Oh that BUT follows on from something doesn't it ?
Yes, the previous verses are about a betrothed woman who consents to cheating on her husband-to-be, and in that case she and the man she cheated with should be put to death as adulterers.
But since that isn't describing rape, it isn't relevant to your claim that God commanded rape victims be put to death.
why do they use the word ONLY the man should be killed ?
To make it clear to knuckleheads that rape victims should not be put to death.
some translations not yout (NIV) they've changed it a bit say thet if it happens in a town they should both be killed...
The NIV does not say that. How long would it have taken you to check that before posting? 10 seconds, tops?
But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her. Deuteronomy 22:25-27 (NIV)
Now, I despise the NIV because later in this chapter it mistranslates a passage to say that God wants rape victims to marry their attackers (and I've already linked to a post where I prove that the NIV indeed mistranslates that passage), but the NIV did manage to get v.25-27 right.
who knows if he held her mouth shut so she couldn't cry for help.
Please tell me you are not that big of a knucklehead! No, a man can't get away with raping a woman by gagging her, nor is a man permitted to rape women so long as he doesn't attack them while in the countryside. :doh:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." And what's that all about I read you post you said to look at but this is pretty self explanitory. The raped girl has no choice in the matter whatsoever.
You read my linked post, and you still don't get it? Maybe you don't want to get it.
This passage is not describing rape. This NIV mistranslated it.
What about the virgins being used as plunder (Not brides... PLUNDER) in Numbers ?
I would gladly move on to whatever you are vaguely referring to if we can first get to a point where you concede that:
- God did not command that rape victims be put to death.
- God did not command that rape victims ought to marry their attackers.
- Just because God used as an example a woman being raped in the countryside where no one could hear her cries for help, that doesn't mean that rape is only condemned when it takes place in the countryside or when the woman is able to scream.
Come on we have to get past the Bible as an absolute moral code it's on shaky ground on a great many things, rape, slavery, killing, pillaging,
You've yet to establish that.
Besides, what standard of morality are you using to judge the God of the Bible to determine that He's "on shaky ground"? What makes yours superior?
and realise that it's man that makes morals not God. Even if they use god as an excuse.
Again:
There is a huge difference between obeying God's command to kill someone and lying about God commanding you to kill someone in and attempt to justify your own murderous behavior.
Do you recognize that?
