I love Jesus (the rapist)

[ashman165]

@Thudlow_Boink

I think most of us in this thread are still baffled as to where you’re getting this “makes it okay” from.

Then you, and anyone who thinks likewise, lacks a complete inability to read at an adult level.

Thank you for trying, but please don’t come back until such time as you can read beyond a grade school level. The words say what they say, that you aren’t wise enough to see that isn’t the problem of the 6 billion people on Earth.

[Malacandra]

@begbert: I don’t believe the OT goes in for that whole burning-in-hell thing - one of our Jewish scholars could help you out a little here, but the Mosaic law AIUI is about how to be a good Jew while alive, no more. (Probably a horrible oversimplification, and I’m perfectly willing to be corrected.)

[ashman165]

@Thudlow_Boink

Just parse it as the OP claiming that Jesus is his therapist.

Lucky you. But, despite your faith, the words are there. Deal with them, or don’t. The choice to ignore the word of God is in your hands.

[begbert2]

@ashman165

Then you, and anyone who thinks likewise, lacks a complete inability to read at an adult level.

Thank you for trying, but please don’t come back until such time as you can read beyond a grade school level. The words say what they say, that you aren’t wise enough to see that isn’t the problem of the 6 billion people on Earth.

The people who note that this a legal stricture that is fining and penalizing the act of rape are not the ones with a reading comprehension problem here.
@Malacandra - ah, well, the OP is conflating Jesus with the OT and legal codes with moral codes. I’d say that any scripture anywhere in the bible promising hellfire to rapists (or some approximate equivalent) would do. Not to say that there is such a scripture - but then, I’m not saying that the biblical God doesn’t like rape. I’m just arguing that the OP’s scripture is a piss-poor place to argue that theory from.

[ashman165]

@Odesio

No. Locking people up in a similar manner to what we do today would have put such a strain on their resources that it just wasn’t practical. So most societies in that era would have punishments that included public humiliation, corporal punishment, being sold into slavery, banishment, and, of course, the ever popular death penalty.

Odesio

So, the punishment of being raped then was to marry your rapist? Goddamn, that would fucking teach someone to stop being raped, huh?

[ashman165]

@Odesio

I would not say that on their face it implies that rape is perfectly ok.

I’m going to take an extremely controversial stand but I don’t care what others here think of me. Rape is wrong in any context. You, however, are not being hostile towards rape or rapist you’re being hostile towards people who disagree with you.

Odesio

You’re right. I approve of rape. Fortunately, the bible backs me up on it. That can’t possibly be controversial, right? After all, it is the word of God!

[begbert2]

@ashman165

So, the punishment of being raped then was to marry your rapist? Goddamn, that would fucking teach someone to stop being raped, huh?

Being married to your rapist > being spinserized and outcast.

And the fine was probably where the punitive aspect of the punishment was focused. The forced marriage was probably damage control.

[Malthus]

@Malacandra

@begbert: I don’t believe the OT goes in for that whole burning-in-hell thing - one of our Jewish scholars could help you out a little here, but the Mosaic law AIUI is about how to be a good Jew while alive, no more. (Probably a horrible oversimplification, and I’m perfectly willing to be corrected.)

You are basically correct, with the observation that the law codes contained in the OT are the ancestor to modern-day Judaism, which is established based more on the commentaries to the codes as contained in the Talmud.

Divine punishment in the afterlife is certainly not the driving force of the religion; Jews do not even agree on whether there is an afterlife, let alone what it consists of. Suffice it to say that the notion of the afterlife is hazy in Judaism (it shows up in some of the commentaries and is believed in by some, but not all, religious Jews). In the OT itself, the afterlife is treated as being either a simple metaphore for burial, or as a place of gloom for good and bad alike, similar to the Greek notion.

[ashman165]

@Captain_Amazing

The fact that it requires the rapist to pay a fine and marry and support the woman he raped.

Is your premise such that marriage is an actual repayment for raping someone in the first instance? Let’s say I hold you down and ass rape you for a few nights in a row, is my (and God!) requiring you to submit to my forcing you to marry an appropriate punishment for me?

Or does it just mean that now I get to ass-fuck you, but now it isn’t considered rape?

What is an appropriate punishment (other than God requiring you to marry me) in your eyes?

[begbert2]

@ashman165

Is your premise such that marriage is an actual repayment for raping someone in the first instance? Let’s say I hold you down and ass rape you for a few nights in a row, is my (and God!) requiring you to submit to my forcing you to marry an appropriate punishment for me?

Or does it just mean that now I get to ass-fuck you, but now it isn’t considered rape?

What is an appropriate punishment (other than God requiring you to marry me) in your eyes?

I seem to be replying to this thread a lot.

Looking at the options Odesio speculated (“public humiliation, corporal punishment, being sold into slavery, banishment, and, of course, the ever popular death penalty”), forced marriage would arguably be kindest to the victim, because unlike all other possible punishments for the rapist, it would enable the woman to be supported. Typically back then, non-virgins were not people’s first choice for marriage; being raped would basically make you unmarriagable, completely independent of the legal system. So, the forced marriage would at least ensure that you wouldn’t be left alone and unsupported after your father died. As noted, it would be a pragmatic solution to the victim’s sudden problem of being unmarriagable.

[ashman165]

@Malthus

Raping and enslaving women captured in war wasn’t exactly unknown in the ancient world. Indeed, it was more or less what everyone did who was successful in war.

As interesting as that is, the question involves do you believe the bible supports it. Thanks for not answering that question; if you continue to fail to do so, there is no reason to post here.

What the law codes in the Bible attempted to do in such cases was to put some sort of limits on these behaviours, rather than outright condemning them. Yes, you may massacre in war, but only in those specific cases where God tells you to. Yes, you may rape and enslave in war, but you have to provide for the women afterwards.

/yawn. So, back to the question of rape in the bible . . .yes it says it’s okay, or no it doesn’t?

Is it “good” by our standards? Well, obviously not. But it was in the context of a time in which brutality was pretty well par for the course.

Back to God: does his book say rape is okay, or not? If you can’t answer such a simple question, move elsewhere.

Condemning the drafters of these laws for not proposing moral rules suitable for a liberal democracy is somewhat similar to people in a future in which war is outlawed condemning the drafters of the Geneva Convention for condoning war.

Take for example slavery. The OT has lots of rules regarding slavery - mostly intended to limit its harshness. No doubt this condones slavery, but consider that just about every ancient society had slavery - how many had a code similar to that in the Bible?

Wow, it must hard to accept that God encourages rape, even rewards it. sniffle

[ashman165]

@begbert2

The people who note that this a legal stricture that is fining and penalizing the act of rape are not the ones with a reading comprehension problem here.

Ok, I accept your premise. What then, if not rape, is promulgated here?

@Malacandra - ah, well, the OP is conflating Jesus with the OT and legal codes with moral codes. I’d say that any scripture anywhere in the bible promising hellfire to rapists (or some approximate equivalent) would do. Not to say that there is such a scripture - but then, I’m not saying that the biblical God doesn’t like rape. I’m just arguing that the OP’s scripture is a piss-poor place to argue that theory from.

Are you saying that the Bible isn’t the word of god then?

[ashman165]

@begbert2

Being married to your rapist > being spinserized and outcast.

And the fine was probably where the punitive aspect of the punishment was focused. The forced marriage was probably damage control.

Thanks, but that doesn’t answer the question I asked. Does the bible, or god, support rape or not? I’ll thank you to move your non-responses to another thread. In this tread, if you can’t answer the question presented, then shut the fuck up.

[ashman165]

@Malthus

You are basically correct, with the observation that the law codes contained in the OT are the ancestor to modern-day Judaism, which is established based more on the commentaries to the codes as contained in the Talmud.

Divine punishment in the afterlife is certainly not the driving force of the religion; Jews do not even agree on whether there is an afterlife, let alone what it consists of. Suffice it to say that the notion of the afterlife is hazy in Judaism (it shows up in some of the commentaries and is believed in by some, but not all, religious Jews). In the OT itself, the afterlife is treated as being either a simple metaphore for burial, or as a place of gloom for good and bad alike, similar to the Greek notion.

Thanks for your not-quote-so-insightful into the rest of the bible. Now shut the fuck up or answer the OP.

[Michael_Ellis]

@Alessan

What does a Late Bronze Age Hebrew legalism - progressive for its day, but now hopelessly archaic - have to to with Jesus?

Smug internet atheism (as opposed to the more thoughtful varieties of atheism). It’s easier to troll ordinary and non-fanatical Christians on an internet message board than engage in an actual debate with the actual fanatics that cause trouble in real life.

[ashman165]

@begbert2

I seem to be replying to this thread a lot.

Looking at the options Odesio speculated (“public humiliation, corporal punishment, being sold into slavery, banishment, and, of course, the ever popular death penalty”), forced marriage would arguably be kindest to the victim, because unlike all other possible punishments for the rapist, it would enable the woman to be supported.

Got it: forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist at least provides for her support. So, I’m glad that you agree that bible supports rape. It gives me courage to go out and rape people; since after all, the bible condones it.

You are wise beyond your years since you agree that the bible means what it says.

[Malacandra]

@Malthus

You are basically correct, with the observation that the law codes contained in the OT are the ancestor to modern-day Judaism, which is established based more on the commentaries to the codes as contained in the Talmud.

Divine punishment in the afterlife is certainly not the driving force of the religion; Jews do not even agree on whether there is an afterlife, let alone what it consists of. Suffice it to say that the notion of the afterlife is hazy in Judaism (it shows up in some of the commentaries and is believed in by some, but not all, religious Jews). In the OT itself, the afterlife is treated as being either a simple metaphore for burial, or as a place of gloom for good and bad alike, similar to the Greek notion.

Thanks, and understood about the law codes; that’s about how I thought it worked from what I’ve read here.

[Malthus]

@Michael_Ellis

Smug internet atheism.

Correction: moronic internet atheism.

[begbert2]

@ashman165

Ok, I accept your premise. What then, if not rape, is promulgated here?

Rape is the crime whose civil legal punishment is being described in the passage you quote. You will note that it doesn’t go unpunished, either.

@ashman165

Are you saying that the Bible isn’t the word of god then?

Who me? I’m a card-carrying atheist, like I said. What do you think I say about Biblical inerrancy?

Also, biblical literalists are dumber than the average bear. But I’m pretty sure that even some of them are aware that certain bits of the bible are jewish legal codes and their failure to mention non-legal punishment doesn’t in the slightest imply that non-legal (as in, divine) punishment will not also occur.

[ashman165]

@Michael_Ellis

Smug internet atheism. It’s easier to troll ordinary and non-fanatical Christians on an internet message board than engage in an actual debate with the actual fanatics that cause trouble in real life.

Great, if you can’t restrict your comments to the OP, you aren’t welcome here. Your name isn’t Liberal; you aren’t free to hijack any thread and do what you want with the consent of Tom, and TubaDiva doesn’t have my personal information to blackmail me. I’ll tank you, given the above reasons, to restrict your commentary to the actual OP.