so why are christcucks against child marriage?
inb4 the little one verse is posted even if that doesn't refer to children

the fbi can track your ip

Christianity doesn't forbid pedophilia because pedophilia was normalized in Hebrew times.
Turns out religion is whatever the fuck people feel like at any given moment.

Put some pants on, anon

>>510185689 (OP)
You will have a millstone hung about your neck, nonce.

>>510185744
They are all pedophiles though

>>510185689 (OP)
>Theres nothing in the Bible about harming children and dont give me any verses about not harming children crap

>>510185878
Why are Americans so sadistic? I know good people. Good people don't laugh or mock mentally handicapped people who make bad decisions.
America is a sadist's paradise where human dignity is not a right.

>>510185894
>>510185964
Jewsus wasn't talking about actual children you fucking idiots

The Old Testament is VERY kill your neighbor and fuck the children. Many such passages, Joshua. Maybe get used to it.

>>510185744
pedophilia advocacy is not illegal
>>510185964
give me ANY verse that mentions that child marriage is actually sinful, the verses about "little ones" aren't about children but about the vulnerable and weak

>>510185689 (OP)
If it was up to them, they'd make the minimum age of marriages 12 years for girls and 13 years for boys, the way it is in judaism, the way it was in christian countries before feminism. Feminists there might make sense in the sense of births could be dangerous at that young age, but then such humanism could be at the root of birth decline. And because kids are always crazy, I'd only legalize such young intercourse for married couples. Fornication in general should be frowned upon, the way catholics would rather have it.
But on the other hand, it shouldn't be up to the church to decide, because maybe their deceitful nature could throw the atheis crowd to embrace fornication as a norm, which is not very cool if you really think about it.

>>510185894
Rothschild? Is that you "rules for thee but not me"ing again?

>>510186000

You wouldn't think as much if dude was paying your underage daughter a visit.

>>510185689 (OP)
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6)

Also biblical marriage is defined between a man and a woman, not children.

>>510185894
>>510185964
I think I know which verse you're talking about,
>But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
Little ones obviously refers to children, but it doesn't say anything about fucking. The only theoretical sin could be related to fornication, but that can be avoided with marriage.
It also exempts atheist children, since God explicitly states "who believe in me".
This loophole was probably created because ancient Hebrews did all kinds of fucked up shit to "enemy" infants.

>>510186339
I would have a moment of weakness if it happened to me personally, maybe.
The difference is that it doesn't even happen to you, yet here you are mocking mentally disabled people, anyway.

>>510186128
Legal minor is a meaningless term. Any female capable of giving birth to children is fair game.

>>510186422
explain who the 'little ones" are

>>510186659
“And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.” (Matthew 18:2-5)

Probably because you pedophiles just want to groom a sex slave for your dungeon.
Not that you care beyond a walking onnahole that is born to please your sex fantasies.
You never stood a chance without going for the inexperienced

>>510185744
Lol at your lack of freedom of speech. Do you have a loicense for that thought guvna?

>>510185689 (OP)
?????????? are you good nigga

>>510186460

Fuck em. He gets the ridicule he deserves.

>>510186775
That's not pedophilia. Someone who targets children because they're easier is not a pedophile.
They'd be an opportunistic offender. A real pedophile is attracted to a child's physical features.

>>510186649
> female capable of giving birth
How would you know? What if she was five, like this youngest mother?

>>510186925
Pedo detected. kys

>>510187008
Why did you bother making 4 posts in this thread if you can't even handle someone defining the very subject of the thread?
Stop wasting everyone's time.

>>510186990
The exception does not nullify the rule. Anything can be taken out of context and perverted to an irrational extreme. Use common sense.

>>510187175
Fortunately, there's no such retarded rule.

Most people don't know that sex over 18 is completely new and are uninformed

I find it interesting that ~100-150 years ago marrying a mere 10 year old was normal for 20-something or even older guys.

>>510187468
And dare I say, it was normal in the USA, for example. I'm not into that kind of shit, but for some reason it wasn't a crime.

>>510185894
We have history on our side FILTHY KIKE!

>>510185689 (OP)
So there’s two:
> Matthew 18:1–6 “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
And
> Matthew 18:3–4 “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”

Basically Christ saying it’s okay to kill people who make children sin, and the second verse says that children are models for what you should be like.

A child can’t marry because a child can’t have children. That’s what marriage in the Bible is: a man and a woman becoming one in order to have children.

I won’t argue with you or respond to this post. May Christ be with you.

>>510187685
>I won’t argue with you or respond to this post.
I wouldn't either if I started making shit up,
>A child can’t marry because a child can’t have children.
What's the verse for this? Also, some children experience early menarche.

>>510186422
>>510186460
>Little ones obviously refers to children
No, it doesn't
Matthew 18:1-5
>At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
>He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me
The "children" are his followers who need to be humble and ignorant and easily led like children. This is an admonishment against false teachers, there is nothing about sex or actual children here. This is as bad as retards calling masturbation "Onanism" when Onan's sin was lack of familial responsibility

>>510187468
I’m gonna miss Epstein when the Donetsk rings open back up…

>>510187685
Fuck off and die you illiterate piece of shit

>>510187809
Yes it does. Read the previous verses to get the whole picture:

“And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.” (Matthew 18:2-5)

Much like words derived from the term salvation, it is defined by context. E.g.

“Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” (1 Timothy 2:15)

“Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved.” (Acts 27:31)

Obviously words don't always mean the exact same thing everywhere.

Pedophilia whether you like it or not, has been present in all types of cultures, including the highest WESTERN civilizations, such as Greece. Greeks openly practiced pedophilia and parents of the boy even wanted him to be a "lover" of rich and influential men.

A lot depends on the culture, as this does not happens everywhere. In Afghanistan little boys are being dressed in girls' clothes and put on a makeup and made to dance in a sexual manner, and then the elder men engage in sexual acts with them. For them it's normal, a part of culture. They call it "bacha bazi", however the Talibans prohibited it, so Afghanis just do it when nobody is looking.

1. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3384027/Women-children-boys-pleasure-secret-shame-Afghanistan-s-bacha-bazi-dancing-boys-dress-like-little-girls-make-skirts-abused-paedophiles.html
2. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-53396586
3. https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/shame-and-silence-bacha-bazi-in-afghanistan/
4. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/bacha-bazi-afghan-subculture-child-sex-slavery-050719513.html
5. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2018/01/24/the-revised-afghanistan-criminal-code-an-end-for-bacha-bazi/

Curiously, the US government and its Army appears to tolerate the practice of bacha bazi and even punishes soldiers who save Afghani children from Afghani men raping them: https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/green-beret-afghanistan-bacha-bazi/

Today, in modern world, we should focus on the cause of the problem and rehabilitation, instead of punishing, because otherwise ostracized socially pedophiles will continue to form their networks and the problem will never be solved.

This, however will not happen, as long as intelligence agencies can use pedophile networks for blackmail material, so they can control and manipulate people, they would need some kind of replacement for that.

MORE IN REPLY

>>510185689 (OP)
It says don't buttfuck

To be a gay pedo or a hetero pedo butfucking is a must

>>510188925
>Greece

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece

The problem with modern, western pedophiles is that most of them were themselves a victim of it and as a result they become one. Human sexuality is rather complicated and many details affect it. One of the strongest desires for sexual contact with children by pedophiles who themselves were victimized, is the feeling of POWER. It’s similar to heterosexual men engaging in promiscuity, it increases their ego, and some of them with strong desire to feel powerful (especially to hold power over another human being) engage in sexual acts that are considered to be dehumanizing. In extreme cases it ends with rape.

Pedophiles often suffer from psychological and emotional issues and the two most common ones are feelings of being powerless and resentment towards the world in general for what has happened to them, hence some of them want to "corrupt" the children and victimize them as both a kind of "revenge" for what happened to them and in order to feel “powerful”. For them sex is often more about power than pleasure.

In many cases (in the west) it's a generational issue, and most of the problems stem from the culture itself. In societies where pedophilia is normal or at least semi-normal, children rarely complain about its effect on them. Sometimes it's exactly the opposite, as in less developed societies it allows them to rise up the social ladder by being a "lover" of powerful men. It's similar to prostitution in modern Asian countries, such as Thailand.

1. https://theconversation.com/the-causes-of-paedophilia-and-child-sexual-abuse-are-more-complex-than-the-public-believes-94915
2. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00940/full
3. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19392397.2010.511157?journalCode=rcel20
4. https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/4478390

In short-what's "wrong" to you, is desirable for others. It all depends on the environment and the culture.

>>510185689 (OP)
>1 Corinthians 7:36-36But if anyone thinks he is behaving improperly by remaining unmarried, and if he is past the bloom of youth, then this is what should take place: Let him do what he wants; he does not sin. Let them marry.

WE-And if a man feels that he is doing the right thing for the woman he is to marry, then let him marry her. That is, if she is no longer young, and if he wants her very much. Then he must do as he thinks best. It is not wrong for him to do it.

WEB-But if any man thinks that he is behaving inappropriately toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of her age, and if need so requires, let him do what he desires. He doesn’t sin. Let them marry.

RGT-But if any man thinks he is behaving less than optimally toward his virgin, if she has passed the flower of her age, and so requires, let him do what he will. He does not sin. Let her be married.

NKJV-But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry.

NET-If anyone thinks he is acting inappropriately toward his virgin, if she is past the bloom of youth and it seems necessary, he should do what he wishes; he does not sin. Let them marry.

NASB1995-But if any man thinks that he is acting unbecomingly toward his virgindaughter, if she is past her youth, and if it must be so, let him do what he wishes, he does not sin; let her marry.

NASB-But if anyone thinks that he is acting dishonorably toward his virgin, if she is past her youth and it ought to be so, let him do what he wishes, he is not sinning; let them marry.

>>510185689 (OP)
>>510189096
ESV-If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry—it is no sin

ERV-A man might think that he is not doing the right thing with his fiancée. She might be almost past the best age to marry. So he might feel that he should marry her. He should do what he wants. It is no sin for them to get married.

DLNT-But if one thinksthat heis behaving-dishonorably toward his virgindaughter— if she is beyond-the-bloom-of-youth, and it ought to be so— let him do what he wants. He is not sinning. Let them marry.

DARBY-But if any one think that he behaves unseemly to his virginity, if he be beyond the flower of his age, and so it must be, let him do what he will, he does not sin: let them marry.

CSB-If any man thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, if she is getting beyond the usual age for marriage, and he feels he should marry—he can do what he wants. He is not sinning; they can get married.

>troony acting like xhe gives a shit what the bible says in order to justify xer pedophilia

>>510187545
> 10 years old until 1871 when it was lowered to 7 years old
I wonder what would be the reason. What was their rationale?

>>510188430
>Read the previous verses to get the whole picture:
Yes, tardo, I gave the context showing that in verse 6(the part that is always referenced) he is not talking about actual children
Matter 18:7-9
>Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come! If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
And 7-9(also oddly never referenced) continues making it clear this has nothing to do with actual children. It is saying to cut contact with family members who aren't supportive of you being in the cult. Which is a sentiment we see in red letters again and again