SA asked "Why does the Bible suggest the Rapist marry the woman he has raped?" but used a faulty translation

Question

SexyAbs asked this question:
"Why does the Bible suggest the Rapist marry the woman he has raped?"

and used his own English translation to try and prove it:

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29)
"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

*****
Now here's the shocking part--

Do you realize how many mindless sheep who come to R&S didn't even bother to check if the translation was correct?

If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; King James Version

If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, RSV

A full explanation can be found here:
http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm

This is the problem with R&S... don't take SexyAbs' word for it and don't take my word for it... do the research yourself people

Again, for those who still are having trouble with this, a full explanation can be found here:
http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm

Reverend Soleil:

The old testament was not written in Latin

Again, people, do the research yourselves.
Here is a good place to start:
http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm

Come back after you've read the whole thing

Answer 1

28 ¶ If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. Ex. 22.16, 17

This is the correct translation. It doesn't say rape. It simply says if he has sex with her before marriage.

You are all ignorant to think that God would allow a man to live after he raped a virgin. According to the Law God would have the man executed.

Answer 2

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is often pointed to by atheists, skeptics, and other Bible attackers as evidence that the Bible is backwards, cruel, and misogynist, and therefore, not the Word of God. At first glance, this passage seems to command that a rape victim must marry her rapist. Is that the correct interpretation of the text, and if so, how is that not horribly unfair to the woman? This issue is actually addressed in two passages, both of which are below:

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 “If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days."

Exodus 22:16-17 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride price for her and make her his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride price for virgins."

Together, these passages clearly state that if a man has sex with a virgin who is not betrothed (regardless of whether or not it was rape or consensual) he is obliged to marry her. He should have sought her father's permission first, negotiated a bride-price, and taken her as his wife. Because he did not, he is punished for this—he now must pay up (he can't opt out any more) and marry her (which could be a major punishment in itself if this was a foolish, spur-of-the-moment act and she really wasn't the right woman for him!).

Also note that "he may not divorce her all his days" – this initially doesn't seem significant but is actually a major punishment. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (restated more clearly in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9) allowed for divorce, but only in the case of sexual immorality (the word "uncleanness" refers to this and was translated as such in the LXX). This man now may not divorce his wife even for this reason, but is obliged to continue to support her all his life whatever she does.

But her father is ultimately in authority over her, as her head, until he hands this authority over to her husband. If the man is unsuitable, the father can refuse to give his daughter to him. How many fathers would give their daughter to a rapist? Not many. So, in general, a rapist would actually have to pay a 50 silver shekel fine to her father, and not get a wife at all.

The answer to the question is in Exodus 22:17 - the woman does NOT have to marry a rapist, she must only do what her father says.

Note that throughout the Old Testament no rape victim is ever recorded as being forced to marry a rapist. However it is plausible that there could be circumstances in which a father would choose to have his daughter marry a rapist. In 2 Samuel 13, Amnon, a son of David, rapes his half-sister, Tamar. Tamar was not forced to marry Amnon. Interestingly, though, Tamar seemed to have wanted to marry Amnon after the rape (2 Samuel 13:13-16). Why would she desire such a thing? In that culture, virginity was highly prized. It would have been very difficult for a woman who was not a virgin, and especially a woman who had been raped, to find a man to marry her. It seems that Tamar would have rather married Amnon than live desolate and single the rest of her life, which is what happened to her (2 Samuel 13:20). So Deuteronomy 22:28-29 could be viewed as merciful to the woman, who, because of the rape, would be considered unmarriageable. In that culture, a woman without a husband would have a very difficult time providing for herself. Unmarried women often had no choice but to sell themselves into slavery or prostitution just to survive. This is why the passage leaves marriage to the discretion of the father, because every situation is different, and it is better to be flexible than have a blanket rule.

Also note that the penalty for having sex with an unbetrothed virgin is completely different from the penalty for sex with a married or betrothed woman. Sex with a married or betrothed woman is adultery and was to be punished by the death of both if consensual, or the death of the man if it was rape (Deuteronomy 22:22-27).


Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Deuteronomy-22-28-29-marry-rapist.html#ixzz3fGSd9w5d

Answer 3

Deuteronomy 22
25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:

Answer 4

Anyone can understand that "lay hold on her" or "seizes her" means rape her.

Women were not valued in that culture. This 'law' was considered quite advanced at that time, as it placed a definite value on forcibly deflowering a woman: 50 pieces of silver and lifetime support.

Notice that he is to marry her even though he might already be married, among other interesting aspects of this rule. The intent is to keep men from making virgins unmarriageable, causing a problem for their fathers who then must support them for their entire lives. There's no penalty for 'seizing' unmarried non-virgins, you see.

The bible is an interesting piece of literature applicable only to its time and the culture of that time. Trying to revert to bronze age culture by way of a 'holy book' in order to feel superior to those more advanced is a waste of time.

Answer 5

in accordance to (Deut 22. 13-21) the huge type might in all probability be great. On yet another observe became P a virgin whilst she have been given married? you may thank her god and the common-sense of a few individuals for no longer letting her get to the Oval place of work..

Answer 6

If she's a virgin she's not going to sleep with someone, back in those times it would ruin her chance for marriage.

I'm sure it covers both consensual & non-consensual sex, but I think this has to do with rape.

Answer 7

>> "If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her"

What do you think 'seizes' means?

Answer 8

did look it up
but the fact still remains that she would be unworthy if he decided that he really did not want her after laying with her.

Answer 9

The word "rape" comes from the Latin "rapere" which means, literally, "to seize".

Your "seizing" is just a euphemism for "rape".

Answer 10

That is Jewish law. It has nothing to do with modern society or Christianity.