You see people spouting on about adultery and homosexuality as they believe the bible says that they are abominations, but (from any view point) rape is far worse than both of these put together, why is rape not so bad in the bible?
If you are going to start an answer with "the bible says" please include references.
2007-09-23 19:26:50 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
What? How is rape a subclass of adultery?
2007-09-23 19:32:54 · update #1
Actually if you read that story again, David's son was murdered because he didn't marry his sister after raping her, NOT because he raped her.
2007-09-23 19:34:35 · update #2
Danny N: Please read more of the surrounding deuteronomy passages.That is only if the woman is engaged, if she is not then she is forced to marry her rapist, and if no one hears her scream then they are both killed.
2007-09-23 19:37:49 · update #3
sparklez1026: Here's some rape in the bible
Zechariah 14:2
Numbers 31:17
2 Samuel 12:11-12
2007-09-23 19:54:12 · update #4
God has some pretty strange priorities, huh?
That whole "rape is a kind of fornication" thing (from one of the above answers) still has my head spinning.
If I remember my Old Testament correctly, I believe that a woman who had been raped was forced to marry the man who'd raped her. But then, this is the same source that is okay with slavery.
*Edit -- Oh, and people will oftentimes use the "customs of the time" argument. If god is all-knowing, he should have known that rape would develop into a problem, and outlaw it from the beginning. Just like even though slavery was a product of the times, god in all his "moral absoluteness" should have recognized it as wrong, and outlawed it for his followers, regardless of the "customs of the time". And if some of those things were only relevant during the time it was written, how can we be sure that ANY part of the bible is relevant now?
If people can't look at those things, and see the bible for what it is ...
2007-09-23 20:21:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Interesting, this came up in conversation with a fellow Christian. I'll try to answer.
You seem to hit it right on the nail. It's people. You see, people tend to see sin in degrees. We are not the greatest of judges of which sin is worse or which sin is better. God does not see any difference in sin. A sin is a sin. Whether it's rape, adultery, homosexuality, or stealing a candy bar from a 7-11. We are not the ones to judge, "Well, this sin is so so and this sin is a really really bad."
It'd be helpful if you put a reference as to why "rape is not so bad" from the Bible. Last time I read, it's just as sinful...
Edit: Okay, I read back through your references and it doesn't say anything about rape being "not so bad" as homosexuality or adultery or whatever other sin is out there. I'm not denying that rape ever happened. It occurred alongside ransacking and murder, yes. But worse than homosexuality and adultery? I missed that part?
2007-09-24 02:47:48 · answer #2 · answered by sparklez1026 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I haven't even finished my first cup of coffee yet, and you're going to make me look something up? I'll be right back with a reference. Yes, the Bible does mention rape. The only time a man WASN'T severely punished for rape (read: put to death) was if it was in the city, and the woman didn't cry out for help. In those days, there was no excuse for a woman not crying out, unless the man had some sort of weapon, or he had his hand over her mouth. Not likely, on either one. It would automatically be a death sentence, for the man ONLY. The woman's father (if she wasn't married) received money for it, or if she WAS married, her husband received money from the rapist's estate.
But there was no reason really to mention rape, because most men wouldn't do it. Sex outside of marriage was forbidden, even and especially if it was forced.
As I said, I will get the reference in a moment.
Edit: Former answerers got it first. It's in Deuteronomy 22. Maybe you're wondering why it goes on to say that if a woman didn't cry out, she had to marry the man. The reason was for protection of the man, since the sentence was death.
2007-09-24 02:37:02 · answer #3 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Rape would be a form of fornication, which is mentioned many times throughout the Bible as being wrong, both in the old and the new testament.
Rape is actually discussed in the Old Testament. One of David's sons raped his sister. It took a while but was eventually dealt with. There was no doubt in the writings about this event that it was immoral and sinful.
Hope this helps.
2007-09-24 02:33:10 · answer #4 · answered by bamascrappingirl 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It may have to do with the way things were thought of back them. Woman were considered property in a way. So "taking' your wife was not considered rape.. even tho under the laws of moses it was wrong, just not illegal and could be 'paid back' some how..
adultery and homosexuality were considered things people did willingly. In the bible wrong, but willingly..
2007-09-24 02:36:39 · answer #5 · answered by LadyCatherine 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
"Thou shall not covet." That also includes rape. Rape is definately seen as a sin. However I do believe you may be possibly correct in the lack of emphasis in the subject of rape. Keep in mind that women were seen as less than back then in terms of decission making etc. You will notice that they had multiple wives. In fact they looked at multiple wives as a sign of wealth. The more wives you had the more you could support therefore you are wealthy. Also keep in mind the example by which the bible uses for us to follow in the sense of how to live. It talks about letting go of your possessions and giving yourself to God. It has to refer to life as it was back then because thats the way things were. Its the stories setting. It's when it began and when it was carried out. If you notice Christ didnt have a mistress. Look deeper into the significance in Mary and you see the "virgin" or purity. The culture in the middle east is very different than that of western culture so it is hard to compare the two at face value when reading the bible and not find fault in areas as you have stated. Im not here to argue that you should be a Christian if you are not. I guess what I am saying is that it is based on a time in an area in the world much different than say, the US. If you go to the middle east now, say tomorrow, and your a soldier and you approach a community chief and request to talk to his wife or even just begin by talking to a female in general you may as well pick up your bag a leave because it is very offensive to them. It's taboo to be honest and very disrespectful to the males in their culture. You always ask to talk to the highest ranking male. Period. Imagine what it was like a 1000 years ago. Yet you have to take into account the messages in the bible that are, in reality, far more advanced for that time period. To give up your worldly possessions as a sign of your dedication to God? Back then they were waiting for a powerful king who wore gold and who was a powerful warrior or general. Who would have thought it would be a man who would wash the feet of other men or focus on self humility? Then on top of that to make Mary a sign of power too far gone to be matched by any of the men. To give respect to her reasoning. She is a pillar of devotion in the bible. If you take that example and compare it with that time period....... WOW. So the bible gives respect to women on a level unheard of back then or even now over ther eto be honest. And "never covet". Covet is the act of wanting that which is not yours...... period. And that includes a womans body or a man's body to be frank and fair. Then there is the reference to the body being holy. Something to be treated with reverence and respect. Rape is definately not respectful. The entire story, in its whole, is definately against the act of rape. To be honest I have never actually searched for the number of references to rape as a topic. You may be right. But if you put it all together its definately a "no no" in the bible if you read it and take the whole thing in.
2007-09-24 03:04:19 · answer #6 · answered by Kerrick C 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well back in the day, when the bible was written, rape wasn't really seen as that bad. All the bible says is that, if a man rapes a woman, he has to marry her. Women tended to get the short end of the stick back then.
2007-09-24 02:30:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
As much as i hate christanity, i really think you would be hard pressed to find many christians who think homosexuality is worse than rape.
2007-09-24 02:31:08 · answer #8 · answered by Brent 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because they are,because He said so,flat out...Those things are abominations to Him..Rape IS bad in the bible.U need to start at the beginning,the OT,instead of the middle/end,NT,and study and read..A girl was raped and the men in her family killed him,and it was lawful,u no why,cause that was the custom,anytime,someone did harm to one of the members of the Israelite family..Those of us who follow in the ways of the God of Israel,as we should,we dont just believe..we know...and we believe,cause we know...Shalom
2007-09-24 02:43:58 · answer #9 · answered by Ree 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
"But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. 26"But you shall do nothing to the girl; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death, for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. 27"When he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but there was no one to save her," (Deut. 22:25-28).
2007-09-24 02:35:00 · answer #10 · answered by Danny N 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋