The bible is a fallible text. It was penned by humans who did not understand the modern idea of women's liberation and equality with men under government. Nor did they understand the psychological violation that occurs during rape.
The bible should not be a standard for morality in the modern world. It is filled with reprehensible ideas that consign women to a position of servitude.
Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Leviticus 21:9 And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.
2007-04-21 09:20:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dalarus 7
·
4⤊
4⤋
Perhaps you should begin back at at verse 23? You must also understand the culture & time in which this was written. Vs. 28 & 29 was written about a young woman who is not "engaged" or betrothed, to another man (when you were betrothed, you were considered married, and could not seperate, except by divorce, therefore a child of rape would become the husband's child, not the rapist's)....consider Mary & Joseph in the NT. The man had to pay the silver to her father, because he dishonored her & her father. He was forced to "marry" her, and never divorce her, in order to right his wrong, and to be responsible, should a child come from the rape. This was an assurance that the woman would be cared for, her child would be cared for, and the silver was her "dowry" in case he died & left her with nothing, she could return to her father's house & the money would help care for her.
Note also, in 23:2, that a child of illegitimate birth, could not be included in the assembly of the Lord.....so the man marrying the woman he raped assured this would not be the case for the offspring of the rape.
When we talk OT and NT, yes they are two distinct records, written for a specific purpose, to a specific people. The Old Testament laws were written to the Jews, before their Messiah came, in order to help them obey God, and know right from wrong, good from evil, and many instances, to keep "pure" in both mind & body. (Many laws concerning their eating habits actually kept them very healthy and has a good basis in science & health studies.)
The New Testament was written to the new followers of Jesus Christ, the Messiah of the Jews. He summed up all of the LAW in just two sentences, you should love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all of your soul, with all of your mind, and with all of your Strength. You should love your neighbor as yourself. Following these two principles, it would be unlikely to 1. commit rape & 2. not do the right thing to the woman you raped, if you fell into temptation.
Before you bash Christians & the Bible, you might want to take some history lessons.
2007-04-21 09:48:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by sharbsmith 3
·
1⤊
4⤋
Firstly, when people say we need to get back to God's Laws, what exactly are they talking about? Since you are evidently ignorant (used in the technical sense here) of this, let me make it quite clear to you that the Old Testament mentioned FOUR different sets of laws. Which of these do we need to get back to? For most Christians, that is the Ten Commandments. Do you have a problem with that? Would you like to murder, steal, sleep around with your neighbor's wife, etc?
Secondly, have you considered the fact that, as it relates to the text you quoted, nobody else would marry her? This law was not so much against the young lady but for her protection. And you need to take into consideration that marriage in those days was not based on the modern concept of love (so when love dies, there is widespread divorce) but on economic and social functions. Did you notice that he could never divorce her? So to her advantage, her attitude could be, "You force me to have sex with you, now you are stuck with me for life!!"
Thirdly, no, I don't think that we should adopt this in America, as the situation is now vastly different. There are many men who would marry a rape victim. I think we should have a new law for rapists : physical castration. And this is definitely not from the Bible.
2007-04-21 09:46:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by flandargo 5
·
3⤊
4⤋
Preceding legislation dealt with cases of rape involving a woman already married or engaged. The ruling outlined here is addressed in cases of seduction IN WHICH IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE WOMAN WAS, OR MAY HAVE BEEN, CONSENTING TO THE SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP. The fact that such a relationship had taken place was nevertheless regarded as of vital concern to the community and therefore required that a requisite sum of money be paid to the woman's father. It is assumed that the bride's father's rights have been violated by what had taken place and that appropriate compensation was necessary to offset the loss of the expected bride-price. A further stipulation required that the couple should then marry and that no subsequent divorce was to be permitted. In Exodus 22:16-17 the closely comparable law allows that the father need not consent to giving his daughter to the man, in which case the compensation was still to be paid to the father. Fifty shekels was a significantly large amount and may be assumed to have been equivalent to the average bride-price.
The web site "source" will explain the Hebrew words used in this text.
2007-04-21 09:13:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by bwlobo 7
·
3⤊
5⤋
It does NOT according to Gods plan for salvation!....This is one of God's 600 + mosaic Laws and ordinances that were done away with after the ministry of Jesus Christ (The Church of God) became the Authority of God on earth and the foundation on which True Christianity was built. Following all Gods 10 Commandments is still in full force as Jesus Christ Himself had magnified them. You have not yet been called by God to serve Him and have no clue or understanding of the Bible as your eyes have been veiled to the truth of the Word of God.
2007-04-21 10:06:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by TIAT 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Isn't that a piece of work? Condemn the woman to be married forever to her rapist. Gives you a good idea of how the writers of the bible viewed woman - nothing more than a father's or husband's property. Nice God, there.
They will indeed tell you that those 'laws' no longer apply. But how could anyone worship a god who would have those laws in the first place?
2007-04-21 09:09:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Sun: supporting gay rights 7
·
8⤊
4⤋
the ones who wrote the laws where all MALES so, as usual, what ever they do or say was the ultimate law ,except
we the FEMALES are the ones who always pay the price.
2007-04-21 13:13:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by not fair 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Actually that is a old translation of the bible a more modern one says lies down with her. It is also quoted out of context because the preceding verses indicate that a rapist is stoned to death.There are allsorts of clauses for this type of situation and this verse appears to be the catch all verse that if a man lies down with a girl they are to marry with the bride price paid and no divorce allowed
2007-04-21 09:13:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Vengeance_is_mine 3
·
5⤊
4⤋
Christians live by the New Testament.
Matthew 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (soon to come)
The first sermon is in Acts 2:22
Also this is the scripture that tells us the beginning of the church.
Matthew 28:17
And when they saw him, they worshiped him: but some doubted.
18-And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, ALL POWER IS GIVEN UNTO ME IN HEAVEN AND IN EARTH.
19-GO YE THEREFORE, AND TEACH ALL NATIONS, BAPTIZING THEM IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE SON, AND OF THE HOLY GHOST:
20-TEACHING THEM TO OBSERVE ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER I HAVE COMMANDED YOU: AND, LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAY, EVEN UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD. Amen.
(This is after Christ was Crucified, and the New Testament Church was begun.
2007-04-21 09:30:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Rhonda 3
·
1⤊
4⤋
Monotheism. Look it up. It's a man's world.
2007-04-21 11:03:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋