Evidence for God from Science

Why would the bible say that you must marry your rapist?

It doesn't, a poor translation says that. Read a book called "Is God A Moral Monster" by Paul Copan, it explains that passage in there.

Here is a modern translation from the ESV Duet 22:28

“If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.

Rape was not involved, it was purely consensual. The word that was wrongly translated meant unlawful, because they were not married it was considered unlawful intercourse.

I will have a look in my concordance when I get home to see if I can find the Hebrew word.

I had a look at the Torah online and this was their translation of the verse
" If a man finds a virgin girl who was not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found,"

Danieltwotwenty wrote:It doesn't, a poor translation says that. Read a book called "Is God A Moral Monster" by Paul Copan, it explains that passage in there.

Here is a modern translation from the ESV Duet 22:28

“If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.

Rape was not involved, it was purely consensual. The word that was wrongly translated meant unlawful, because they were not married it was considered unlawful intercourse.

I will have a look in my concordance when I get home to see if I can find the Hebrew word.

I had a look at the Torah online and this was their translation of the verse
" If a man finds a virgin girl who was not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found,"

Correct.. The passage is not referring to rape at all. We had a discussion about that some time ago..

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 14&t=33287

One could argue that the word "seize" implies the use of force.
The hebrew word taphas means to seize or handle or to lay hold of.
I guess it can be translated a few ways BUT it does seem to imply something that COULD be forceful.
IMO, it meant that if a man got a hold of a virgin that was not engaged to be married and had sex with her and they were found out, he would have to marry her and be under the rule of her father forever.
Quite the penalty in those days.

PaulSacramento wrote:One could argue that the word "seize" implies the use of force.
The hebrew word taphas means to seize or handle or to lay hold of.
I guess it can be translated a few ways BUT it does seem to imply something that COULD be forceful.
IMO, it meant that if a man got a hold of a virgin that was not engaged to be married and had sex with her and they were found out, he would have to marry her and be under the rule of her father forever.
Quite the penalty in those days.

And a fair one too, I mean you ruined someone's life, now you have to provide for her all your life and be responsible towards her.

neo-x wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:One could argue that the word "seize" implies the use of force.
The hebrew word taphas means to seize or handle or to lay hold of.
I guess it can be translated a few ways BUT it does seem to imply something that COULD be forceful.
IMO, it meant that if a man got a hold of a virgin that was not engaged to be married and had sex with her and they were found out, he would have to marry her and be under the rule of her father forever.
Quite the penalty in those days.

And a fair one too, I mean you ruined someone's life, now you have to provide for her all your life and be responsible towards her.

Indeed and it was a far "better" system than what was around on those days in the neighboring nations.
At least the woman was protected and the father had say.

PaulSacramento wrote:One could argue that the word "seize" implies the use of force.
The hebrew word taphas means to seize or handle or to lay hold of.
I guess it can be translated a few ways BUT it does seem to imply something that COULD be forceful.
IMO, it meant that if a man got a hold of a virgin that was not engaged to be married and had sex with her and they were found out, he would have to marry her and be under the rule of her father forever.
Quite the penalty in those days.

It couldn't be rape however.. Why? Because the penalty for rape in the Bible is death.. Deuteronomy 22:25–27

Gman wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:One could argue that the word "seize" implies the use of force.
The hebrew word taphas means to seize or handle or to lay hold of.
I guess it can be translated a few ways BUT it does seem to imply something that COULD be forceful.
IMO, it meant that if a man got a hold of a virgin that was not engaged to be married and had sex with her and they were found out, he would have to marry her and be under the rule of her father forever.
Quite the penalty in those days.

It couldn't be rape however.. Why? Because the penalty for rape in the Bible is death.. Deuteronomy 22:25–27

Yes, I agree.

Doesn't the rest of the passage describe rape, saying that if she screams it's rape. And if they're out of town where no one can here them, it's assumed she screamed. But if she doesn't scream, it's consenting?

ryanbouma wrote:Doesn't the rest of the passage describe rape, saying that if she screams it's rape. And if they're out of town where no one can here them, it's assumed she screamed. But if she doesn't scream, it's consenting?

Actually it is before that passage, none of these passages are connected like a story. These are case laws, they have been made when a situation has arisen.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24

23 “If there is a betrothed virgin, and a man meets her in the city and lies with her, 24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbor's wife. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.

It says she will be spared if it is rape, because if she cries out in the city someone will hear her and then it is considered rape. The man is killed for rape or they are both killed for adultery.

Although their laws were not perfect and I am sure some innocent people got the bad end of the stick, neither are our laws perfect and fool proof.