God's Favor?

[Wrangler]

My purpose, in this thread, is to broach a very specific topic. And yet, rather than address this very specific topic, you dance all around it... Tisk tisk...

Case in point.

If you read carefully, you saw that I did answer your question, but not with a whole lot of stuff from my carnal mind.

 

[POI]

I will check back in to see if you have reconsidered your ways, but barring that, I will probably leave this thread alone.

You are not engaging my requests. You be-bop and skit-skat all around them.

Recap:

- During OT times, a man would only marry a women whom was a confirmed virgin.
- If she was not a virgin, no man would marry her.
- In OT times, a woman could not support herself. She needed a man.
- Her choices were to stay with her father, with family, or be married.
- The consent was offered by the father, to 'give her away'.

This was just how it generally was, during these times...

If a woman was raped, no man would ever take her as his wife, right????

Thus, God's law was to command that the rapist is to marry her, since no one else would take her.

But wouldn't God know that such a law would create a giant loophole for guys to rape the single virgin girls they want? Sure, God could state it was wrong to do so. However, couldn't God have made a 'better' law to avoid this giant loophole?

 

[POI]

I personally do not choose to use the NIV.
I have personally found translations of particular verses to change the intended knowledge.
Already demonstrated.
Nothing indicates the woman was raped; unwilling, to participate in a sexual act.

Deut 22:
[23] If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
[24] 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; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.
[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.
[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;

Forced and lay hold...not the same thing.
Forced, is rape, being against her will.

V25 speaks about engaged women.

V28 speaks about single virgin women. V28 neither mentions her consent, nor her lack there-of. Many translations use the word "rape", "seize", and other. If these translations were under the impression V28 was only speaking about complete consent, then I doubt they would be clumsy enough to use words like "rape" or "seize"

 

[Heart2Soul]

Great, reading the Verses in context, we see the following...

V25 deals with betrothed/married. They are already spoken for...

V28-29 speaks about single virgin females. I cannot repeat this enough, because you guys seem to want to gloss over this point.

Please pay careful attention to Verse 28 -- (highlighted in bold red). If a man finds her, and forces himself upon her, and they are discovered....

Please now pay careful attention to Verse 29. He then pays the father and she shall be his wife.

Hence, if a guy likes a gal, but she does not like him, but he still wants her for himself, he can rape her, and she shall be his. Right?

You keep coming back to this same question...what's your issue on it. That law does not exist today? You're talking about Jewish laws and customs that have no bearing on myself. The state and federal laws of the United States specifically states that rape is a federal crime and punishable by law to the maximum of life behind bars. The woman does not have to marry him. Period!

 

[POI]

You keep coming back to this same question...what's your issue on it. That law does not exist today? You're talking about Jewish laws and customs that have no bearing on myself. The state and federal laws of the United States specifically states that rape is a federal crime and punishable by law to the maximum of life behind bars. The woman does not have to marry him. Period!

Um, I'm completely aware that many of God's law's have now been overridden. Such as, but not limited to: gay marriage, the complete outlaw of slavery, etc...

I'm guessing you concede what I have stated prior now? (i.e.) When God's created law was active, (via Deut. 22:28-29), a rapist could simply claim his wanted lifetime bride, by raping her?

 

[amigo de christo]

Regardless of the answer I might give, would it change what the truth of the matter is?

My friend , let the younger give some good advice unto the elder . Did you notice that after just a few exchanges with this POI man
i left . WHEN you discern that no matter what truth you bring unto a person that they will always try and reject it ,
ITS TIME TO LEAVE my friend . Let no man wear one down . If they wont heed , ONLY GOD can give them increase .
I leave them to THE LORD .

 

[POI]

My friend , let the younger give some good advice unto the elder . Did you notice that after just a few exchanges with this POI man
i left . WHEN you discern that no matter what truth you bring unto a person that they will always try and reject it ,
ITS TIME TO LEAVE my friend . Let no man wear one down . If they wont heed , ONLY GOD can give them increase .
I leave them to THE LORD .

There's a difference between instead choosing to preach, verses, engaging the actual conversation. I'll give you a second chance to actually engage, from post #53:

Can you please acknowledge what MY OP actually says, as well as post #32?

If you are a single virgin, and are raped, coerced, manipulated, seduces, or other; here are the options available - (from the Bible):

1. The male pays the father and also marries the female. Under marriage, the female submits to the male.
2. The male pays the father and is then free. He can still go find another virgin and marry her, rape her as well, other...

Assuming, in some of these cases, that sex was NOT consensual, do you see the above two options as justified by your believed upon 'loving' God?

 

[TLHKAJ]

Sister, @Heart2Soul he is purposefully promoting a faulty interpretation of those 2 verses. They are speaking of a man and woman who have engaged in consensual sex. After that a man has wooed the young woman, she consented. In that case, he should pay a dowry and marry her, and he cannot put her away for the rest of his or her life. He must provide for her.

Can you imagine if we had this law today? This would be a deterrent to promiscuous behaviors, and more children would grow up with their fathers (because so often, those first encounters result in pregnancies).

 

[amigo de christo]

Sister, @Heart2Soul he is purposefully promoting a faulty interpretation of those 2 verses. They are speaking of a man and woman who have engaged in consensual sex. After that a man has wooed the young woman, she consented. In that case, he should pay a dowry and marry her, and he cannot put her away for the rest of his or her life. He must provide for her.

Can you imagine if we had this law today? This would be a deterrent to promiscuous behaviors, and more children would grow up with their fathers (because so often, those first encounters result in pregnancies).

Sound it out sister . Many come to make the law and the GOD who gave the law , seem evil . But it is because
they have another agenda . Stand firm in CHRIST . And let the LORD be praised .

 

[POI]

[/COLOR]Sister, @Heart2Soul he is purposefully promoting a faulty interpretation of those 2 verses. They are speaking of a man and woman who have engaged in consensual sex.

Nope. This is patently false. But nice try.

. [/COLOR]
Can you imagine if we had this law today?

We would only have this law today if women were still as oppressed as they once were But it's quite curious how God could not think of anything better, than to command the rapist to marry her.

 

[POI]

Many come to make the law and the GOD who gave the law , seem evil .

So you too admit that if the rapist is commanded to marry his victim, this sounds evil?

 

[Heart2Soul]

Um, I'm completely aware that many of God's law's have now been overridden. Such as, but not limited to: gay marriage, the complete outlaw of slavery, etc...

I'm guessing you concede what I have stated prior now? (i.e.) When God's created law was active, (via Deut. 22:28-29), a rapist could simply claim his wanted lifetime bride, by raping her?

Lol...you are persistent. This thread is for your personal entertainment and brings no edification to the forum. I am going to temporarily lock it and discuss it with the other mods.