Is the Bible being Re- Interpreted Regarding the Crime of Rape...

[seraphim712]

I don't know if I'm confusing myself or if others are misinterpreting the scriptures through different versions of the bible, but I was almost always certain that if the act of rape was committed against a woman, the man would undeniably be put to death, no questions asked.

However, I notice when I type in Duet 22, the NIV always is the first version to come up in the search engine and by reading the passage, it only qualifies if the woman was a betrothed virgin, however if it were a woman who was a virgin that wasn't betrothed and was defiled by a man, then that man would have to pay fifty shekels of silver to the father and marry the victim and he's not allowed to divorce her for as long as he lives.... to me this sounds horrible and traumatizing for the victim to have to live with her rapist.

I looked up the KJV online and it says the same exact thing, just in 'Old English' format.

Again I don't know if I'm making up things in my head, but I grew up on the KJV of the Bible, I used to read from a family bible that was very old, and I swore that this chapter indicated that if the woman was forcibly violated whether if she were married or not, then the culprit would die.

So many people are bringing up this scripture among others on FB in my feed to 'prove' a point that the Bible is 'barbaric' and 'evil'; I'm always the type to seek out questions and do my best to research things, when I ask ministers about it, they usually go around my question and don't answer me directly.

Can someone help me out with this please? I know all versions of the bible we know of today originate from Hebrew, therefore does the Hebrew bible say something completely different and is being misinterpreted when translated to different languages?

 

[seraphim712]

Found this article (long read): http://unveiling-christianity.org/2012/08/07/bible-demands-rape-victims-marries-rapist-life/#

 

[Shimmie]

This is a good topic discussion and I agree with you that for a woman to have to be married to a man who raped her, is beyond horrible.

In Deuteronomy 22:25-27 it speaks here of a man being killed for raping a 'married' (betrothed) woman.

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.

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 neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

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

--------

In my opinion, this should apply to the woman who was unbetrothed and raped as well. For some reason, I believe there is a passage of scripture that supports this for unmarried women also.

 

[MrsHaseeb]

I see things like this all the time where people try to discredit the Bible saying its filled with violence and calling God a tyrant. When people get to that point I don't continue to talk with them because they clearly hate God.

 

[blazingthru]

Actually, if we look at the bible from their point of view it would not seem so horrible, for example we have Tamar and Amnon. Amnon was her brother and he raped her. She would have gladly married him, to prevent her shame and her new circumstances. Also Dinah, she would have married her rapist, but in both cases, this was not permitted. The brothers slew everyone in Shechem and Amnon was later killed, but neither ever married. No one would marry them, So as long as they lived, they will be a burden on their families. So marrying the Rapist for that time would not have been a terrible thing. I can't compare that time to now. Now its so violent and evil, not that it wasn't then, but looking deep into it you can see why God would say for them to marry. ( sorry going from memory and have misspellings) Amnon was spoiled rotten and David made terrible mistakes with his kids. But that is another story. I don't always understand why God makes the decision that he does, but he is just and he makes no mistakes and the best part is he doesn't hid it he tells you the full story. Besides people will make all kind of excuses not to trust in the bible.

 

[Shimmie]

Besides people will make all kind of excuses not to trust in the bible.

This is the Truth and I totally agree.

 

[seraphim712]

Sorry I haven't responded back yet; I doing some major spring cleaning, but I will return to post my thoughts.

 

[CoilyFields]

Actually, if we look at the bible from their point of view it would not seem so horrible, for example we have Tamar and Amnon. Amnon was her brother and he raped her. She would have gladly married him, to prevent her shame and her new circumstances. Also Dinah, she would have married her rapist, but in both cases, this was not permitted. The brothers slew everyone in Shechem and Amnon was later killed, but neither ever married. No one would marry them, So as long as they lived, they will be a burden on their families. So marrying the Rapist for that time would not have been a terrible thing. I can't compare that time to now. Now its so violent and evil, not that it wasn't then, but looking deep into it you can see why God would say for them to marry. ( sorry going from memory and have misspellings) Amnon was spoiled rotten and David made terrible mistakes with his kids. But that is another story. I don't always understand why God makes the decision that he does, but he is just and he makes no mistakes and the best part is he doesn't hid it he tells you the full story. Besides people will make all kind of excuses not to trust in the bible.

^^^THis

I was going to postulate something along these lines. If she is no longer a virgin there were no other options but to live with parents for the rest of their lives (never able to set up a household/family of her own). There werent options for women to support themselves (besides prostitution) so the protection of a man was needed then. No longer being a virgin also could have exposed her to undue targetting of others who may see her as used and therefore available goods. It should also have served as a deterrant to would-be rapists.

Overall, I would imagine it to be a safeguard for a woman in a cruel world. It seems horrible for us today because we have other options. I kinda see it like when God allowed Moses to establish the "writ of divorce" not because it is what he wanted, but due to the horrible abandonment by men of their wives he had them establish a formal process to protect the wives in some way.