Are there any instances of "GOD" order and/or condoning the rape of women in the bible? (page 2)

Vidiot

The Bible definately doesn't seem to view sexual assault as a particularly big deal except in certain cases.

ttdtt

Vidio - my brother - you must remember Dog made allowances for his people because they were Stiff Necked.

Jehober was showing love allowing innocent women to be raped.
He is a Dog of Justice afterall.

fulltimestudent

Vidiot : The Bible definately doesn't seem to view sexual assault as a particularly big deal except in certain cases.

I agree!

And, we need to ask why? I'm currently thinking that its because our contemporary concept of rape as being a violation of a persons right to say No, was not the way that the ancients really thought about the problem.

I see that different way of thinking as being based on their attitude that 'women' were 'property.'

When young, and girls were unmarried, they were the property of their father/family. When married, they were the property of their husband, hence the use of the word 'baal,' with the meaning of 'husbandly owner' as the NWT translates Isaiah 54:5:

"For your Grand Maker is your husbandly owner, ..."

A choice in harmony with the meaning of 'baal' in this Blue Letter Bible site: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H1166&t=KJV

It seems to me that this attitude is behind the way that 2 Samuel 12:11,12 says David was to be punished. David violated another man's 'property.' so he would be punished the same way. His property (i.e. his wives) would be violated by another man.

YHWH didn't give a f*ck about the feelings of the women involved - they were just a piece of meat belonging to David.

There are other biblical passages that may indicate other perspectives, but the 'ownership' perspective is rather fundamental.
Anyone got a different viewpoint?

stuckinarut2

And we were always told that "god never changes". He is "the same yesterday, today and tomorrow"

Hmmm...so if he doesn't change, then he is still ok with it??

Whey did he allow "his special people" to act in such an appalling manner?

How does an apologist rationalise this??

If a modern day "Christian" did acts like that, how would he be viewed by the Law and The congregation??

Huh??

jws

Ah, good old biblical marriage:

~~Between one man and one woman~~

Between one man and one or more women and all the women he rapes and a little bit with some of his slaves.

rebel8

http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-home-page/rape-in-the-bible/

http://www.alternet.org/gender/what-bible-says-about-rape

Jesus is the product of child rape--age 13--no matter who you believe the baby daddy is. This from a god who believed his perfect son couldn't consent to baptism until age 33. Consent to impregnation when you're 13=A-OK. Consent to baptism=wait til you're in your 30s.

fulltimestudent

Rebel, any contemporary parent will almost certainly agree with you. But is that a consistent cultural belief throughout history?

Not so long back (in historical terms, a girl may well have been married off around ages 13-15. Why? well life was precarious, early death came to women in many forms, not least complications in child birth.* If the average age of death was say 50, and you wanted to see grand children, then you needed to have surviving children by the time you were 20.

Reference: https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/09/09/age-of-consent-in-european-american-history/

The full picture is complicated, but generally it may be thought that parents would have been thinking of finding a suitable marriage partner for a daughter, once her breasts started to develop.

* And we have to say that sometimes pregnancy in a body not fully mature, would have been a cause of death.

Are there any instances of "GOD" order and/or condoning the rape of women in the bible?

Vidiot

ttdtt

fulltimestudent

stuckinarut2

jws

rebel8

fulltimestudent

Black Man

ElderEtta

never a jw

Share this