English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is this supposed to be some type of retribution? What about the victim here, what if she doesn’t want to marry a pig who raped her? All that matters is her father receives payment for his “property”.

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 Says that we must cut off a woman’s hand if she touches the “secrets” of a man who is fighting with her husband…“And thine eye shall not pity her.” Once again, there is no punishment for the man she touched, only the woman.

2006-06-25 06:30:17 · 18 answers · asked by mr_mojo_resurrected 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

18 answers

There is more to the rape law. Back up to Deuteronomy 22:23-24 (NAB)

"If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife."

Now, if you read Judges 21:10-24, Numbers 31:7-18, Deuteronomy 20:10-14, Deuteronomy 21:10-14, Deuteronomy 22:23-29, 2 Samuel 12:11-14, Judges 5:30, Exodus 21:7-11 and Zechariah 14:1-2, it's pretty clear the God actually APPROVES of rape and even uses it as a reward for his minions.

If you actually read the Bible, you'll find that God really doesn't give a whooping fundt about women. Women are property.

What you are reading in Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is property law. Raping a mans betrothed is not about whether it is right or wrong to rape someone. It is about the punishment for devaluing another mans property. If you read very carefully, you'll notice there is no prohibition on raping a woman who is not betrothed, that is to say, the property of another man.

-SD-

2006-06-25 07:43:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Deuteronomy 22:28,29 is not a discussion of forcible rape. That is already discussed in the previous verses (25-27) and the penalty was death to the rapist. This is a discussion of mutual relations, of a single woman being seduced, that is why verse 29 says "they" have been found out. And the marriage had to be with the father's permission.
The fact that a man could never divorce a woman, for any reason,that he had humiliated ( even in the case of rape) would make him think twice about using a woman for selfish purposes as is so frequent in today's society, and would have helped maintained a high moral standard in ancient Israel.
So unlike today's world where using and dumpning women seems to have no consequences whatsoever, not even 50 shekels.

2006-06-25 14:01:18 · answer #2 · answered by ontario14 1 · 0 0

This is an example that laws written from one viewpoint seldom work for the whole population.

We had a similarly oxymoronic local law here, that to provide for low income housing, builder/developers had to provide ten percent low cost housing or pay $5000 into a housing fund . For a while they were paying the $5000; no lowcost nor low rent housing was ever provided; then the builders attacked the fees in court. The average cost of a unit of housing is now well above $100,000.

To get back to Deuteronomy, i.e. religious law; do you know in Arabia if your daughter is caught in the back seat of a Chevy with some guy, you, the father, are required to bring her to the central crossroads or market place and cut off her head. What civilization !!

2006-06-25 13:54:49 · answer #3 · answered by fata minerva 3 · 0 0

you need to go back and read... det..22 28-29 again and stop quoting what you dont understand... a bible is to be interpreted by those given the knowledge.. that is what church is for.. try it, any way the det 22... paragraph 25 says if a man finds a betrothed(engaged or promised)woman in the field and forces her(rapes) that man only shall die. the father recieves payment when a man lays with her willingly and she is not engaged to another and the truth comes out. dad is paid...the two of them gets married. once again.. the reason we have church and bible study... and discussion ..is so that people like you do not promote or spread stories to others that no as little as you do. there is a saying that definately applies here. " a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"

2006-06-25 13:44:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This was written thousands years ago. What is your point. I guess you would rather live in a religion free society such as North Korea, China, or Cuba were you have no freedom. You should thank God that this nation was founded by people who had faith in him or you could be the slave to some dictator right now.

2006-06-25 13:34:21 · answer #5 · answered by JESUS IS LOVE 5 · 0 0

They lived in patriarchal society which meant that the men were the rulers and the women were considered property. The Bible is just old history, stories and allegories to keep the average person in line.

2006-06-25 13:35:03 · answer #6 · answered by HamTownGal 3 · 0 0

Well, mr_mojo_resurrected is RIGHT.

Look here:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2022:28-29;&version=47;

2006-06-25 13:48:42 · answer #7 · answered by Casimir Alexander 3 · 0 0

Jesus was pissed off at this too; thats why he told the guys "whoever has a clean vest, cast the first stone", when they wanted to stone the woman for having cheated on her hubby. The guys all had a big lip after he had told them off.

2006-06-25 14:00:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

thats why you need the tradition with the bible


if the woman dose not want to mary the Jerk that raped her she dose not have to. Period.

as for the Dut. 25 that ones a little hader if you truly want the answer then email me and I will look it up

2006-06-25 13:36:02 · answer #9 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 0 0

well that was old days, these pple were savage, primitives in the current world and christianity its totally different. well not all the bible is perfect. it was i agree unfair to women, women those days dint have any rights at all. they were viewed as objects to satisfy their husbands, and be extremly submissive to them no matter what, the men had permission to hit women if they disobeyed. it was really bad.

2006-06-25 13:35:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers