|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:39 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:18 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 4:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 8:34 pm
 |
|
|
|
Matt Pniewski Call Me Apple It specifically says rapes? My KJV says: "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"Which is actually pre-marital sex, not rape persay. Of course, the King James Version isn't really the most reliable source..... But still..... It's NOT a good moral regardless. Compared to other cultures, yes.
Why isnt the KJV reliable?
And why did you cut the rest of my statement out? That was important as well. |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:30 am
|
|
|
 |
Grilled Cheese 28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. [c] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.Could someone please explain to me how this makes any sense whatsoever? I suppose it would deter potential rapists, but I still don't understand the reasoning behind it. How does administering justice equate to forcing the girl to spend the rest of her life with the man who raped her?
Call Me Apple It specifically says rapes? My KJV says: "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"Which is actually pre-marital sex, not rape persay. But to be honest, I would not be surprised if marrying a woman after raping her was a practice in the those times. Christianity & Islam gave women rights in that area of the world. Pre-Religious Middle East was families committing infanticide by burying their daughters out in the desert to die. Women being bought & sold like cattle.
The key indications that it is rape are "lay hold of her", which is to grasp her with his hands and "lie with her" is obviously to have sex with her, then it does indeed indicate rape. The term "violate" suggests stepping over physical or social boundaries without permission. Again, this indicates rape, but it could also indicate sin against the person.
Nevertheless, what you're all missing is that the payment is a dowry to the father of the 'bride', and the marriage is an honouring of the physical unity of two people. It's not supposed to be punishment but the 'right' thing to do. The woman would bear a child and give birth to it, so the man must provide for his new family. It is about a man taking responsibility for his actions and not placing the burden upon the family of the daughter. Therein lies the justice.
You're all thinking too much in the modern mindset of law and crime. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:22 pm
|
|
|
|
Call Me Apple Matt Pniewski Call Me Apple It specifically says rapes? My KJV says: "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"Which is actually pre-marital sex, not rape persay. Of course, the King James Version isn't really the most reliable source..... But still..... It's NOT a good moral regardless. Compared to other cultures, yes. Why isnt the KJV reliable?
Because it contains several notable missing or altered passages.
Quote: And why did you cut the rest of my statement out? That was important as well.
I have no idea, considering I commented on it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
