HAHAHAH I love you Krimsa!

So is the bible contradictory or are there really god given contingencies on rape punishment based on regional context?

I so want the evangelicals to field this one!
Sounds like we should get a flock together Mr Seamonster!

I think women just had very little rights in this time period. They were treated somewhat inhumanely. It’s really hard to imagine people having to endure such brutality.

Yea seriously Krimsa, but sadly its still happening in a plethora of so called states around the world.

If only people could jettison the barbaric dogma's.

You are right there. While I was in college I volunteered for Amnesty International so I got to see some of this close up. It’s beyond description. Female clitoral mutilation, widespread rape that goes unpunished. Murder. Religion plays a role absolutely. That’s why it’s often so difficult for human rights organizations to combat.

I would not trust the bible on ANYTHING, let alone to be an authority on rape!

Btw, on another site I opened a debate on male and female circumcision and was horrified to learn about the way women were/are grossly disrespected, it is almost castration.

Female genital cutting, also known as female genital mutilation, female circumcision or female genital mutilation/cutting, refers to "all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs whether for cultural, religious or other non-therapeutic reasons." The term is almost exclusively used to describe tradition, cultural, and religious procedures where parents must give consent, because of the minor age of the subject.

FGC is practiced throughout the world, with the practice concentrated most heavily in Africa. Its practice is extremely controversial. Opposition is motivated by concerns regarding the consent (or lack thereof, in most cases) of the patient, and subsequently the safety and long-term consequences of the procedures. In the past several decades, there have been many concentrated efforts by the World Health Organization (WHO) to end the practice of FGC. The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) has also declared February 6 an "International Day Against Female Genital Mutilation."

Where are all the pro-christians on this thread?

I guess they must be less sheeple over here than I thought...

Not even a single Apologist (and God knows they have more than enough to apologise to).

They just say "it's how women were treated back then, get over it." That is their pat answer to explain these atrocities perpetrated by the god of the OT.

This is only for those who are willing to listen. I'm not interested in debate, we've been through this many times before.



http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm

And...

Deuteronomy 22:25-27:
"But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her."

1) He forced her.
2) The rapist is executed.
3) The victim is not punished.

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

1) He takes her a lies with her.
2) THEY are caught. Not HE, but THEY.
3) She's not engaged.
4) They are forced to be married.

The message is clear, it's not rape. THEY got caught. THEY, not HE. If he was raping her, the rape would have been punished as such. But since the act was consensual, the girl is forced to marry the man. The reason being that the man has "humbled" the girl. There was a terrible stigma on premarital sex in those days (paternity, diseases, pride, etc), so the likelihood of her finding a husband after being caught having sex would be nil. So the man who deflowered the WILLING young lady would be forced to marry her, so that she wouldn't have to live the life of a widow, beggar or prostitute. While the man was denied the right to divorce her, nothing required that she live with him. In fact, many Israelites lived separately (see Abraham and his wife). So she would be put up by the man, but she wouldn't have to live with him or sleep with him. In addition, while the man was denied the right to divorce her, she could still divorce him.

And that is supossed to be considered justice?

City Rape (urban rape victims who fail to scream loud enough )

If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city. -- Deuteronomy 22:23-24

Country Rape

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. ... For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. -- Deuteronomy 22:25-27

Of an unbetrothed virgin

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; 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. -- Deuteronomy 22:28-29

Of prisoners of war

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. -- Numbers 31:15-18

They all know a trap when they see one. No matter the amount of scholarship or exegesis, the minds of the "anti-Christians" (since you are looking for "pro-Christians" I guess that means that the posters so far are the "anti-Christians") are set in stone. Far from being open minded, the "anti-Christians" are completely closed minded. Their reading of scripture is a form of rationalization, wherein they search for scriptures to support their preexisting judgments of Christianity. The other Christians are all too smart to fall for this. You have your mind made up that there can only be one interpretation of this scripture and that any Christian who tries to explain what it means will just be twisting the text. I'm sure I'm going to get beat up over my post, but I'm used to it. I'm dumb, I admit it. I always tell myself "Maybe I'll get through to someone this time...". I know it's a fruitless hope, but I guess I'm a romantic at heart.

Krimsa,

The young lady in the scripture in question wasn't raped, the scripture immediately before it clearly defines that the lady was raped and that her rapist should be executed. The scripture in question doesn't. It simply says that they had sex and got caught. THEY got caught, indicating that the sex was consensual. Only one translation has ever translated it as "rape" and that translation is considered very poor by linguists.

No one is being mean to you. Go ahead, talk us through all of the cited situations concerning rape. Justify each one for us.

Im not talking about that. Im talking about the Law and rape.

This was for women who were not raped. The point is that if she was being raped she would have cried out. When David's daughter Tamar was raped, she didn't cry out and wasn't punished. The law wasn't enforced blindly, it was done so with an eye towards justice. If there was some reason why the girl wouldn't cry out, then she wouldn't be punished. Her rapist ran away and was hunted down by an avenger of blood (her brother) and killed. She was never punished, because she was innocent.



This is rape. The girl isn't punished, but the man is. Notice that there is no need for even witnesses to the fact. The woman's claim of having been raped was all that was necessary. Sorry, but this verse really hurts your case. No other society (not even ours) would put a man to death simply because a woman accused him of rape.



This is not describing rape for the reasons I already explained. Deuteronomy 22:25 makes it clear that it's discussing rape by using the word "force". This verse doesn't imply force and in fact implies the opposite by saying "They be found" (they are caught).



It was not lawful for an Israelite to have sex with a woman who wasn't his wife. Phineas killed an Israelite for having sex outside of marriage and God called him a man after his own heart. The simple fact is that those people were made into slaves. Slaves of the Israelite tradition, which is what we would call a servant. They were freed with pay after seven years of service. They were protected by law. There is nothing in this verse or Israelite tradition which would allow for the captives to be raped. Nothing in what Moses says teaches that.

It's actually somewhat perverse that you imagine that the Israelites were such rapists. You can't just say "I don't believe the Bible" you have to twist the scriptures into condoning rape. That shows to me that you are afraid of the truth of the Bible, so you must twist it to make it as abhorrent as possible, so that you can justify in your own mind the rejection of the Bible.

I think this is both a positive thing and a negative. It's positive in that it shows that your spirit is telling you that the Bible is the truth, even though your soul rebels against it. It's negative in that it shows the lengths you are willing to go to deny the truth.

Nope definitely not set in stone. I appreciate the interpretations.

I really wanted to know what you guys thought about these passages and that is why I posted this.

I have no fear of being converted, trust me its not going to happen, but not becuase of some kind of contempt for the bible, but becuase like I have stated before there is no reason for me to believe any of this as the word of god, it could all be soft and cuddle stuff straight from the mouth of Barney and It would not add any evidence, but it is good to see that someone can rationally justify some of this stuff.

I dont think Rabi's would get circumcision's if they where forced to wait until age of consent to do it.

I dont think anyone should have any part of them chopped off for any reason short of health issues.

You can play that card BTW but its bullocks.

I hear ya spider...

I know I'm just about finished posting at all in the general religion threads.
All it ever gets you is just a sense that some folks enjoy getting under your skin. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth and like you said, it's fruitless.

Not that I think I'll be missed...


the bible supports and endorses rape huh?

good grief...

How do we know she was not raped? Isn’t it possible that a man could have covered her mouth while he was raping her? And let’s say for the sake of argument that she wasn’t raped as you seem to feel since she didn’t cry out. That means that the two "fornicators" will now be stoned to death. Lovely.



I agree, this scenario is clearly rape or we are to assume it is at least. And in this day and age since women had virtually no value once they were no longer virgins, they lost all semblance of worth to their fathers. No man would have them as a bride since they were to be considered "unclean" and "harlots" from that point on. Sure the man will be punished (if they catch him) because he had essentially destroyed property. So no, it really builds my case. Once again we clearly see the mindset that these beastly men had in regards to women. They were nothing more than chattel. Chances are, even if they do catch the man, he will merely be asked to pay her father a few shekels to call it even since that is what he lost in that now he will not be able to marry this daughter off.



This is a similar situation except it is not rape but consensual sex. The daughter loses all value so the man is forced to marry her in order to take her off the hands of her father so he is not burdened with a whore taking up space in his household.



If it was not lawful for an Israelite to have sex with a woman who wasn't his wife, why is Moses asking that they save all of the women? What do you think is going to happen to these women spider? They were prisoners of war. Why would every male be killed and every non virgin female? Wouldn’t they make just as good slaves? The rest of your statement is no responsive.

Cuz everyone gets silly, like the thread on arguments for the existence of g-d turning into a discussion of nazis, etc. It seems to me (and I am often wrong) that most people on this thread have a belief in a higher power, so the posts should have been about the philosophical agruments merit, but quickly degenerated into veiled attempts at conversion. One of the reasons the Supreme Court voted against Intelligent Design being taught in science class was 1. It is clearly not science. 2. it is clearly an attempt to push one specific religion over others.