A question for those who refer to the "a woman who is raped has to marry their rapist" scriptures?

Question

Please consider this perspective about the fact that these women were forced to marry their rapist in the Old Testament Times. From the perspective of the 21st century, it is despicable to expect a woman to marry the rapist, but if you were in that time period?

Take into consideration the culture at the time that scripture was written and please frame your answer in that context.

It was an era where a women who was not a virgin had almost no hope of ever finding a suitable marriage and to be unmarried was a cause for shame...a woman could not have an abortion, and in that day a man could have multiple wives and the woman may end up pregnant.

As a woman in a culture where women had no rights, If you were in that situation in that time period, which would you choose? To remain unmarried with no means of supporting yourself, never to be married and to be shamed for not being a virgin, or at least to have the respectability of a marriage, even if it was to a person who hurt you?

Answer 1

I actually was reading my Bible one day and I read that it says that if you try to struggle and someone rapes you then you don't have to marry the person. Read the Bible.. but I guess you're asking for scriptures. I can't think of any. \

But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. - Deut. 22:25

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. [a] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Deut. 22:28-29

Answer 2

The times in the Bible took place over a variety of eras. .

Name a passage in the Bible that states it was a must. If i am not mistaken - many women mentioned in the Bible on their own merit, not those that just got a passing mention as being the wife of the brother of so and so, oftentimes went against the grain for their faith and their family and defied "the laws"

Keep in mind that the laws of the time or the country was also not always judaic law. Something are mentioned to give you historical context into traditions/to set up the saga of the faithful versus being a mandate.

Answer 3

I like your explanation that makes perfect sense. But there was a surplus of women. So it was rough on them and reading some of the cruel mean things they did to women made me think men are evil.
But as someone pointed out to me the mens' life was no piece of cake. A women was taken care of by her father until she was married and provided for.
A man had to go to war. If he was small to bad. if he was mild and didn't really like killing it made no difference.
the weak or sickly was killed off first. Leaving only the mighty men to bred. They were given the wives. This kept the human race strong. Today it is just the oposite. The weak or crippled stay home to bred.
As one work put it in the middle east husbands are not the central focus of a womens life. They are there to get them pregnant and provide food and shelter. If they die another is appointed. Or they are purchased by someone else.
Their children were their life. They focused their lives around their children. So to not have a child was a horrible thing.
Even their husbands looked down on them for that.
So the more kids they had the more he had to feed and clothe. You would think he would be glad when a wife wasn't having babies.

Answer 4

I would rather shame myself and remain unmarried, rather than marry a violent man. Who cares what others think?

Wow, if someone raped me I would cut "it" off. Even if it would mean that I got stoned for it, I'd rather die with dignity than live and marry my attacker.

It's sad that back them men were that sexist thant rape wasn't a crime. Not to mention...you can't tell if someone is a virgin or not. Especially back then-- that was impossible and still is today. So if you were that weak to have to feel accepted and marry him, couldn't you also say it never happened and you lost your hymen another way? (considering how often that loss has without sex...I was born without one!)

Answer 5

Where is that found? My take on the scripture I think you are talking about is that the men couldn't "get it on with" or "get a baby on" or just generally run around producing babies they weren't required to take care of - they also could "lay with" (read that have sex with) a woman without consequences to them and (sometime unfortunately) to her.

BTW - there are many parts of the world, non-Bible believing parts, that still treat women as chattel, and children as possessions to be bought, sold and used.

Anyway - what scripture are you quoting - I'd really like to research this question.

Thanks.

Answer 6

Your argument is a totally reasonable one. I believe the Bible is not divine, and was a product of its time. Your argument is entirely consistent with that belief. There is a problem with scriptures like that one only when people think that the scripture is divine, and somehow reflects the will of a real god.

Answer 7

See, that's the whole point right there. The entire darn book is a relic from 3000 odd years ago, yet people seem to think it is still valid in todays more enlightened world. The entire Bible needs to be recognized for what it is: a mythology of a nomadic, sheephearding people living in ancient times, not a timeless guide for living.

Answer 8

that does send the wrong message to rapists and reward the wrong actions . the bible has a few points of contention where it supports injustice towards the idea of human rights and should not .how long does it take for a human with god on his side to get it right ?

Answer 9

Yes. It's called moral relativism. Good for you.

The problem arises when people take such perspectives out of their historical and social context and treat them as eternal moral absolutes. Assuming they were ever morally justifiable, which is sometimes a stretch with the OT.

We atheists are merely pointing out the absurdity of such "absolutes".

Answer 10

ya know, i was very tempted NOT to give the scripture reference of your topic. And folks would think your a nut for maybe making this up. but i digress........

Deuteronomy 22:28-29