:02 AM
Hank Hanegraaff has done much to educate the modern evangelical mind that has been utterly corrupted by outrageously false, incoherent, and unbiblical doctrines. But in the process, he also has promulgated his own perversions of the truth that simply MUST be refuted. One such error that has "stuck in my craw" for many years is his assertion that RAPE is a form of LOVE. He has repeated this ad nausium ad infinitum in both print and voice. Here is a snippet from his article called Hank Speaks Out on the Problem of Evil (http://www.equip.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=muI1LaMNJrE&b=2616123&ct=5897175):


Do rapists force their "love" on people? Is rape defined as a form or expression of "love"? NO. NO! NO!!! Such an idea is perverse beyond all description! Here is how Webster's defines rape:

Main Entry: rape
Function: noun
Date: 14th century



1 : an act or instance of robbing or despoiling or carrying away a person by force
2 : unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consentRape is the opposite of love. Hanegraaff's statement that God is "not a cosmic rapist who forces his love on people" is not merely perverse and blasphemous, it also is logically incoherent in the extreme. It is a travesty to witness him repeating this absurdity over and over and over again in his attempt to justify his false doctrine that people "freely choose" to go to an eternal conscious torment and that the overwhelming Divine Grace of God through Christ would be equivalent to "rape" if He successfully redeemed His fallen creatures trapped in sin if they didn't "choose" to be redeemed.

Here's an analogy. Suppose a criminal runs into a burning building while attempting to evade the police. He refuses to come out because he fears the consequences of his crimes. Would it be "rape" for the police to go against the will of the criminal and to drag him out of the burning building to save him? Why would we think less of God?

Richard

It's nice to see our Richard with his back up and his tail bristling. As a rule he's laid back ,benign,benevolent,placid Today we find him toe to toe with Hanegraf, Eyeball to eyeball ,daggers drawn and spitting blood. I don't know this feller who rattled Richard's cage but I had a brush with a similar animal some years ago. Prof. Maxwell if I remember rightly. Professor of the New Testament whatever that might be. His eyes were as cold as an Icelandic cod. He stated that God does not command any one to love him----------He doesn't say ' If you don't love me I will Kill you'. My response was ,'No! But he does say ,If you don't love me you will die'. God says ' turn away .Why will you die .Turn and live.' Brer. Maxwell said ,'God doesn't want us to fear him'. I have no doubt that Max fears bullets bombs and blades,but God says do not fear him who can kill the body but fear him who,when he has killed the body can destroy both body and soul in the fires of the land of Hinnom. Of course we have a free will. I choose to believe God. I choose to live according to his laws. If others prefer hell to heaven . Death rather than life ,despair instead of hope ,that is their choice. If in this life only we have hope we are of all men most miserable. If there is no eternity,there is no hope,no justice,no future,no purpose. Just a big black hole of despair. Total oblivion. I prefer to rejoice in hope in the anointed saviour .
Alec

Richard Amiel McGough
10-24-2008, 05:51 PM
It's nice to see our Richard with his back up and his tail bristling. As a rule he's laid back ,benign,benevolent,placid Today we find him toe to toe with Hanegraf, Eyeball to eyeball ,daggers drawn and spitting blood. I don't know this feller who rattled Richard's cage but I had a brush with a similar animal some years ago. Prof. Maxwell if I remember rightly. Professor of the New Testament whatever that might be. His eyes were as cold as an Icelandic cod. He stated that God does not command any one to love him----------He doesn't say ' If you don't love me I will Kill you'. My response was ,'No! But he does say ,If you don't love me you will die'. God says ' turn away .Why will you die .Turn and live.' Brer. Maxwell said ,'God doesn't want us to fear him'. I have no doubt that Max fears bullets bombs and blades,but God says do not fear him who can kill the body but fear him who,when he has killed the body can destroy both body and soul in the fires of the land of Hinnom. Of course we have a free will. I choose to believe God. I choose to live according to his laws. If others prefer hell to heaven . Death rather than life ,despair instead of hope ,that is their choice. If in this life only we have hope we are of all men most miserable. If there is no eternity,there is no hope,no justice,no future,no purpose. Just a big black hole of despair. Total oblivion. I prefer to rejoice in hope in the anointed saviour .
Alec
Hey there my friend!

Yes, I guess I did come across with my "tail bristling." I think I was responding to the visceral, ugly, and outrageously inaccurate image of God as a "cosmic rapist" which is totally outside of my realm of "acceptible discourse" about the holy things concerning God.

There are no simple answers to this question. But I agree with your approach - God does indeed tell us that we have the option of "love Him" or "die" - but that's not presented so much as a "command" as it is a statement of fact concerning the fundamental nature of Reality. Since God is the root souce of Reality and all that is good, to hate God is to hate life, and to hate life is to love death.

Good to be chatting Alec,

Richard