God's Favor?

  • 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!

Status
Not open for further replies.

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
Hello all,

Recently, I was engaged in a debate, elsewhere with several interlocutors, regarding Verses Deuteronomy 22:28-29. After much back and forth, this was the conclusion drawn, at least by me...?


When this passage was written, women's right's were quite restricted in society. Women needed to marry men, or to remain with their fathers for financial stability. Prior to marriage, the women remained with their father's, where applicable. If a women was known to have relations with a male, prior to marriage, she was considered unworthy of marriage by any other potential mate. And thus, the father could never 'give her away'. And hence, would remain financially responsible for her, for life. A woman's consent, prior to marriage, was likely granted by the father, not the woman. And after marriage, under the contract of Biblical marriage, the woman was then to submit to the husband. Sure, the husband was to fulfill his role in the marriage, but the woman answered to the man. Two notable Verses to reference would be (Ephesians 5:22-28, and 1 Corinthians 11:3). Some would bring up Exodus 22:16-17, as a defense. However, the Verses speak about possible seduction, and not rape. Hence, what constitutes 'rape', verses not 'rape'? And furthermore, was the price, for which the male was to pay, enough to sustain the father's financial obligation to support his daughter for life?

Having established the above, this is essentially where the prior debate left off, at least for me. Why? It started to go off the rails from there....

Moving forward, I would like to explore the following point...

In light of the given passage (Deuteronomy 22:28-29), seems as though God's favor was to protect the father more-so than the female victim. Why? Seems as though God's favor was to assure the father is compensated over and above seeking 'justice' for the rape victim. If the female was raped, seems as though her only available options were:


a: The father keeps her, and no other man will ever marry her, (because she is not a virgin).
b: Hand her over to her 'rapist', or the one whom 'seduced' her, where the woman is to submit, under the contract of Biblical marriage, (Ephesians 5:22-28, and 1 Corinthians 11:3).

What is your take on this seemingly precarious predicament?
 

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It can be difficult to understand what exactly the women's rights were and are where it comes to consent and force. But it seems that if she cries out, that is the basis as to whether she was/is in sin or was/is innocent.

I don't think
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is speaking of rape. The verses prior do speak of rape.

Deuteronomy 22:25-27 (KJV) ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ 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: ²⁶ But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: ²⁷ For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

This subject does raise a lot of thoughts for me, because consider a child who is raised in abuse. She cries out and no one rescues her...and the abuse continues. She learns that crying out doesn't result in rescue, so she stops crying out. She may even pretend she likes it in order to survive, and nor be hurt worse. She may develop a part of herself whose job is to be used sexually.

It wasn't ever her choice to be "humbled." But at some point, in order to survive, she makes choices ....because no help came when she cried.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy and POI

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You know ...I think I was wrong. I believe that when you consider what the word translated "humbled" in verse 29 actually means, it can mean "forced." So you have a legit point here. I would like to know ....is the idea of "rape" as we call it today, actually a Biblical term? Do girls and women have any defense where it comes to being forced? Or only if she is "betrothed" to a man?
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
It can be difficult to understand what exactly the women's rights were and are where it comes to consent and force. But it seems that if she cries out, that is the basis as to whether she was/is in sin or was/is innocent.

I don't think Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is speaking of rape. The verses prior do speak of rape.

Deuteronomy 22:25-27 (KJV) ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ 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: ²⁶ But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: ²⁷ For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

Verses 28-29 speak specifically about a single virgin, not an engaged virgin. I was speaking about these Verses specifically, for this reason. If she is not already spoken for, looks like the woman is given two applicable options - (for which she herself does not choose; but is instead either chosen by her father <or> the law):

1. Stay with the father for life, and not give her to the male. She will stay with the father for life, because she is no longer a virgin, and no male will ever claim her.
2. The father or the law forces the rapist to marry her, for which the female then submits to the husband - (by marriage).

I guess a provisional option 3 would be for her to commit suicide? But if she knows the Bible, she would not commit this act, as it would be deemed murder. A 4th option would be she could simply run away. But again, this would be little different than (option 3) - suicide. A single non-virgin would surely not survive, as she cannot support herself.

This subject does raise a lot of thoughts for me, because consider a child who is raised in abuse. She cries out and no one rescues her...and the abuse continues. She learns that crying out doesn't result in rescue, so she stops crying out. She may even pretend she likes it in order to survive, and nor be hurt worse. She may develop a part of herself whose job is to be used sexually.
It wasn't ever her choice to be "humbled." But at some point, in order to survive, she makes choices ....because no help came when she cried.

Great point! In this situation, where she is raped or taken advantage of, what-say-you, regarding Deuteronomy 22:28-29? Is God sentencing the female victim to a lifetime of submissive servitude, via her attacker?

Also, doesn't this law seem to be more-so looking out for the father, over that of the victim?
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
You know ...I think I was wrong. I believe that when you consider what the word translated "humbled" in verse 29 actually means, it can mean "forced." So you have a legit point here. I would like to know ....is the idea of "rape" as we call it today, actually a Biblical term? Do girls and women have any defense where it comes to being forced? Or only if she is "betrothed" to a man?

Did my other response address this concern, or would you like something further here?
 

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Upon further digging, the word translated "humbled" in vs 29 has other possible meanings (other than "force"). And considering context of surrounding verses, she didn't cry out, which indicates some level of consent. In that verse, the more appropriate translation would be "humbled." He made moves toward her and she consented and they were found. Now, common sense says that if they were found and she was heard crying out, it would obviously be force, or rape.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Did my other response address this concern, or would you like something further here?
I just saw this ...I think I found at least some of the answer.
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
Upon further digging, the word translated "humbled" in vs 29 has other possible meanings (other than "force"). And considering context of surrounding verses, she didn't cry out, which indicates some level of consent.

But you already conceded that some women will remain quiet to avoid additional violence, and/or because they think no one will care any ways - (due to prior experience with screaming). Or, maybe the woman was taught to always submit to a male, as it instructs in the Bible. Thus, I'd imagine there would be many situations where the woman would not scream, cry, or make a peep.

Or maybe the rapist tells her, "make a peep and I'll kill you."

In that verse, the more appropriate translation would be "humbled." He made moves toward her and she consented and they were found. Now, common sense says that if they were found and she was heard crying out, it would obviously be force, or rape

Not so fast :) You are assuming the Verse [excludes] any plausibility of situations being 'without her consent'.

I would imagine most sexual activity happened without witnesses, right? If it came down to testimony, between 'he said' vs 'she said', which testimony carries more favor (his or hers)?

If the act happened behind closed doors, the woman would likely say nothing. Why? She knows her announcing rape would seal her fate of either remaining single forever or having to marry him - (if they even believed her anyways). All they would have to do is ask the male. He would either deny the occurrence or claim she consented.

If they somehow were to find out that she was no longer a virgin, he would simply say that she was willing. This way, he may be able to pay 50 units and walk away. Heck, maybe he even liked her, and she refused his advances. Maybe this was his way of securing her for life? Her options would then look to be as follows:

A: never get married.
B: have to marry the rapist.
 
Last edited:

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
As for the child...
But you already conceded that some women will remain quiet to avoid additional violence, and/or because they think no one will care any ways - (due to prior experience with screaming). Or, maybe the woman was taught to always submit to a male, as it instructs in the Bible. Thus, I'd imagine there would be many situations where the woman would not scream, cry, or make a peep.
From experience, I can say... she still cried. Even if she was not safe to cry or scream outwardly, she did so inside...or afterward when she was alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigo de christo

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
As for the child...
From experience, I can say... she still cried. Even if she was not safe to cry or scream outwardly, she did so inside...or afterward when she was alone.

Though I truly do empathize with such occurrences, I feel my original post topic has not really been addressed?

In such situation(s), God looks to offer favor to the father and/or the rapist, over the victim.

God instructs for the confirmed rapist to marry the victim. Under Biblical marriage, the rape victim then is instructed to submit to the very person whom violated her. Sure, the father can refuse the transaction. But then he is to keep his daughter for life, as no other male will ever come along to marry her. But in doing so, he still receives some financial restitution, and the rapist is then free to leave.

During OT times, God's resolve for many offenses, was death. Seems quite odd that God did not simply offer the same resolve for confirmed rapists, or other? In this case, one may rationalize that the rapist is commanded to take care of his victim for life. Thus, relieving the father of financial duty. However, the resolve is under the contract of "marriage"; where the victim submits to the rapist for life.

What's your take?
 
Last edited:

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What's your take?
Like I said, initially, without studying it out, it seemed that verses 28 and 29 were speaking of force/rape, but as I looked deeper, I understood it wasn't. It is speaking to a case where a man had desires toward a female and she consented (evident in that she didn't cry out, an indication she was not forced). Again, from experience, when someone is forced, they do cry out, scream, etc. Their voice may be silenced pretty quickly, but they do make protest.
 

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If a child is forced and that child cries out and cries out, and they are only hurt worse ...they learn not to use their voice to cry out. So then, in order to survive, they create parts of themselves who cry or scream (inside) and other parts of themselves whose job is to handle those assaults, or even pretend to "like it." Or maybe they develop parts who believe they "like" being hurt (as a defense for survival) or that it's their purpose to be hurt, or that to be hurt is the same as "love."

In this case, these verses would apply...

Matthew 18:6-7 (KJV) ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ⁶ But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. ⁷ Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

“And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.”
— Mark 9:42 (KJV)
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
Like I said, initially, without studying it out, it seemed that verses 28 and 29 were speaking of force/rape, but as I looked deeper, I understood it wasn't. It is speaking to a case where a man had desires toward a female and she consented (evident in that she didn't cry out, an indication she was not forced). Again, from experience, when someone is forced, they do cry out, scream, etc. Their voice may be silenced pretty quickly, but they do make protest.

"25-27 In this way you will reduce crime among you. But if this deed takes place out in the country, only the man shall die. The girl is as innocent as a murder victim; for it must be assumed that she screamed, but there was no one to hear and rescue her out in the field. 28-29 If a man rapes a girl who is not engaged and is caught in the act, he must pay a fine to the girl’s father and marry her; he may never divorce her."

- The man forces himself upon the single virgin, (as expressed above).
- The rapist is supposed to marry her, (as expressed above)
- If the father refuses the marriage, the rapist is still ordered to pay the father 50 units, then the rapist may walk away.
- If such a ruling is not up to the father, then the rapist is ordered to 'marry' the rape victim. The victim is then to submit to her rapist.

What is your take?
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
If a child is forced and that child cries out and cries out, and they are only hurt worse ...they learn not to use their voice to cry out. So then, in order to survive, they create parts of themselves who cry or scream (inside) and other parts of themselves whose job is to handle those assaults, or even pretend to "like it." Or maybe they develop parts who believe they "like" being hurt (as a defense for survival) or that it's their purpose to be hurt, or that to be hurt is the same as "love."

In this case, these verses would apply...

Matthew 18:6-7 (KJV) ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ⁶ But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. ⁷ Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

“And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.”
— Mark 9:42 (KJV)

The single virgin may not be a child. This looks irrelevant regardless.
 

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
"25-27 In this way you will reduce crime among you. But if this deed takes place out in the country, only the man shall die. The girl is as innocent as a murder victim; for it must be assumed that she screamed, but there was no one to hear and rescue her out in the field. 28-29 If a man rapes a girl who is not engaged and is caught in the act, he must pay a fine to the girl’s father and marry her; he may never divorce her."

- The man forces himself upon the single virgin, (as expressed above).
- The rapist is supposed to marry her, (as expressed above)
- If the father refuses the marriage, the rapist is still ordered to pay the father 50 units, then the rapist may walk away.
- If such a ruling is not up to the father, then the rapist is ordered to 'marry' the rape victim. The victim is then to submit to her rapist.

What is your take?
You're using a version of the Bible that chose a flawed interpretation of the word the KJV translated as "humbled." You have to take all scripture as a whole, because taking a verse out of context can result in flawed interpretation.
 

TLHKAJ

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
6,973
8,499
113
US
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The single virgin may not be a child. This looks irrelevant regardless.
It is related and certainly not irrelevant.

I'd like to know your purpose in creating this thread. Are you an advocate for rape? Do you believe God advocates forcing a woman (young or old, or a child)?
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
It is related and certainly not irrelevant.


Please explain why your provided Verses are relevant?

I'd like to know your purpose in creating this thread. Are you an advocate for rape?


The purpose is to address an unresolved matter, from a previous conversation; as the OP expresses.

God seems to be more concerned with the welfare of the victim's father, and/or the rapist, verses that of the victim herself?

The father might be given the option to accept payment, and/or give the daughter away. This way, he's compensated, and no longer has to financially be held responsible for her.

The rapist, at worst, is told to marry her. In which case, she is to remain submissive to him under marriage.

As for the her, the victim, where's her consideration? She gets violated. Her only choice is to remain single, or be united with the one whom attacked her.

And anyone whom reads what I have written, would know I'm not "advocating rape" :) Quite the contrary.


Thus, to recap.

- Somehow, some way, a man is witnessed raping a single virgin.
- She does not scream. But this does not matter regardless, because...
- The rapist is told to marry her.
- Consent may be initiated by the father, not the female.
- If the father refuses the marriage, the father still gets paid; and the male is then free to go.
- If the father has no say in the matter, the male is ordered to marry her. She then becomes subject to the very person whom possibly violated her.

I have receipts for all of the above claims, via Scripture.

You are trying to say that maybe she was a willing participant. If this is the case, then of course the law sounds 'reasonable', for this time/era. However, these Verse seems to suggest that, even if it was a confirmed rape, then the above rules apply, as I laid out in the above bullet points.


Thus, do you agree with my OP? Does God favor the father and/or the rapist over the victim?


 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
You're using a version of the Bible that chose a flawed interpretation of the word the KJV translated as "humbled." You have to take all scripture as a whole, because taking a verse out of context can result in flawed interpretation.

I could say the very same thing about you :)
 

POI

Member
Mar 11, 2021
66
2
8
59
Fresno
Faith
Agnostic
Country
United States
Do you believe God advocates forcing a woman (young or old, or a child)?

My current hypothesis, is that this law was man-made. The law was created to protect the father. Back then, men would only marry virgins. Unmarried, and sexually active, was a complete no-no - (regardless of consent or rape). A law needed to be written to protect the father from having to financially take care of their promiscuous daughter. (Or), also having to support their raped daughters. Thus, seems like it was kind of a 'gotcha', to force the rapist or seducer to support the one they raped or seduced instead. A clause was written, where the father can still refuse the marriage (if they think it really was a vicious rape), but take payment anyways. Why not kill them? Well, the rapist owed them money. Many may not have had the money, and had to work to pay it off. If the law stated to pay the debt, then be put to death, they would not work to pay the debt first.

None of the above sounds like something a 'loving' God would invent?.?.?.?....???? There exists no consideration from the female in this equation. Seems like nothing more than a man-made law, that was invented to protect against the time/are for which they lived within.
 
Last edited:

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
22,800
39,084
113
52
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
As for the child...

From experience, I can say... she still cried. Even if she was not safe to cry or scream outwardly, she did so inside...or afterward when she was alone.
exactly sister . Its simply saying that if he forced her . sometimes folks can get too caught up with a tiny detail
to realize the over all picture . Rape is rape . Yep . Exactly sister .
 
  • Like
Reactions: TLHKAJ
Status
Not open for further replies.