Is the Bible wrong about virgins? Deuteronomy 22:13-21

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,494
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So before engaging in this conversation I ask that you use wisdom. To use wisdom means to read the whole post and then respond by either agreeing, by asking clarifying questions, by disagreeing by countering my points or either by further elaborating on the story. Trigger warning for the sensitive here. This disagrees with biblical inerrancy. This post will be made in three sections. The scriptures, the errors in the scriptures and lastly a healthier understanding of what it could mean.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Scriptures.

Deuteronomy 22:13-21
New American Standard Bible

Laws on Morality

13 “If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and he charges her with shameful behavior and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her to have evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful behavior, saying, “I did not find your daughter to have evidence of virginity.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread out the garment before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take the man and rebuke him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he is not allowed to divorce her all his days.

20 “But if this charge is true, and they did not find the girl to have evidence of virginity, 21 then they shall bring the girl out to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death, because she has committed a disgraceful sin in Israel by playing the prostitute in her father’s house; so you shall eliminate the evil from among you.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Errors.
So there are two main things wrong with this. One is the scientific errors of virginity and the other is the issue of woman abuse and murder.

Claim one.
It says that if a man does not find evidence of his newly wed virgin wife then her parents are given the chance to collect evidence themselves and bring it before the priest or else the woman is to be stoned to death.

What’s the evidence? It can only be one thing. The parents are going to the bedroom to find bloody sheets. See ancient Jewish people believed that all virgins bleed every time. That if a woman did not bleed, then it meant that she was not a virgin and that meant she must have willingly had sec with another man. But as many women, scientist and medical experts can attest to, that’s not true. Not all women bleed the first time. Hymens could be naturally different from broth. Hymens can be broken by riding horses, donkeys, camels and so on. They can be broken by being sexually abused as kids by their fathers , or they could have been raped and so on. But it’s simply not true that all virgins bleed the first time. This is wrong.

Secondly it’s always evil to kill innocent , non threatening people. It’s vile. Any Jewish men that murdered their probably underage wives were garbage. All the Jewish men that took concubines as their sex slaves were garbage. Rape is always wrong. No matter what. Killing a 16 year old just because she was molested as a kid and had a broken hymen or even if she slept with someone else before getting married, is evil.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Healthier Biblical Hermeneutics


All of the collective scriptures are known as meditation texts. Jesus himself says to mediate on the word of God. You read the Bible front to back, back to front, side to side and pick up biblical tropes, patterns and hyperlinks. We know that Yahweh hates human sacrifices and that he abhors the murder of innocent people.

So we must view all these passages through the corrective lens of Jesus. We must view all of these passages by knowing Yahweh desires mercy and compassion and love. So if you are two parents and you just heard your daughter has been accused of fornication by her newly wed husband and that she was soon to be murdered by people throwing rocks at her until she died what would you do? Well you would want to save her.

When reading those passages we see something that should make us think of something earlier. What did these parents witness and grow up hearing from the Bible about kids being murdered? They would think of the exodus. The angel of death. A Christian should also see Christ in this story. In all these stories we know shed blood equals protection from death. To save their kids from the angel of death they smeared blood up and down their houses posts.

One thing to pay attention to is that the parents were the only ones that could collect the evidence. Not the priests, not the judges and not the husband. Only the parents. They had to collect it and bring it before the priests. So remembering the previous story would mean the parents had plenty of time to collect blood of a lamb and spread it on the garment saving their daughter. Just like a
Rahab lied to save then others. We know lying out of love to protect someone is not bad. We know Jesus was against stoning a woman. We know God hates human sacrifice. So the parents would collect the garment, put blood on it and then bring it before the priests.

so why would god say that? It’s to protect women. Yahweh inspired mankind through their paradigm. It’s why in Joshua the sun moves while the earth stays still. God wanted to reach mankind in a way they could understand .

This was the first post of yours that I’ve read. I like your inquisitiveness and the way you framed the discussion and I’m sorry it has t resulted in much of one. Mostly just people posturing as would be expected when honest inquiry meets uncomfortable belief.

It’s actually commendable. It’s the Berean approach, where one ‘examines the scriptures to see if these things are true’ - the default reason must be that sometimes the premise or understanding / isn’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skovand1075

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,494
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I told this story a couple of months ago, but I think it is appropriate here:

I was honored to attend the wedding of a wonderful Jewish couple, friends of mine since college. As we and all their friends sat around their hotel room that evening reminiscing about old times, the groom's father sent up a Maitre D' with a bottle of red wine and one of the hotel's towels. The groom then poured some of the red wine on the towel and sent the Maitre D' back to his father's room with the red-stained towel as "proof" of her virginity. My friend then explained the meaning of this ritual in Judaism. His father of course knew the bride was not a virgin; the couple had been living together since we were in college, for crying out loud. Yes, some ritual deceit was involved. But Judaism is not about heartless legalism (despite Christian stereotypes to the contrary). They understand "For I desire compassion and not sacrifice" full well.

I just love this - and I love the Jewish people. I find that so refreshing in their approach and balance. It teeters on a fulcrum between their Law and tradition on one end and whatever ridiculous ‘work-around’ they can come up with on the other.

One of the men I work with is an orthodox Jewish doctor who has become a dear friend. We love learning from one another and it’s always a joy to gain his perspective. We both seem to have a good amount of Jacob in our blood. If you don’t know what I mean by that then you aren’t familiar enough with Jacob, never mind me and my doctor friends.

This father loved his daughter and new son-in-law. He also loves the traditions. ‘They want proof? -Here... give them proof! Pour some of this wine on the towel (not the bedsheets- I don’t want to get a bill for that) so that I can fulfill the requirements. - Hey, but not too much, because it’s expensive wine!’
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lambano

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,696
5,575
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So before engaging in this conversation I ask that you use wisdom. To use wisdom means to read the whole post and then respond by either agreeing, by asking clarifying questions, by disagreeing by countering my points or either by further elaborating on the story. Trigger warning for the sensitive here. This disagrees with biblical inerrancy. This post will be made in three sections. The scriptures, the errors in the scriptures and lastly a healthier understanding of what it could mean.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Scriptures.

Deuteronomy 22:13-21
New American Standard Bible

Laws on Morality

13 “If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and he charges her with shameful behavior and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her to have evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful behavior, saying, “I did not find your daughter to have evidence of virginity.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread out the garment before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take the man and rebuke him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he is not allowed to divorce her all his days.

20 “But if this charge is true, and they did not find the girl to have evidence of virginity, 21 then they shall bring the girl out to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death, because she has committed a disgraceful sin in Israel by playing the prostitute in her father’s house; so you shall eliminate the evil from among you.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Errors.
So there are two main things wrong with this. One is the scientific errors of virginity and the other is the issue of woman abuse and murder.

Claim one.
It says that if a man does not find evidence of his newly wed virgin wife then her parents are given the chance to collect evidence themselves and bring it before the priest or else the woman is to be stoned to death.

What’s the evidence? It can only be one thing. The parents are going to the bedroom to find bloody sheets. See ancient Jewish people believed that all virgins bleed every time. That if a woman did not bleed, then it meant that she was not a virgin and that meant she must have willingly had sec with another man. But as many women, scientist and medical experts can attest to, that’s not true. Not all women bleed the first time. Hymens could be naturally different from broth. Hymens can be broken by riding horses, donkeys, camels and so on. They can be broken by being sexually abused as kids by their fathers , or they could have been raped and so on. But it’s simply not true that all virgins bleed the first time. This is wrong.

Secondly it’s always evil to kill innocent , non threatening people. It’s vile. Any Jewish men that murdered their probably underage wives were garbage. All the Jewish men that took concubines as their sex slaves were garbage. Rape is always wrong. No matter what. Killing a 16 year old just because she was molested as a kid and had a broken hymen or even if she slept with someone else before getting married, is evil.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Healthier Biblical Hermeneutics


All of the collective scriptures are known as meditation texts. Jesus himself says to mediate on the word of God. You read the Bible front to back, back to front, side to side and pick up biblical tropes, patterns and hyperlinks. We know that Yahweh hates human sacrifices and that he abhors the murder of innocent people.

So we must view all these passages through the corrective lens of Jesus. We must view all of these passages by knowing Yahweh desires mercy and compassion and love. So if you are two parents and you just heard your daughter has been accused of fornication by her newly wed husband and that she was soon to be murdered by people throwing rocks at her until she died what would you do? Well you would want to save her.

When reading those passages we see something that should make us think of something earlier. What did these parents witness and grow up hearing from the Bible about kids being murdered? They would think of the exodus. The angel of death. A Christian should also see Christ in this story. In all these stories we know shed blood equals protection from death. To save their kids from the angel of death they smeared blood up and down their houses posts.

One thing to pay attention to is that the parents were the only ones that could collect the evidence. Not the priests, not the judges and not the husband. Only the parents. They had to collect it and bring it before the priests. So remembering the previous story would mean the parents had plenty of time to collect blood of a lamb and spread it on the garment saving their daughter. Just like a
Rahab lied to save then others. We know lying out of love to protect someone is not bad. We know Jesus was against stoning a woman. We know God hates human sacrifice. So the parents would collect the garment, put blood on it and then bring it before the priests.

so why would god say that? It’s to protect women. Yahweh inspired mankind through their paradigm. It’s why in Joshua the sun moves while the earth stays still. God wanted to reach mankind in a way they could understand .
Certainly, it is not wrong to follow the ways of Christ or even to do what is morally good. But that is not why the scriptures and history are what they are.

All these things that we now read of, they are revelations of God to mankind of what is right and wrong by God--yes, but also the revelation of each person's folly, the good and the evil, before the Judgement. In fact, these things are not even so much for this life of being born in the flesh, but rather for that life of being born of the spirit of God, that we should overcome the folly to become perfect just as our Father in heaven is perfect.

It is a hard saying for those existing in the flesh and the present age to comprehend that this life is but a mere sketch (that created image) that is to be discarded by the fire of the Spirit, dissolved with fervent heat just as all the elements of the earth from which we were made.

What then should our rationale and pattern for life in this world be?

Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

14 Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; 18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen
. 2 Peter 3:11-18​

So then--the matter of virgins:

It is not that those things we have read are just or right, or that we should critique the Bible... But rather, that certain virgins may indeed have been born to die to show the error of some injustice to a thousand generations, just as Israel's light upon a hill being made dim has given life to these many generations throughout all the world in Christ who also died, that we might be saved.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mr E

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,494
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Certainly, it is not wrong to follow the ways of Christ or even to do what is morally good. But that is not why the scriptures and history are what they are.

All these things that we now read of, they are revelations of God to mankind of what is right and wrong by God--yes, but also the revelation of each person's folly, the good and the evil, before the Judgement. In fact, these things are not even so much for this life of being born in the flesh, but rather for that life of being born of the spirit of God, that we should overcome the folly to become perfect just as our Father in heaven is perfect.

It is a hard saying for those existing in the flesh and the present age to comprehend that this life is but a mere sketch (that created image) that is to be discarded by the fire of the Spirit, dissolved with fervent heat just as all the elements of the earth from which we were made.

What then should our rationale and pattern for life in this world be?

Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

14 Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; 18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen
. 2 Peter 3:11-18​

Wonderfully put, Scott.

We see the shadow or reflection of something and mistake it for ‘the thing.’ Your shadow is only a likeness. Your reflection is only an image— not ‘the real thing.’ Not the real you.

We can examine the physical form understanding that what is below is only “like” what is above, but not ‘actually’ the same. Only a representation. A likeness.

His prayer was that we might experience life in its fullness, by living here like that greater realm where things are seen clearly just as they are- without distortion or interpretation or confusion. On earth as it is in heaven, -May His kingdom come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScottA

Skovand1075

Active Member
Jul 13, 2022
331
79
28
35
Alabama.
www.instagram.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Oh, that.

Historically, the Protestant Reformation went with Sola Scriptura as a reaction to certain abuses by the leadership of the Church, most notably selling indulgences to finance a Vatican building project. Luther got into more trouble from getting in the way of the Vatican's money-making scheme than he did for his Sola Fide doctrine. Sola Scriptura was a means of taking ecclesiastical power out of the hands of an elite clergy and presaged the later upheavals in Western Civilization including the American revolution, the French Revolution, the labor movements, et. al.

Sola Scriptura assumes the Bible is the fixed standard for understanding God's will, and not some Magestrium's dictum. The leadership is held accountable to the same standard as the people. Biblical inerrancy is logically necessary for Sola Scriptura to work, so inerrancy is one of the core dogmas on which the whole system stands, similar to Euclid's Fifth Postulate.

Look, I've long recognized that Biblical inerrancy is not intellectually tenable. (Did Judas hang himself, or splatter his guts out in a fall?) Yet I am convinced that the basic facts about Jesus's sayings and life, death, and resurrection as recorded in the Bible are true. And as my company's representative Industry Standards bodies, I understand full how important standards are. I also know how flawed we humans are (the Reformers got that Depravity thing right); "Every man did what was right in his own eyes" doesn't work. My own faith tradition says to use Scripture, Church Tradition, Reason, and Experience. With compassion and mercy always in mind. May God's Holy Spirit guide me.

i believe the story of the gospels as well. I think Jesus literally died, came back from the dead and ascended to wherever his father is.

but that does not change my stance on the things I’ve mentioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lambano

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,001
4,801
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
i believe the story of the gospels as well. I think Jesus literally died, came back from the dead and ascended to wherever his father is.

but that does not change my stance on the things I’ve mentioned.
You think a power to resurrect the dead is all wet behind the ears when it comes to keeping commitments?
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2019
1,879
938
113
62
Port Richey, Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Quote the verse where the Bible says “all virgins bleed on their time having sex”.
I was being kind by overlooking your careless handling of God’s word.

It’s literally in the OP dude….

13 “If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and he charges her with shameful behavior and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her to have evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful behavior, saying, “I did not find your daughter to have evidence of virginity.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread out the garment before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take the man and rebuke him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he is not allowed to divorce her all his days.

20 “But if this charge is true, and they did not find the girl to have evidence of virginity, 21 then they shall bring the girl out to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death, because she has committed a disgraceful sin in Israel by playing the prostitute in her father’s house; so you shall eliminate the evil from among you.​

all virgins bleed on their time having sex” was NOT included in the Bible quote in the OP. It WAS something that you read between the lines … exactly as I accused you of doing.

Let me ask a simple question: Is breaking a hymen on your wedding night and bleeding an indication that she was a virgin, if the question was being disputed in a court of law? YES or NO?
 

Skovand1075

Active Member
Jul 13, 2022
331
79
28
35
Alabama.
www.instagram.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
13 “If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and he charges her with shameful behavior and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her to have evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful behavior, saying, “I did not find your daughter to have evidence of virginity.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread out the garment before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take the man and rebuke him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he is not allowed to divorce her all his days.

20 “But if this charge is true, and they did not find the girl to have evidence of virginity, 21 then they shall bring the girl out to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death, because she has committed a disgraceful sin in Israel by playing the prostitute in her father’s house; so you shall eliminate the evil from among you.​

all virgins bleed on their time having sex” was NOT included in the Bible quote in the OP. It WAS something that you read between the lines … exactly as I accused you of doing.

Let me ask a simple question: Is breaking a hymen on your wedding night and bleeding an indication that she was a virgin, if the question was being disputed in a court of law? YES or NO?
So you think I’m reading between the lines?

so answer this.

if the husband accuses his virgin wife of not being a virgin what is the evidence the parents gather that proves she’s a virgin? What are the parents going in and taking to bring out and carry before the elders?
 

Robert Gwin

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2021
6,888
1,587
113
69
Central Il
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think it’s only a hope breaker if you believe that the Bible is inerrant. I don’t. So it’s expected. There are several more, but when people can’t accept scientific facts about periods, they usually don’t accept anything else. Deconstruction can often feel like hopelessness, but it usually results in greater hope than ever. Exchanging concordism for accommodation and exchanging literalism for
contextual analysis resulted in far better hope for me.

Keep in mind Skov, the Bible does not exist. It is very true that in versions of it, obviously there is errors and some deliberate alterations, so yes it is full of errors. I do not believe that there was an error in the account of virgin law however. So I side with the Bible on it, the method advised would have been acceptable and just.
 

Skovand1075

Active Member
Jul 13, 2022
331
79
28
35
Alabama.
www.instagram.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Keep in mind Skov, the Bible does not exist. It is very true that in versions of it, obviously there is errors and some deliberate alterations, so yes it is full of errors. I do not believe that there was an error in the account of virgin law however. So I side with the Bible on it, the method advised would have been acceptable and just.
I side with the Bible as well. Just that it’s there to accommodate a hard hearted tribe. That’s why Christ rejected it and corrected it and said whoever has not sinned can cast the first stone. It was never Yahwehs desire to kill. That was mankind.

by Bible I mean scripture. It’s a common term nowadays. I don’t care which of the dozens of bibles that have existed throughout time you use.
 

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,494
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I side with the Bible as well. Just that it’s there to accommodate a hard hearted tribe. That’s why Christ rejected it and corrected it and said whoever has not sinned can cast the first stone. It was never Yahwehs desire to kill. That was mankind.

by Bible I mean scripture. It’s a common term nowadays. I don’t care which of the dozens of bibles that have existed throughout time you use.

Right. The scriptures then, accurately record the follies of the followers. What you call "error" in the scriptures is simply error or misunderstanding and misapplication of God's desires, even to the point of men-- like Moses preeminently writing such "rules" into Law. Things haven't changed. We have tens of thousands of laws on the books that were written at and for a time that no longer make much sense. I'll spare you examples, but to say now that those laws MUST be enforced would be error. That doesn't make the record of the law wrong. It just shines a light on the folly of men at the time.

And so you can pay homage to the law-- almost mockingly, like the father of the bride with the wine and the towel and so fulfill the letter of the Law, while completely missing the principle. We see this over and over in the life and ministry of Jesus. The 'experts in the Law' had all kinds of extra rules and regulations that he regularly made fun of, or pointed out as silly-- even to their understanding and application of Moses' Law concerning things like the Sabbath, adultery, sacrifice, and more.

The times change. Even in Jesus' day and before his birth we see in scripture that his mother-to-be, Mary while unwed was found to be 'with child.' Greater evidence of adultery (fornication) doesn't exist. 'The Law' of course would require that she be stoned. But Joseph (her betrothed) was a good man (scripture says) was not wanting to expose her and see her subjected to these Priests. So then we see scripture ascribing "good" to the one who rejected the Law.

Of course there is far more to the story...
 

Robert Gwin

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2021
6,888
1,587
113
69
Central Il
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I side with the Bible as well. Just that it’s there to accommodate a hard hearted tribe. That’s why Christ rejected it and corrected it and said whoever has not sinned can cast the first stone. It was never Yahwehs desire to kill. That was mankind.

by Bible I mean scripture. It’s a common term nowadays. I don’t care which of the dozens of bibles that have existed throughout time you use.

Great Skov, You posted a really interesting section of passage, as I don't believe the actual law is found in the Bible, at least I couldn't find it. We don't have much information on it either, here is the only thing I can find we have printed:
*** it-2 p. 341 Marriage ***
Proof of Virginity. After the supper the husband took his bride into the nuptial chamber. (Ps 19:5; Joe 2:16) On the wedding night a cloth or garment was used and then kept or given to the wife’s parents so that the marks of the blood of the girl’s virginity would constitute legal protection for her in the event she was later charged with lack of virginity or of having been a prostitute prior to her marriage. Otherwise, she could be stoned to death for having presented herself in marriage as a spotless virgin and for bringing great reproach on her father’s house. (De 22:13-21) This practice of keeping the cloth has continued among some peoples in the Middle East until recent times.

It seems that it might have been a tradition among God's people, but since God chose to have the outcome recorded for us in His inspired Word, it is a Law in which He has sanctioned. I have never studied that before Skov, thanks for the motivation sir.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2019
1,879
938
113
62
Port Richey, Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
if the husband accuses his virgin wife of not being a virgin ...
THERE YOU HAVE IT! "IF"...
Do all virgin brides get accused of being a non-virgin by their husband and require blood from a broken hymen to prove in court that they were a virgin?
Is that really how you believe all Hebrew marriages began?

If not, then your question about whether or not all virgins bleed is irrelevant to the rare case presented in the text ... Isn't it?
You have read into the TEXT a universal application that does not exist. It is a law about a very specific rare event involving "bad faith" by one partner or the other.


... and you did not answer my simple question:
"Let me ask a simple question: Is breaking a hymen on your wedding night and bleeding an indication that she was a virgin, if the question was being disputed in a court of law? YES or NO?"
 

Skovand1075

Active Member
Jul 13, 2022
331
79
28
35
Alabama.
www.instagram.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
THERE YOU HAVE IT! "IF"...
Do all virgin brides get accused of being a non-virgin by their husband and require blood from a broken hymen to prove in court that they were a virgin?
Is that really how you believe all Hebrew marriages began?

If not, then your question about whether or not all virgins bleed is irrelevant to the rare case presented in the text ... Isn't it?
You have read into the TEXT a universal application that does not exist. It is a law about a very specific rare event involving "bad faith" by one partner or the other.


... and you did not answer my simple question:
"Let me ask a simple question: Is breaking a hymen on your wedding night and bleeding an indication that she was a virgin, if the question was being disputed in a court of law? YES or NO?"
So it’s not irrelevant. The question is not how often it happens.

the question is was the Bible correct in implying all virgins bleed the first time or is it wrong? I posed the question. Just because you can’t honestly respond to it does not mean you have the authority to change my question.

The answer is that the Bible is wrong. Not all virgins bleed the first time they have set. That’s a medical and scientific fact. So if it’s wrong right there what is it’s purpose? If it’s wrong right there then how can anyone claim biblical inerrancy?
 

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,494
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So it’s not irrelevant. The question is not how often it happens.

the question is was the Bible correct in implying all virgins bleed the first time or is it wrong? I posed the question. Just because you can’t honestly respond to it does not mean you have the authority to change my question.

The answer is that the Bible is wrong. Not all virgins bleed the first time they have set. That’s a medical and scientific fact. So if it’s wrong right there what is it’s purpose? If it’s wrong right there then how can anyone claim biblical inerrancy?

You are not only missing the entire point, you are misrepresenting what scripture says. It is not written that all virgins bleed the first time they have intercourse. For you to declare that the Bible is wrong on that point is dishonest because the Bible says no such thing. The example in Deut 22 is very specific and it doesn't even mention the wedding night specifically. The 'evidence' of a daughter's wedding night virginity is something that a father would hold on to for safe keeping in the event of circumstances at a later date as depicted in the Deut example where a man takes a wife and at some unknown later point in time begins hating her and accusing her of shameful things-- including having not been a virgin when he married her-- the father could then show his 'proof' that the man was lying and that the father had raised a good girl. This proof was to protect the father's reputation primarily.

What if the father had no such proof? For example, what if the bride didn't bleed on her wedding night and the father was given no evidence that she was indeed a virgin? Well, presumably if the bride and groom had been having sex themselves before marriage-- they would 'fake' some evidence to give to the father to save any embarrassment for all. OR-- if the groom knew for a fact that he had never had intercourse with his bride he would at that moment declare her unfaithful and the marriage would be annulled on the spot. -- Or perhaps he would accept her explanation as to why she didn't bleed-- (my hymen broke three years ago when I was horseback riding) and again they would likely present some fake evidence to the father.

The tradition was not only to present the evidence to the father, but to wave the blood stained bedding out the window so to speak for all the world to know. The father would keep this as primary evidence if ever in the future his son-in-law was to accuse his daughter of infidelity. It would be prima facie evidence that the man had at least at one time, accepted the girl as pure and right.
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,184
2,534
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
We know lying out of love to protect someone is not bad.
You're preaching "Situation Ethics" - which isn't Scriptural.

Did the Mordecai bow to protect himself and his people from that maniac Haman?
Did the Three Hebrew Worthies "bend down and tie their shoelatchets" to protect each other?
Did Daniel cease praying toward East out loud so Israelites could continue to hear about Messianic salvation?
Did the millions killed by the papal Antichrist confess the wafer is literally Christ's body to save their children?

One time, a king commited genocide but kept alive the enemy king, spared a few choice animals from the slaughter, and took spoil from the victory - all which he was explicitly told not to do. When the prophet Samuel showed up, he whipped up a quick lie and said they were for "sacrifice". That one little indiscretion led to the downfall of his entire reign and royal family:

1 Samuel 15:22-23 KJV​
[22] And Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord ? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.​
[23] For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, he hath also rejected thee from being king.​

Let's not co-mingle idolatrous philosophy with Scriptural truth.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,695
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So before engaging in this conversation I ask that you use wisdom. To use wisdom means to read the whole post and then respond by either agreeing, by asking clarifying questions, by disagreeing by countering my points or either by further elaborating on the story. Trigger warning for the sensitive here. This disagrees with biblical inerrancy. This post will be made in three sections. The scriptures, the errors in the scriptures and lastly a healthier understanding of what it could mean.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Scriptures.

Deuteronomy 22:13-21
New American Standard Bible

Laws on Morality

13 “If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14 and he charges her with shameful behavior and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her to have evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16 And the girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and behold, he has charged her with shameful behavior, saying, “I did not find your daughter to have evidence of virginity.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread out the garment before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take the man and rebuke him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he is not allowed to divorce her all his days.

20 “But if this charge is true, and they did not find the girl to have evidence of virginity, 21 then they shall bring the girl out to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death, because she has committed a disgraceful sin in Israel by playing the prostitute in her father’s house; so you shall eliminate the evil from among you.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Errors.
So there are two main things wrong with this. One is the scientific errors of virginity and the other is the issue of woman abuse and murder.

Claim one.
It says that if a man does not find evidence of his newly wed virgin wife then her parents are given the chance to collect evidence themselves and bring it before the priest or else the woman is to be stoned to death.

What’s the evidence? It can only be one thing. The parents are going to the bedroom to find bloody sheets. See ancient Jewish people believed that all virgins bleed every time. That if a woman did not bleed, then it meant that she was not a virgin and that meant she must have willingly had sec with another man. But as many women, scientist and medical experts can attest to, that’s not true. Not all women bleed the first time. Hymens could be naturally different from broth. Hymens can be broken by riding horses, donkeys, camels and so on. They can be broken by being sexually abused as kids by their fathers , or they could have been raped and so on. But it’s simply not true that all virgins bleed the first time. This is wrong.

Secondly it’s always evil to kill innocent , non threatening people. It’s vile. Any Jewish men that murdered their probably underage wives were garbage. All the Jewish men that took concubines as their sex slaves were garbage. Rape is always wrong. No matter what. Killing a 16 year old just because she was molested as a kid and had a broken hymen or even if she slept with someone else before getting married, is evil.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Healthier Biblical Hermeneutics


All of the collective scriptures are known as meditation texts. Jesus himself says to mediate on the word of God. You read the Bible front to back, back to front, side to side and pick up biblical tropes, patterns and hyperlinks. We know that Yahweh hates human sacrifices and that he abhors the murder of innocent people.

So we must view all these passages through the corrective lens of Jesus. We must view all of these passages by knowing Yahweh desires mercy and compassion and love. So if you are two parents and you just heard your daughter has been accused of fornication by her newly wed husband and that she was soon to be murdered by people throwing rocks at her until she died what would you do? Well you would want to save her.

When reading those passages we see something that should make us think of something earlier. What did these parents witness and grow up hearing from the Bible about kids being murdered? They would think of the exodus. The angel of death. A Christian should also see Christ in this story. In all these stories we know shed blood equals protection from death. To save their kids from the angel of death they smeared blood up and down their houses posts.

One thing to pay attention to is that the parents were the only ones that could collect the evidence. Not the priests, not the judges and not the husband. Only the parents. They had to collect it and bring it before the priests. So remembering the previous story would mean the parents had plenty of time to collect blood of a lamb and spread it on the garment saving their daughter. Just like a
Rahab lied to save then others. We know lying out of love to protect someone is not bad. We know Jesus was against stoning a woman. We know God hates human sacrifice. So the parents would collect the garment, put blood on it and then bring it before the priests.

so why would god say that? It’s to protect women. Yahweh inspired mankind through their paradigm. It’s why in Joshua the sun moves while the earth stays still. God wanted to reach mankind in a way they could understand .
First God does not make mistakes, even with the nation of Israel.

God also does not condone or promote abuse of women. Teh whole context of this is far deeper than the shallowness of what you present.

A broken hymen was a potential sign and thus an accusation could be presented. but at a potential cost to the accuser. So there was more to it than that.

Secoind once women have reached the age of menstruation, it is rare indeed when they have no bloody discharge. God knew that, and that became the prima facie evidence of her innocence. God was writing rules for societal purity and not an indepth medical textbook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler