Deu 22:22-27 NRSVue
22 “If a man is discovered lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman as well as the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel.
23 “If there is a young woman, a virgin already engaged to be married, and a man meets her in the town and lies with her,
24 you shall bring both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death, the young woman because she did not cry for help in the town and the man because he violated his neighbor’s wife. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
25 “But if the man meets the engaged woman in the open country and the man seizes her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die.
26 You shall do nothing to the young woman; the young woman has not committed an offense punishable by death, because this case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor.
27 Since he found her in the open country, the engaged woman may have cried for help, but there was no one to rescue her.
A Christian society or nation does NOT gets its laws and commandments from Moses, but Paul did say the OT was an example for us to consider as Christians.
When it comes to the claim of rape against someone committed years in the past, whether a man upon man, woman or child; there is the question of the Statute of Limitations. I believe it is wrong to charge a man or woman for claims of rape or sexual molestation in the distant past. Considering the OT laws on rape I quoted above -
First a thought, the story of the woman caught in the act of adultery, where the woman was brought before Jesus for his statement on stoning. I suspect Jesus may have written Deut. 22:22 where if the woman and man were caught or "discovered", why bring only the woman to Jesus for stoning, where is the man mentioned? Now to Statute of Limitations -
Don't vs23-24 compare with the idea of making claims of rape or molestation occurring in years past. Isn't there a hint that these claims of rape and molestations committed in years past should be considered bogus, regardless of the sexes and involved. If the accusation is not made at the time, is that not similar to a woman not crying out in the town when she is sexually attacked?
Yet vs 25-27 indicates that if the rape was in the country where the woman could not receive help by crying out, she was innocent. Maybe this would compare to a man or woman sexually molesting a child where the responsibility is solely on the offender, so there should be a reasonable time the Statute of Limitations found, but once the child has grown to 18 or 21 and has not made the claim, he or she should have no grounds to make accusations.
What say you?
22 “If a man is discovered lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman as well as the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel.
23 “If there is a young woman, a virgin already engaged to be married, and a man meets her in the town and lies with her,
24 you shall bring both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death, the young woman because she did not cry for help in the town and the man because he violated his neighbor’s wife. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
25 “But if the man meets the engaged woman in the open country and the man seizes her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die.
26 You shall do nothing to the young woman; the young woman has not committed an offense punishable by death, because this case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor.
27 Since he found her in the open country, the engaged woman may have cried for help, but there was no one to rescue her.
A Christian society or nation does NOT gets its laws and commandments from Moses, but Paul did say the OT was an example for us to consider as Christians.
When it comes to the claim of rape against someone committed years in the past, whether a man upon man, woman or child; there is the question of the Statute of Limitations. I believe it is wrong to charge a man or woman for claims of rape or sexual molestation in the distant past. Considering the OT laws on rape I quoted above -
First a thought, the story of the woman caught in the act of adultery, where the woman was brought before Jesus for his statement on stoning. I suspect Jesus may have written Deut. 22:22 where if the woman and man were caught or "discovered", why bring only the woman to Jesus for stoning, where is the man mentioned? Now to Statute of Limitations -
Don't vs23-24 compare with the idea of making claims of rape or molestation occurring in years past. Isn't there a hint that these claims of rape and molestations committed in years past should be considered bogus, regardless of the sexes and involved. If the accusation is not made at the time, is that not similar to a woman not crying out in the town when she is sexually attacked?
Yet vs 25-27 indicates that if the rape was in the country where the woman could not receive help by crying out, she was innocent. Maybe this would compare to a man or woman sexually molesting a child where the responsibility is solely on the offender, so there should be a reasonable time the Statute of Limitations found, but once the child has grown to 18 or 21 and has not made the claim, he or she should have no grounds to make accusations.
What say you?
