# Need help from the bible scholars **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 2, 2015, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730 "2015-09-02T19:23:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/81 "2015-09-03T17:44:13Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Why do so many people insist on quoting the KJV in this day and age? Even most evangelicals don’t use it anymore. > > Anyway, ninja’d, but I came to post Psalm 137 (in a more modern translation): I found that the Exodus quote’s ambiguous wording was best preserved in the KJV. Besides, KJV preserves the formality of the book. A religious book should not sound like your buddy in the coffee shop telling you a story. (IMHO) > [@The Great Sun Jester](#): > > Well, definitely bluff. But not a hollow one, or else the fake ma would have protested as well rather than being ready to go along with it. Which begs the question: at what point after being born does a kid change from damageable property to murderable person? > > (looks at his own children) Um…need answer fast. There are a number of older societies where the thought was they were “real people” once the dangers of childbirth had passed. One society I read about, the baby was not considered a child until given a name at 6 days age. I wonder if the same logic applied in some small way originally to Christian baptisms and Jewish circumcision ritual? In perusing my ancestors’ records in southwest England, I see a number of cases where the baptism (christening) did not happen until a month to 3 months after birth, if they bothered to record the birth date at all. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/82 "2015-09-03T17:53:41Z")
Also point out that the same Old testament rule - “you broke it you bought it…” applied to a wide number of societies laws - IIRC Italy and Spain until a few decades ago had the option that a man could escape a rape charge by marrying the woman. I recall something in the news similar about rape in some middle eastern country. (not clear what option the woman had in all this, but in a male-dominated society, obviously she didn’t have a lot of choices once she’d been identified as a victim, no longer a virgin, and hence “spoiled goods”. Ah, the good old days…) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/83 "2015-09-03T18:03:24Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Yup, a specific instance of rape was acceptable - that is, rape of women taken as captives in war. Note that this was hardly unusual for the late Iron Age - in fact, the OT gave such captives more rights then they generally enjoyed in other contemporary societies (the rapist was specifically prohibited from selling her after he was tired of her, but had to free her - not something that, say, a Roman would be required to do). > > Just like a specific instance of baby-killing was acceptable - killing of babies from among the “accursed” tribes, like the Amalakites, who were supposed to be killed to the last person. Again, other contemporaries were not so limited. > > But it is wholly inaccurate to allege, _as a generality_, that rape and baby-killing were “okay”. As the sections quoted upthread demonstrated, they were not. > > The allegation is aking to suggesting that “baby killing” is okay under modern laws, because soldiers who drop bombs in war can create “collateral civilian damage” without being charged with murder. Societies today, as then, distinguish between what is acceptable in the context of warfare, and what is acceptable in society during peacetime. And, since he had to marry her,\* in those days\* no one would consider that “rape”. Good point. The firebombing of Dresden, Hiroshima, The Blitz, etc all killed lots of babies. To answer the OP- if you need a simplistic answer the answer is “No”. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/84 "2015-09-03T18:03:26Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Anyone who knew anything at all about the Bible would know that it’s not OK in general. The OP’s reference to “a verse” indicates that he’s looking for specific instances, not generalities. > > At any rate, I think two things have been established so far: > > 1. Rape and baby-killing are not generally OK. > > 2. There are specific cases, already cited and admitted, in which they are permitted. Though, to be fair, the cases where they are permitted both center on deciding that class B is your enemy. Theoretically, that’s supposed to be “as proclaimed by God”, but it’s pretty easy for anyone to decide that they can feel God’s support or to find a guy who’s willing to claim that he’s getting messages from God. (Cite: ISIS) So, it’s a restriction that leaves itself fairly open to abuse. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/85 "2015-09-03T18:06:07Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > but it is ok > just not for jews > so, generally, since it is a Jewish book, it is “not ok” > but in many other cases it is fine > so, yes, rape and killing babies are ok in the OT In fact the Baal/Moloch sacrifices were _condemned_ in the OT. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/86 "2015-09-03T18:17:41Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > **Moderating** > > This being GQ, unless you can produce some archaeological evidence supporting this statement, it has no bearing on the discussion. If you want to witness about your religious beliefs, take it to Great Debates. > > Colibri > General Questions Moderator Okay, then the OP’s question is unanswerable, since there is no archaeological evidence that any of the stuff we are citing actually happened. We are discussing what is in the text. The text says that God put those in stone, so that’s what we have to go by. And, frankly, the thread shouldn’t be in GQ because it is obviously dealing with religious or literary interpretations. You are throwing out mod notes left and right because this isn’t the forum for this topic. There are multiple ways to read the OP’s question and what qualifies as making those specific things “okay.” Some (including me) think the answer is no. A lot of other people think the answer is yes. Yet we have the same facts. That means there is no factual answer. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/87 "2015-09-03T18:30:17Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > I found that the Exodus quote’s ambiguous wording was best preserved in the KJV. > > Besides, KJV preserves the formality of the book. A religious book should not sound like your buddy in the coffee shop telling you a story. (IMHO) On the other hand, the KJV is over 400 years old – there have been centuries of advance in our understanding of ancient languages and “correct” translations, not to mention archaeological discoveries and reams of ancient manuscripts not available in 1611. And that doesn’t even include the changes in the meaning of many _English_ words used in the KJV since then. It’s beautifully poetic, and worth reading as classic literature. But if you’re using it to actually argue “what the Bible says about…” (and can’t read ancient languages) then you’re far better off going with an accurate modern translation. As I said, most churches don’t even use it in normal worship anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/88 "2015-09-03T18:34:40Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Okay, then the OP’s question is unanswerable, since there is no archaeological evidence that any of the stuff we are citing actually happened. > > We are discussing what is in the text. The text says that God put those in stone, so that’s what we have to go by. > > And, frankly, the thread shouldn’t be in GQ because it is obviously dealing with religious or literary interpretations. You are throwing out mod notes left and right because this isn’t the forum for this topic. > > There are multiple ways to read the OP’s question and what qualifies as making those specific things “okay.” Some (including me) think the answer is no. A lot of other people think the answer is yes. Yet we have the same facts. > > That means there is no factual answer. yeah, well, according to the text spider man can climb up walls. and shoot spider webs. and lift cars over his head. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/89 "2015-09-03T18:53:01Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > Besides, KJV preserves the formality of the book. A religious book should not sound like your buddy in the coffee shop telling you a story. (IMHO) That depends on what part of the Bible you’re talking about; they weren’t all originally written in the same style. The Gospel of Mark, for instance, maybe _should_ “sound like your buddy in the coffee shop telling you a story.” (“And then this happened and then this happened and then this happened…”) ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/90 "2015-09-03T19:10:54Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Okay, then the OP’s question is unanswerable, since there is no archaeological evidence that any of the stuff we are citing actually happened. > > We are discussing what is in the text. The text says that God put those in stone, so that’s what we have to go by. > > And, frankly, the thread shouldn’t be in GQ because it is obviously dealing with religious or literary interpretations. You are throwing out mod notes left and right because this isn’t the forum for this topic. > > There are multiple ways to read the OP’s question and what qualifies as making those specific things “okay.” Some (including me) think the answer is no. A lot of other people think the answer is yes. Yet we have the same facts. > > That means there is no factual answer. **Moderator Note** Knock off the junior modding. If you want to complain about the way it’s being modded or what forum it’s in, open a thread in ATMB. Colibri General Questions Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/91 "2015-09-03T22:18:33Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > yeah, well, according to the text spider man can climb up walls. and shoot spider webs. and lift cars over his head. Cite that spider man is in the bible. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/92 "2015-09-03T22:42:34Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > Also point out that the same Old testament rule - “you broke it you bought it…” applied to a wide number of societies laws - IIRC Italy and Spain until a few decades ago had the option that a man could escape a rape charge by marrying the woman. I recall something in the news similar about rape in some middle eastern country. (not clear what option the woman had in all this, but in a male-dominated society, obviously she didn’t have a lot of choices once she’d been identified as a victim, no longer a virgin, and hence “spoiled goods”. Ah, the good old days…) Yes. For a man who was interested in a woman who rejected him (or whose father rejected him) this law is a feature, not a bug. Betrothed women are different because then it is also a crime against the husband, and marriage is impossible. So the penalties are greater. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/93 "2015-09-03T22:48:08Z")
With regard to rape, how about the story of Lot’s Daughters? They clearly rape Lot. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/94 "2015-09-03T23:02:11Z")
> [@JimNightshade](#): > > I , perhaps foolishly, made a bet, and as I would hate to lose it, but would honour the facts, I ask all the bible scholars here to help me out. > > I bet that “killing babies is OK, and raping women is OK as well” according to the old testament. > > So - can this be backed up at all? Is there verse to support this? > > Many thanks to all the knowledgeable bible scholars out there. It depends on how you worded your bet. No law in the Jewish Scriptures permits either murder or rape. However, there are occasions when the text portrays God as ether permitting or ordering actions by the Jewish people that would result in murder or rape. This is made further confusing because 21st century attitudes will cast various actions in a different light than the way they would have been viewed by the original audience. For example, the command to marry a woman who has been raped gets interpreted as “permitting” or “encouraging” rape, although there is no indication that this was the actual outcome of the law. > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > “Thou shall not kill” - Exodus 20:13. No exception is made for babies. Basing declarations on bad translations is never a good idea. Despite the popularity of the sentence “Thou shalt not kill.” the actual command should have been rendered in English as “Thou shalt not murder.” ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2015, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/95 "2015-09-03T23:04:56Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > With regard to rape, how about the story of Lot’s Daughters? They clearly rape Lot. And the story is told in a way that their actions are condemned. Lot became the patriarch of people with whom the Israelites were at war–Moabites and Ammonites were “bad guys” in Israelite literature. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2015, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/96 "2015-09-04T00:30:12Z")
> [@The Great Sun Jester](#): > > …does a kid change from damageable property to murderable person? > > (looks at his own children) Um…need answer fast. Hehe! This is my number one reason when I get asked why I prefer dogs over kids. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2015, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/97 "2015-09-04T03:02:09Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > God did allow executions so not inconsistent (not to mention the sentence being overturned and reversed) And he was wrong to do so (in the sense that Voldemort was wrong to kill Harry Potter’s parents). Capital punishment is morally wrong, in every circumstance, and always has been. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2015, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/98 "2015-09-04T04:39:35Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Rape is certainly not OK in the Bible. It’s another form of sexual immorality. > > Deuteronomy 22:28-29 > _If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days._ > > Exodus 22:16-17 > > _If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride price for her and make her his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride price for virgins._ > > Although this punishment may seem simple compared to today’s punishment, it was actually quite a punishment at the time. The woman was not required to marry the man, but to do what her father demanded. If however she did marry the man, the marriage was to be permanent. This means the man (rapist) was responsible for the support of the woman for all of his life. There was no out. > > Women who weren’t virgins were not sought after for wives. They were outcasts. They had little or no means of supporting themselves in these days and often sold themselves into slavery or became prostitutes. Totally screwed logic to say the least. Yeah, it is. So couldn’t God have said something about _that?_ I just don’t get that God saw that women were being treated as property, unable to support themselves or live independently from a man, ostracized if they were raped, forced into literal slavery or prostitution, and God’s big solution is to say "Hey, bros, those women you’re raping? Someone should totally own them. I mean pay for them. I mean, the fathers, who owned them, they’re not gonna get paid for them any more, and it’s not fair those fathers should have to keep feeding them when it’s totally your fault for raping them that his daughters are worthless now. So if you rape someone, you better be prepared to be responsible for them now. "Kind of a you-break-it-you-bought-it thing. "And I’m totally going to hold you accountable for her welfare according to exactly the same strict, perfectly holy and just standard I have for other marriages, by which I mean, you’re the man, do whatever the fuck you want. Just don’t divorce her; we can’t have a bunch of unclaimed bitches running around after they’ve been raped, right? I know that’s harsh, but that’s the burden of being the chosen people, called to be perfect as the LORD your God is perfect, a light unto all nations. “I mean, I certainly couldn’t cut any slack on something fundamental to basic morality, right, or what would be the point of the Law? Of course, I also couldn’t command anything too radical like actual gender equality because no Iron Age tribe could even understand what that–By the way, just checking, you guys cut the ends off your dicks like I asked, right? Cool. I’m glad we got this stuff straightened out.” ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2015, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/99 "2015-09-04T04:47:42Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > . . . Besides, KJV preserves the formality of the book. A religious book should not sound like your buddy in the coffee shop telling you a story. (IMHO) . . . Actually, almost the reverse. Although we, today, in modern English don’t have a “familiar” form, the Jacobean “thee and thou” are familiar. This is how you talk to your children, to your lover, to really good buddies, and to your social inferiors when you want to dress them down. When you speak to God as “thou,” you’re talking to him exactly the way you talk to your buddy in the coffee shop! (This is why Darth Vader kneeling and asking, “What is thy bidding, my master” is so wrong. “Thy” is familiar, not formal! It’d be like me saying, “Yo, Darthy, how’s the Sith biz?”) ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2015, 9:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730/100 "2015-09-04T09:35:48Z")
> [@cmkeller](#): > > The only verses that support “killing babies” would be those that refer to wiping out eight specific nations that G-d singled out as evil - seven Canaanite nations, plus Amalek. Outside of that, killing babies is not condoned. In [2 Kings 2:23-25](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Kings%202%3A23-25), the prophet Elisha calls down a curse “in the name of the Lord” on some annoying little brats. Two bears appear and kill forty-two of the children. Not quite the same as “killing kids is OK,” but certainly along the lines of “under certain circumstances, God kills kids and that’s OK.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/need-help-from-the-bible-scholars/729730.md?page=6)