"God" says to stone rape victims to death (1 Viewer)

[vergiss]

From the book of Deuteronomy:

"022:023
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

022:024
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 neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

022:025
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.

022:026
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 neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

022:027
For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."

Sounds like fun.

 

[V.I. Lenin]

Valiant effort, but you're not going to change any minds my friend.

 

[blogger31]

From the book of Deuteronomy:

"022:023
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

022:024
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 neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

022:025
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.

022:026
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 neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

022:027
For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."

Sounds like fun.

The question for you would be if you really understand what is being read or if you just saw something you didn't like and posted it without any knowledge or understanding?

 

[vergiss]

I read it. I thought "Good grief." I spoke to my mother to make sure I was clear, and she was of a similar reaction.

Want me to translate it for you? In a nutshell, if a woman is raped in the country by a man who is not her fiance, her rapist shall be stoned to death because, being the country, there was no one around to hear he scream. However, if the same situation were in the city, she presumably wasn't raped, or else she'd have been heard screaming - therefore, she'll be stoned to death with the man.

A passage just above that one says that if a man marries a woman and then decides he doesn't like her, he can demand proof from her father that she was a virgin until her wedding night (ie bloody sheets). If he is unable to find the proof, she is to be stoned to death:

"22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,

22:14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

22:15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:

22:16 And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;

22:17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.

22:18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;

22:19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.

22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

Don't make the foolish of mistake of thinking I'm just some cynical atheist playing around with Bible quotes. I'm Jewish. I respect the Old Testament and I've been taught about it since childhood. My problem lies with fundamentalists who get anal retentive about certain passages, then conveniently ignore the existence of others. Either be literal about it all, or cut the rest some slack. What worked 2000 years ago isn't going to work now, and if God's frothing at the mouth regarding homosexuality or whatever, technically he should also be having a hissy fit everytime you eat bacon.

Exodus 35:2 says that those who work on the Sabbath day should be put to death. I don't exactly see that mass executions every Saturday, do you?

 

[Joe7000]

If you're a virgin, spend all of your time in a field. Gargle often, you may need to give out an obligitory scream...:mrgreen:

From the book of Deuteronomy:

"022:023
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

022:024
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 neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

022:025
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.

022:026
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 neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

022:027
For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."

Sounds like fun.

 

[YamiB.]

I believe this goes under the category of old laws that did not need to be followed after the death of Jesus. Some others that come to mind are not eating shellfish, not wearing clothes of more than one fabric, not shaving, various sacrifices, and a man lying with a man as with a woman being an abomination.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

I believe the people who wrote the bible were human. I don't believe that any human is the voice of God.

 

[HTColeman]

I read it. I thought "Good grief." I spoke to my mother to make sure I was clear, and she was of a similar reaction.

Want me to translate it for you? In a nutshell, if a woman is raped in the country by a man who is not her fiance, her rapist shall be stoned to death because, being the country, there was no one around to hear he scream. However, if the same situation were in the city, she presumably wasn't raped, or else she'd have been heard screaming - therefore, she'll be stoned to death with the man.

A passage just above that one says that if a man marries a woman and then decides he doesn't like her, he can demand proof from her father that she was a virgin until her wedding night (ie bloody sheets). If he is unable to find the proof, she is to be stoned to death:

"22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,

22:14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

22:15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:

22:16 And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;

22:17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.

22:18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;

22:19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.

22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

Don't make the foolish of mistake of thinking I'm just some cynical atheist playing around with Bible quotes. I'm Jewish. I respect the Old Testament and I've been taught about it since childhood. My problem lies with fundamentalists who get anal retentive about certain passages, then conveniently ignore the existence of others. Either be literal about it all, or cut the rest some slack.

But, as far as Christians believe, we no longer need to follow such strict punishments. Back then, prior to Jesus, after such an act, there was no possibility for redemption, but now, since Jesus died, our sins can be forgiven, so there is hope for us to redeem ourselves.

What worked 2000 years ago isn't going to work now, and if God's frothing at the mouth regarding homosexuality or whatever, technically he should also be having a hissy fit everytime you eat bacon.

Exodus 35:2 says that those who work on the Sabbath day should be put to death. I don't exactly see that mass executions every Saturday, do you?

Colossians 2:16
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

Once again, because of mercy, the strict traditions of the Old testament are done away with. However, the principles behind those traditions are still important to follow. Children still should obey your mother and father, but they shouldn't have to get stoned if they don't.

 

[Windy]

I read it. I thought "Good grief." I spoke to my mother to make sure I was clear, and she was of a similar reaction.

Want me to translate it for you? In a nutshell, if a woman is raped in the country by a man who is not her fiance, her rapist shall be stoned to death because, being the country, there was no one around to hear he scream. However, if the same situation were in the city, she presumably wasn't raped, or else she'd have been heard screaming - therefore, she'll be stoned to death with the man.

A passage just above that one says that if a man marries a woman and then decides he doesn't like her, he can demand proof from her father that she was a virgin until her wedding night (ie bloody sheets). If he is unable to find the proof, she is to be stoned to death:

"22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,

22:14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

22:15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:

22:16 And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;

22:17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.

22:18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;

22:19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.

22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

Don't make the foolish of mistake of thinking I'm just some cynical atheist playing around with Bible quotes. I'm Jewish. I respect the Old Testament and I've been taught about it since childhood. My problem lies with fundamentalists who get anal retentive about certain passages, then conveniently ignore the existence of others. Either be literal about it all, or cut the rest some slack. What worked 2000 years ago isn't going to work now, and if God's frothing at the mouth regarding homosexuality or whatever, technically he should also be having a hissy fit everytime you eat bacon.

Exodus 35:2 says that those who work on the Sabbath day should be put to death. I don't exactly see that mass executions every Saturday, do you?

Are you and your mother reading the same passage as me?????
I dont see it that way at all.

 

[leejosepho]

Back then, prior to Jesus ... there was no possibility for redemption, but now ... there is hope for us to redeem ourselves.

Whoa! Are you sure you meant to say that?!

To some folks, that would sound like a license to rape ... then "forgive oneself".

 

[Binary_Digit]

I believe this goes under the category of old laws that did not need to be followed after the death of Jesus.

I don't understand this. Why couldn't God simply get his laws right the first time? I'd think he wouldn't hold anyone to laws that would only be revoked later. That's a double standard.

 

[leejosepho]

I don't understand this. Why couldn't God simply get his laws right the first time? I'd think he wouldn't hold anyone to laws that would only be revoked later. That's a double standard.

There is no double standard here -- no law has been revoked. Rape is still a crime, the offender is still to be punished (in whatever way), and forgiveness includes neither escape from punishment nor the ability to exonerate oneself.

 

[Binary_Digit]

There is no double standard here -- no law has been revoked. Rape is still a crime, the offender is still to be punished (in whatever way), and forgiveness includes neither escape from punishment nor the ability to exonerate oneself.

You are right, rape is still a crime (and a sin, I'm sure). I was replying to the statement "old laws that did not need to be followed after the death of Jesus" which implies that certain laws were revoked. Not just the method of punishment, but the actual law. Or are you suggesting that it's still a sin to be raped within city limits?

 

[leejosepho]

You are right, rape is still a crime (and a sin, I'm sure). I was replying to the statement "old laws that did not need to be followed after the death of Jesus" which implies that certain laws were revoked. Not just the method of punishment, but the actual law ...

Ah, okay. Maybe I misunderstood a bit while pondering that erroneous "old laws that did not need to be followed" statement within the context of rape.

Or are you suggesting that it's still a sin to be raped within city limits?

Wherever it might occur, rape is still rape, and I am not aware of its location ever being a factor implicating the victim. Rather, I believe the issue here is the societally-sane thought or "law" that women were/are expected to help see to it that rapists might not "get away" and possibly even escape punishment as circumstantially "aided" by their silence. And of course, some right judgment should be shown in the event that for some reason a woman actually cannot "cry out" ... just as she would otherwise be questioned as to why she did not when in fact she could have.

 

[vergiss]

One of my original points here is that it's entirely possible (and happens all to often) for a woman to cry for help during an assault, and not be heard by anyonce who could help. Therefore, according to the rules of God - you could be stoned to death for being raped and not having anyone within hearing distance to rescue you.

How very fair.

 

[leejosepho]

One of my original points here is that ... according to the rules of God - you could be stoned to death for being raped and not having anyone within hearing distance to rescue you.

I am quite sure you have misunderstood.

 

[Gideon]

From the book of Deuteronomy:

"022:023
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

022:024
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 neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

022:025
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.

022:026
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 neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

022:027
For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her."

Sounds like fun.

Tip: Scripture quotes wont work
Theres lots of eveidence its been tampered with, A LOT, by people who didnt believe the bible way long ago. Second of all, theres many different "versions" of the bible nowadays. Thirdly, its mainly examples which you learn from, don't take it so literally. Fourthly, the New Testament is considered to be more correct, because a new law was put in place (opposed to Moses' law), fifhly, its probably just saying to put away evil from your lives, and maybe not actually kill them and humiliate them, it may just be to humble them, or that may just be the older law.

Its a PRETTY flimsy argument you have

 

[vergiss]

In that case, so are the arguments against homosexuality. After all, they're just tampered, Old Testament mistranslations, too.

Thank you for helping my point.

(Keep in mind, by the way, the "New Testament is more correct" rule doesn't apply to us Jews - nor, it seems, the fundamentalist Christians who enjoy quoting from it every thirty seconds.)

Leejosepho - how have I misunderstood? It quite clearly says that if a woman isn't heard crying out during her rape, then she is to be punished as well. It's seriously not hard to imagine that most women don't have anyone in earshot to hear them at the time, as definitely not all rapes are stopped by rescuers.

 

[leejosepho]

Leejosepho - how have I misunderstood? It quite clearly says that if a woman isn't heard crying out during her rape, then she is to be punished as well ...

First, "rape" is not the only kind of relation being mentioned in the Scripture you have referenced, and whether or not a woman cries out in one kind of location or another possibly *can* be a piece of evidence as to what kind of relation and crime -- adultery (fornication) or rape -- had actually just taken place.

You had written:

In a nutshell, if a woman is raped in the country by a man who is not her fiance, her rapist shall be stoned to death because, being the country, there was no one around to hear he scream.

No, the rapist is/was to be stoned simply because of his crime, not because of its location or whether or not the raped woman screamed.

However, if the same situation were in the city, she presumably wasn't raped, or else she'd have been heard screaming - therefore, she'll be stoned to death with the man.

No, if a mute woman was raped – “same situation” (rape), you had said – in the city, I cannot imagine her being automatically stoned for not crying out. Yet in a *different* situation, such as where “the absence of a scream in a location where it could be heard means it is possible that the relation was not actually rape at all”, yes, the woman’s being stoned along with the man is/was certainly to be considered.

It's seriously not hard to imagine that most women don't have anyone in earshot to hear them at the time ...

Yes, and it is so very sad that any raped women might ever hear any question or implication as to whether or not she “enjoyed it”. At times, then, right discernment can be extremely challenging.

 

[Gideon]

In that case, so are the arguments against homosexuality. After all, they're just tampered, Old Testament mistranslations, too.

Thank you for helping my point.

(Keep in mind, by the way, the "New Testament is more correct" rule doesn't apply to us Jews - nor, it seems, the fundamentalist Christians who enjoy quoting from it every thirty seconds.)

Leejosepho - how have I misunderstood? It quite clearly says that if a woman isn't heard crying out during her rape, then she is to be punished as well. It's seriously not hard to imagine that most women don't have anyone in earshot to hear them at the time, as definitely not all rapes are stopped by rescuers.

Good job, you made comments on about 2 of my points :roll:

Also good job on trying to change the subject, I never told you my view on homosexuality

 

[vergiss]

I'm not talking about your views on homosexuality personally, try not to be so paranoid.

Leejosepho - again, you miss my point. Hypothetically, what if a woman (who isn't mute) is raped in the city, and screams, but no one was around to hear it? Then they'd say that she hadn't (even though she had) and stone her to death just for being the victim of a crime.

 

[Windy]

In that case, so are the arguments against homosexuality. After all, they're just tampered, Old Testament mistranslations, too.

Thank you for helping my point.

(Keep in mind, by the way, the "New Testament is more correct" rule doesn't apply to us Jews - nor, it seems, the fundamentalist Christians who enjoy quoting from it every thirty seconds.)

Leejosepho - how have I misunderstood? It quite clearly says that if a woman isn't heard crying out during her rape, then she is to be punished as well. It's seriously not hard to imagine that most women don't have anyone in earshot to hear them at the time, as definitely not all rapes are stopped by rescuers.

Vergis..do you believe the bible ?
I ask you this because if you don't ; why does it matter so much to you.
The other week I was going to join a social club , it looked pretty good
so I got the application form . When I looked at the rules I didn't want to join .
They lost no sleep over me not joining , I lost no sleep over not joining .
I wont carry on whining about some rules that I didn't want to follow .
The same thing applies here if you don't like the rules ; don't join .
If you do join ; you have to follow the rules or else whats the point ?

 

[vergiss]

Vergis..do you believe the bible ?
I ask you this because if you don't ; why does it matter so much to you.
The other week I was going to join a social club , it looked pretty good
so I got the application form . When I looked at the rules I didn't want to join .
They lost no sleep over me not joining , I lost no sleep over not joining .
I wont carry on whining about some rules that I didn't want to follow .
The same thing applies here if you don't like the rules ; don't join .
If you do join ; you have to follow the rules or else whats the point ?

That's all well and good, but yes - I do, to a certain extent. The Old Testament, anyway. However, I do not believe in following every single word literally.

I have to follow the rules? How much so? So then you say I should obey the rule about stoning rape victims to death? In that case, my parents have the authority to sell me off to the first bidder, too?

 

[Windy]

That's all well and good, but yes - I do, to a certain extent. The Old Testament, anyway. However, I do not believe in following every single word literally.

I have to follow the rules? How much so? So then you say I should obey the rule about stoning rape victims to death? In that case, my parents have the authority to sell me off to the first bidder, too?

You take me wrong . All any of us can do is to try and keep the Rules .
Some rules are hard to follow ,and we give up before we even try ,for rear of failure .
Some of them we disagree with because we don't like them anyway .
And others we try to change because we don't like them .
Which ever is the case we end up with something that can be changed by everybody , and is nothing like the original set of Rules we had in the first place . Which is pointless . So don't join .
In the Mosaic Law as you know there are hundreds of rules that were for
then ..not now .
It was a time of huge transition ; a nation of slaves who had
to follow Egyptian law , were now left in the Wilderness with no law at all .
Imagine for one moment the huge task of trying to form a cohesive society .
Look for yourself in the old testament there is a rule for everything..but it
was for then.....There is even one on how to shave your beard ..
They were there for a purpose... which it served .
As I said before if you don't like the Rules don't join .
Everytime I read the bible I find something that could hurt me ...
I have learned that there is ''No gain without Pain'' I have to be knocked
down to be built up again . It has worked for me personally although
it is not very nice learning hard lessons sometimes .

 

[leejosepho]

Leejosepho - again, you miss my point. Hypothetically, what if a woman (who isn't mute) is raped in the city, and screams, but no one was around to hear it? Then they'd say that she hadn't (even though she had) and stone her to death just for being the victim of a crime.

Ah, now I see. Thank you for the clarification.

First, the Scripture you are referencing is not exclusively addressing rape:

---
“When a girl who is a maiden is engaged to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and shall stone them to death with stones, the girl because she did not cry out [when people] in the city [could have heard her] ..."
---

At least the initial assumption there would be that the girl did not cry out because the act was consentual. However, I cannot imagine any right-ruling judge automatically having her stoned before at least asking her why she had not cried out ... for it is at least possible she had been gagged or even knocked unconscious.

---
“But if a man finds the girl who is engaged in the field, and the man seizes her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do no matter to the girl. The girl has no sin worthy of death – for the matter is like a man who rises against his neighbour and kills him – for he found her in the field, and she cried out, the engaged girl, but without anyone to save her” (Deuteronomy 22:22-27).
---

Overall, and regardless of where the incident took place, the pertinent "point of law" concerning the girl is whether or not she had cried out *if* there were people nearby ...

... and *not* whether anyone actually heard her. If a girl was to be found guilty and stoned simply because no one had heard her cry out, then the girl in the field would automatically be stoned for not in the first place being near enough to at least someone who could have heard.

Therefore, the girl in your scenario could not be rightly stoned unless there were actual witnesses to attest to her "I consent" silence.