The Roles of Husbands and Wives

continuation...

4. No hair/cuts shave for men? it never in the scripture it says men don't cut your hair. It is said it is a grace
for a man to show his manhood when he grows up his hair. Still a man who shaves all this body parts will act like a women
which leads to homosexuality .
5. yes to ben 2 different types of certain fabrics.... there are certain fabrics, that i can't wear.. you don't see the
difference but i get itchy and have problems on certain types of clothes. It is not said don't wear it in the order type
but in a way it is going to affect you .

And last paragraph .....about matthew the verses you stated says :

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

it is written for people who have cold heart. Like if somebody do bad to you , then you have to forgive because
you want God to forgive you too. If you are connection this with forgiving adulteration, then i wil tell you forgiveness is
good because unless you forgive them then it is going to hurt you even in your future. You will be the one who will be
thinking about it and worried not them( the once who cheats). So forgiveness is good. But that doesnot mean you have
to stick with them because once the vow is broken, it is broken. Even if you try to leave with them, still it won't be
a fruitful life, so it is better to forgive and move on.

I hope you understand it.

if you have question, feel free to ask...

the last paragraph is live not leave.... Sorry typo mistake.

To Gundee:

I can't answer all of your assertions right now, but I can explain the woman marrying her rapist.

In that culture at that time, unmarried women were considered incapable of consenting to sex outside of marriage. If it happened, they assumed that the man took advantage of her - not violently, just that he used his charm to get her to go against God. That's why it says if two people commit fornication in a field, they assume the woman cried out and no one heard her, so she won't be punished. The sex could have been consentual, but they wouldn't see it that way.

Also, a woman's economic status was dependent on her husband. Once she was found out to not be a virgin, no one else would marry her and she would be poor, homeless and destitute with no prospects for marriage. Her parents may let her stay there and relatives might take her in, but she would never marry.

The Bible assumes in "rape" (even if the sex was consentual) that a man is taking advantage of a girl and that, if he was caught with the proverbial milk, he had to buy the cow. It wasn't a brutal, violent rape, it was the equivalent of a "shotgun wedding" where the boyfriend was made to marry his girlfriend because he slept with her. That is also why the Bible says that the man can never divorce her all the days of his life. By going outside of the custom and God's will (by not just marrying her first), the man had to be economically responsible for her and he could never leave her.

It was for making him take responsibility, not for punishing her.

Luv wrote:

Sorry , i didn't reply to your post earlier, I didn't log on yesterday.

Please know that it’s quite all right. On the other hand, I see that you did provide a very lengthy response (smile). If I may, I would like to offer a response to your comments as follows:

Luv wrote:

Ok, Let me make it clear for you. pouline doctrine?

Yes, Pauline doctrine is based on the theological teachings of Paul, rather than the teachings of Jesus and his disciples.

Luv wrote:

oh men, let me make it clear well, i hope you keep it in your mind because it is very important.

I can assure you that you have my complete and undivided attention (lol).

Luv wrote:

Where do you think faith comes from?

As it relates to Christianity, I submit that faith comes from parents/pastors/relatives/frie nds, reading/believing the bible and accepting the teachings of the church, in my humble opinion. I also assert that most Christians believe the church/pastor more than they believe in the bible.

Luv wrote:

There is no Faith with out work.

Wow! Then how do you reconcile this statement to what Paul said at Ephesians 2:8-9, i.e.,“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. Are you starting to see what I meant by Pauline doctrine?

Luv wrote:

Having Faith is not simply you get out of the blue. But having Faith Comes from hard WORK.

But are you now contradicting what Paul said?

Luv wrote:

So , Christians are saved by their WORK AND THEIR WORK gives them FAITH.

That’s not what Paul said, is it?

Luv wrote:

For example you can't get Faith unless you really believe in the world of God, the Torah.

The Torah? Isn’t that the first 5 books of the OT, which was written by Moses, but was the inspired word of God?

Luv wrote:

It is very important for every human to read the scriptures so that their Faith will be strong.

Are you suggesting that the only way a person’s faith can be strong is if he/she reads the scripture? If so, how can those that are illiterate acquire faith?

Luv wrote:

And not only reading but doing what our Father in Heaven told us to do. Unless we follow that, then we can't have Faith.

Wait a minute please; you are moving a little too fast for me (smile). Let me make sure that I understand what you are suggesting. Did you just say that we must not only read but also follow the scripture, which is what our Father in Heaven told us to do? Otherwise, we cannot have Faith?

Luv wrote:

Ok about your second paragraph. YES, unless you do what God have told you to do. Then you will suffer. That means, God have reason to tell you everything you are supposed to do in life, is because God knows what is best for both you and me.

Yes, I agree. After all, didn’t God kill a man just because he would not impregnate his dead brother’s wife (Gen 38:9-10)?

Luv wrote:

If God says don't do adulteration, then Don't do it, because if you do it, then your marriage will be messed up.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that if you commit adultery, the bible says that you should be put to death, right (Lev 20:10)? If so, how can the marriage be messed up if you are dead?

Luv wrote:

Just like lying, it is written don't lie is because you if lie, that lie will bring another lie and if will not be good for your life.

Okay, if a woman asks her husband/boyfriend if she’s fat (less say that she went from 130 to 220 lbs), should he tell her the truth? Or if a killer is looking for your friend who’s hiding in your closet, should you tell him the truth? I mean, how serious do you want to take this lie thing (smile)?

more to follow.....

continued (2)......

Luv wrote:

About the scripture which says. It is written in the scripture , Unless both the husband and the wife, know the word of God and follow it. In the scripture it is said both man and women should follow the word of God. go to Deuteronomy 28 :58 and 59..... If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD; Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance

I agree that you make an excellent point here. But wouldn’t that mean the husband and wife should also follow Deu 24:1, especially since this is actually refers to a husband and wife? But please notice that the reason for getting a divorce is not “adultery,” right?

Luv wrote:

God loves us so much, but you have to know is that, God is powerful God.

He is also jealous, right? In fact, isn’t His name Jealous (Ex 34:14)?

Luv wrote:

It is all written, If you don't follow the word of God then God will curse you. and You will suffer in life.

Wow! If I follow the biblical teachings like Job did, I guess then I will not have to suffer, right? Or would God allow Satan to tempt Him, again?

Luv wrote:

But if you ask for forgiveness and sin no more? Then God will forgive you. But for many it is hard to get back.

I submit that people will continue to sin, even after they are forgiven.

Luv wrote:

If you need more quotes about God telling you not to do certain things. I will tell you. Just let me know.

I really do appreciate your offer, but I most respectfully decline. You see, I am a skeptic, and thus, I do not believe that the bible should be understood literally, but rather allegorically. Further, there are many quotes in the bible that most indoctrinated Christians will not follow, with all due respect. Thus, instead of trying to live my life by an ancient writings (no disrespect intended), I prefer to apply certain universal truths to it, i.e., integrity, humility, kindness, fairness, selfless service, respect, courage, human dignity, patience, encouragement, consideration, just to name a few.

Luv wrote:

Matthew 19:9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." This means that any ma/women shouldn't divorce unless for cheating....

Okay, I am now totally lost. You see, I thought that adultery was grounds for the offender to be put the death, right? Especially, since we should observe “all the words of the law (Deu 28:58).” Please tell me what am I missing?

Luv wrote:

About what Christian life have to do with marriage? Temptation!!! In earth you get tempted to do things which you are not supposed to do. A man and a women who really love God and fight that evil temptation , are the once who are more blessed. So everyday as a Christian you have to fight those things which this earth and live here have brought to you. It is hard work but the hard work will bring you happiness. But never give up. Its not easy., Thats why Christian life is struggle.

I am now even more confused. You see, Christians divorce at the same rate as sinners? Thus, what’s the advantage to being a Christian as it relates to marriage?

more to follow...

continued (3)......

Luv wrote:

About you saying that 33% their biological father in not the husband. I agree. but you have to know is that , i know from life now a days, is that both man and women sleep with many partners. But the thing is that , men cheats more than women because men is easily tempted by womens.

Is it the temptation, or is it the fact that the biological urge to have sex is greater in men? Remember this: as long as three things are present, both men and women will cheat, regardless as to how much religion and/or spirituality they confess. And the three things are: desire, opportunity, and capability. Please indulge me why I briefly explain each.

(1) Desire – Human has a biological urge to have sex; often times that urge is suppressed, whether the suppression is internally or externally. A man will not try to get with a woman if his wife is present. He might try to coordinate something for later though (lol), and vice versa? Why, because the desire might be there, but the opportunity is not, right?

(2) Opportunity – Now if the desire is present and the opportunity is also present, the desire (depending on its strength) will often time over rule any legal, moral, or religious suppression. Thus, the only thing that can now prevent this cheating from occurring is capability.

(3) Capability – The man’s ability to indulge in the sexual act (not impotent) or fear prevents the woman from going through with it would be examples. I think that in the old days, chastity belts were used, right?

Luv wrote:

It is said men are from mars and women from venus. I am not trying to put men down but women cheats is because a women have been hurt in the past or lots of influence. But women look for love more than sex unlike men who wants sex more than love. And don't try to fake it because it is the truth .

Yes, I agree that woman sometimes cheat because they’ve been hurt. But I trust that you are explaining, and not trying to justify why they cheat (smile). If fact, I think that you would agree that men mostly cheat because of the desire to have sex with multiple/variety of women, right? If so, who do you think is increasing or heightening the man’s desire, i.e., wearing stimulating perfumes and tight clothing, getting their hair/nails done, revealing private body parts, talking sexy, making themselves available, etc. In other words, women know exactly what they are doing, as well as know each other. This is probably why a man is often time a woman’s closest friend. Are we tracking, or am I trying to fake it (smile)?

Luv wrote:

e Virgin Mary wasn’t the only woman to be impregnated by the Holy Ghost (smile), how would you explain this statistical fact? I didn't understand what you meant by this?

What I mean is that since we accept that Mary (Jesus’ mother) was the only woman who was impregnated without sexual intercourse, then how do you explain all of these women getting pregnant and not knowing who the fathers are?

Luv wrote:

Thats why you are suffering right now. People are suffering because the more advanced you feel you are going. The more you are arrogant and try to avoid the word of God.

Well, to be honest, I am not suffering at all. In fact, I would venture to say that most of the Atheist and nonbelievers on this forum have a lot less stress in their lives simply because they see religion from a whole different perspective than Christians, in my humble opinion. Please know that I was raised a Baptist, but now that I’ve had the opportunity to study and research the scripture, I can see my life in a whole different perspective. But for those who can maintain the faith, I totally respect your views.

more to follow......

continued (4)......

Luv wrote:

If you deny God's word, then you must know that God will deny you on Judgement day. No body is forcing women to be forced or anything. If you live your life out of God's word, then you will know it sooner or later. Thats why people say "why did this happen to me" why did that happen to me...Its because you feel like you know above God words.

Well, actually people ask “why did this happen to me” because it a popular saying (smile). I assure that people, who have not been exposed to that saying, do not say it.

Luv wrote:

So Jesus washed the legs of his disciples, does that mean Jesus is below his disciples? how can God give you all you want , when you disobey his words?

Well, I thought that Jesus washed his disciples feet, not legs; but I think that I get the point. Born again and devoted Christians are dying every day of the same diseases that sinners are dying from. And the Christian answer for this phenomenon is either,“it was their time” or “God does not make any mistakes.” With all due respect, I find that way of thinking somewhat naïve or disingenuous.

Luv wrote:

Everything in the bible should be followed...

Really? What happens if you become really sick? Do you go to the doctor, which would make plenty of sense to me, or do you go to the elders of your church (James 5:14)? If you do the former, then you are not following the bible, right?

Luv wrote:

1. working in the sabath is not allowed is because people work the whole week. And don't have time to praise God and give time to God. That is why it is said leave the sabath for God praising.(don't misunderstood or say it in a way which suits you)

Then why are pastors being paid to preach on Sunday? Wouldn’t that be considered work if he/she gets paid?

Luv wrote:

2.Selling your daughter in to slavery- this is not as you interpret it... you don't undertand the scripture at all. the family brings husband to their daughter. So when the man who wants to marry their daughter comes, the family respectfully gives their dauther to the husband.

Okay, since it is not as I interpreted it, I will quote verbatim what the scripture says and then you can tell me what it means, okay?“And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her (Ex 21:7-8). Now when you interpret this, I trust that you realize that “maidservant” in the Hebrew language mean “slave.”

Luv wrote:

3.It never said in the scripture women should marry their rapist.( again don't say things which suits you).

So, you say that it never said that. Well, please take a look at Deu 22:28-29 in the NIV, whereas it states,“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.[a] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”

more to follow....

continued (5).....

Luv wrote:

4. No hair/cuts shave for men? it never in the scripture it says men don't cut your hair. It is said it is a grace for a man to show his manhood when he grows up his hair. Still a man who shaves all this body parts will act like a women which leads to homosexuality.

Well, please review this passage and share your thoughts:“They shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cutting in their flesh (Lev 21:5). Does this passage conflict with TD Jake’s haircut and shave? http://www.demossnewspond.com/ph/photos/Bisho...

Luv wrote:

5. yes to ben 2 different types of certain fabrics.... there are certain fabrics, that i can't wear.. you don't see the difference but i get itchy and have problems on certain types of clothes. It is not said don't wear it in the order type but in a way it is going to affect you .

With all due respect, I do not think that Moses had your itching in mind or what types of fabrics that you can wear when he wrote the Torah. At any rate, please review this passage and share your thoughts:“Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee”(Lev 19:19).

Luv wrote:

And last paragraph .....about matthew the verses you stated says :
For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
it is written for people who have cold heart.

I thought that Jesus said that because of the “hardness of man’s heart,” Moses allowed him to put away his wife (Mat 19:8). I did not realize that forgiveness also had to do with the hardness of the heart. What scripture can you quote to support this assertion?

Luv wrote:

Like if somebody do bad to you , then you have to forgive because you want God to forgive you too. If you are connection this with forgiving adulteration, then i wil tell you forgiveness is good because unless you forgive them then it is going to hurt you even in your future. You will be the one who will be thinking about it and worried not them( the once who cheats). So forgiveness is good. But that does not mean you have to stick with them because once the vow is broken, it is broken. Even if you try to leave with them, still it won't be a fruitful life, so it is better to forgive and move on.

Does this mean that you can forgive, and then get a divorce for the same reason that you forgave? That’s very interesting. That sounds like forgiving a debt, but then taking the person to court for the same debt (lol), right?

Luv wrote:

I hope you understand it. if you have question, feel free to ask...

Yes, I do think that I understand your perspective, for I have found your explanations to be very interesting and thought provoking. Again, thank you for sharing your thought provoking point of view with this forum.

Thank you, KayMo, for your interesting and insightful response.

If I may, I would like to offer a response to your comments as follows:

KayMo wrote:

To Gundee: I can't answer all of your assertions right now, but I can explain the woman marrying her rapist.

Very well, you have my undivided attention (smile).

KayMo wrote:

In that culture at that time, unmarried women were considered incapable of consenting to sex outside of marriage.

Well, are you suggesting that the scripture has more to do with the culture versus being the inspired word of God?

KayMo wrote:

If it happened, they assumed that the man took advantage of her - not violently, just that he used his charm to get her to go against God. That's why it says if two people commit fornication in a field, they assume the woman cried out and no one heard her, so she won't be punished.

Okay, I am confused; Who is this they who are making assumptions? I thought that the bible was written based on the inspired word of God, which was received by Moses. If this is in fact the true origins of the bible, then what would the bible have to do with the culture at that time?

KayMo wrote:

The sex could have been consentual, but they wouldn't see it that way.

Aren’t you speculating here (smile)? How can rape be considered consensual? If that is really the case, then I think that a lot of men could easily use that argument to get out of prison, right?

KayMo wrote:

Also, a woman's economic status was dependent on her husband. Once she was found out to not be a virgin, no one else would marry her and she would be poor, homeless and destitute with no prospects for marriage. Her parents may let her stay there and relatives might take her in, but she would never marry.

The economic status? Yes, the bible does inform us that “money answereth all things”(Eccl 10:19). At any rate, please know that I am not disagreeing with your perspective, but rather trying to reconcile your perspective to the bible being the inspired word of God.

KayMo wrote:

The Bible assumes in "rape" (even if the sex was consentual) that a man is taking advantage of a girl and that, if he was caught with the proverbial milk, he had to buy the cow.

If the bible is making this assumption, would that mean that the omnificent God is also making this same assumption? If so, is this the best that God could offer a woman in exchange for her being raped?

KayMo wrote:

It wasn't a brutal, violent rape, it was the equivalent of a "shotgun wedding" where the boyfriend was made to marry his girlfriend because he slept with her.

Wow! So, rape does not have to always be brutal….you offer such a unique perspective. Perhaps, you should read Deu 22:28-29 (NIV), which states:“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.

more to follow....

continued......

KayMo wrote:

That is also why the Bible says that the man can never divorce her all the days of his life.

Wow! So once the girl is raped, she is rewarded by having to marry her rapist and spend the rest of her life with him. You see, somehow this does not seem like justice to me…are you beginning to see now why I am a skeptic (smile)?

KayMo wrote:

By going outside of the custom and God's will (by not just marrying her first), the man had to be economically responsible for her and he could never leave her. It was for making him take responsibility, not for punishing her.

Well, here’s an after thought. Why not just stone the man to death for rape, especially if the woman is a virgin and not engaged to be married? But if I may respectfully ask,“Do you actually believe that this is what God inspired Moses to write (smile), since Jesus revealed that Moses acted on his on accord as it related to divorce?

Again, thank you for sharing such a thought provoking perspective with this forum.

gundee123 wrote:

continued......
<quoted text>
Wow! So once the girl is raped, she is rewarded by having to marry her rapist and spend the rest of her life with him. You see, somehow this does not seem like justice to me…are you beginning to see now why I am a skeptic (smile)?
<quoted text>
Well, here’s an after thought. Why not just stone the man to death for rape, especially if the woman is a virgin and not engaged to be married? But if I may respectfully ask,“Do you actually believe that this is what God inspired Moses to write (smile), since Jesus revealed that Moses acted on his on accord as it related to divorce?
Again, thank you for sharing such a thought provoking perspective with this forum.

I love how thoughtful and well written your responses are. You make me feel like learning.

TheErick01 wrote:

I love how thoughtful and well written your responses are. You make me feel like learning.

Thank you, TheErick01, for your kind words.

Yes, I do enjoy engaging in thought provoking discussion, for often time it requires us to use our critical thinking skills. Unfortunately, many people’s knowledge about the topics being debated is limited to only regurgitate what they've been told, and it never even occur to them to consider that they might be relying on inaccurate or outdated information.

Again, thank you for the compliment.

**bumped"" would like Luv to
respond to post #111-115

and

KayMo to respond to post #116-117

Gundee:

I believe that the Bible was inspired by God's word, but it was written by human hands and therefore filtered through human minds. People are going to take whatever they hear (from God or anyone else) and then filter it through their own minds so that it makes sense to them.(Try writing a rule for someone else that doesn't make sense to you. You won't do it. You'll try to make it make sense or you won't write it.) Therefore, the Bible is full of God's principles for living and those principles are timeless, but the examples and parables don't always make sense to us because they used examples from their own lives.

You can't respond to my post line-by-line (nice try, though) because it is meant to be taken as a whole. For instance, you interpreted me as saying that rape isn't always violent. I STARTED by explaining that unmarried women were incapable of giving consent, and that is why they called it rape (think: statutory rape), not that it was necessarily a forced sexual act. By taking my post line-by-line, you took that out of context and interpreted it to mean something else.

If this happens between two mere humans, imagine what could happen if a person is trying to interpret God? Example: The ten commandments (spoken/written directly from God) seem pretty clear. No one ever needs to interpret "Thou shalt not covet" or "Honor Thy Mother and Father". But when people start putting those into stories, it gets hazy because the culture is different and the lifestyles are different and even the meanings of words have changed.

It doesn't mean that the Bible is not true and not God's word, you just have to understand the basic principles and apply them to your own modern life.

I think every marriage is unique and the roles spouses play are in direct relation to their circumstances, life style, temperment, it's like a natural formula.
I know however when I get married I will work part time and be very active in my family's life which means having breakfast+ dinner on the table, raising children and taking care of my extended family as well.
The husband just has to be a kind hearted guy who works hard and is there emotionally and physically 100%.
So while for me semi-traditional roles are fine it might be different for another person.

Which begs the question WHY are husband and wife behavior being defined here?

... because it's a husband/wife thread?

KayMo wrote:

Gundee: I believe that the Bible was inspired by God's word, but it was written by human hands and therefore filtered through human minds. People are going to take whatever they hear (from God or anyone else) and then filter it through their own minds so that it makes sense to them.(Try writing a rule for someone else that doesn't make sense to you. You won't do it. You'll try to make it make sense or you won't write it.) Therefore, the Bible is full of God's principles for living and those principles are timeless, but the examples and parables don't always make sense to us because they used examples from their own lives.
You can't respond to my post line-by-line (nice try, though) because it is meant to be taken as a whole. For instance, you interpreted me as saying that rape isn't always violent. I STARTED by explaining that unmarried women were incapable of giving consent, and that is why they called it rape (think: statutory rape), not that it was necessarily a forced sexual act. By taking my post line-by-line, you took that out of context and interpreted it to mean something else.
If this happens between two mere humans, imagine what could happen if a person is trying to interpret God? Example: The ten commandments (spoken/written directly from God) seem pretty clear. No one ever needs to interpret "Thou shalt not covet" or "Honor Thy Mother and Father". But when people start putting those into stories, it gets hazy because the culture is different and the lifestyles are different and even the meanings of words have changed.
It doesn't mean that the Bible is not true and not God's word, you just have to understand the basic principles and apply them to your own modern life.

Thank you, KayMo, for your insightful response.

Yes, I realize that there are many people who share your view that the bible is the inspired word of God. I totally respect your perspective, even though as a skeptic, I do not share it.

Your point is well taken about trying to respond to your comments line by line, because it can be taken out of content. But please know that was not my intent. As far as the statutory rape, isn't that adding to the scripture? I ask because Deut 22:28-29 (NIV) paints a different picture that what you are describing.

Now as it relates to understanding and applying the basic principles to one's own life, I have found that often time people try to apply the scripture according to what they've been taught, rather than trying to discern the exegesis meaning of the passage.

Again, thank you for such an interesting response and for sharing your thoughts on this topic.

Hi Gundee, regarding deut 22:28-29, there are two possible interpretations.

1 - It is the brutal act of rape, but it wasn't recognized as a torture for the girl to live with the man, rather he was "punished" by having to take care of her (you break it, you bought it). Rmember that domestic violence in America wasn't even considered "bad" until recently and domestic rape was considered impossible (wife belongs to husband, how can he rape her?). Different culture and time, but the punishment was supposed to be for the man, not her. She couldn't marry anyone else after being raped,leaving her without care (she couldn't just go out and get a job), and they arranged marriages a lot in those days, so it's not like she would have known him extensively even if the wedding was planned.

2 - It was actually statutory rape but the men of the day couldn't fathom the idea that a woman would willingly sleep with a man she wasn't married to, so he just HAD to have seized her.(the "what - MY angel?" syndrome.) Again, even today people in modern-day America are flabergasted that teen girls seduce their boyfriends. People still have one-night stands. When you think of the term "one-night stand" it's still usually assumed that the man started it all. If we're still having this much trouble acknowledging female sexuality, it's not a stretch to believe that they just didn't get it, either.

In either case, the economic and social status of the woman would have left her in what they considered a "worse case" if she were "deflowered" and unmarried, so they made him marry her.

As for your observation that many people just apply what they were taught, I agree that happens a lot. I wish more Christians were taught to study the Bible in the context of the culture it was written in and then pay attention to the morals and principles rather than trying to argue about whether it's literal or symbolic. We give Aesop more respect than that, for goodness sakes! No one goes around getting into arguments about whether foxes can talk or whether they eat grapes, we just read the story and understand the moral.

Thanks for your posts as well. It's nice to have an intelligent conversation on Topix :)

KayMo wrote:

Hi Gundee, regarding deut 22:28-29, there are two possible interpretations.
1 - It is the brutal act of rape, but it wasn't recognized as a torture for the girl to live with the man, rather he was "punished" by having to take care of her (you break it, you bought it). Rmember that domestic violence in America wasn't even considered "bad" until recently and domestic rape was considered impossible (wife belongs to husband, how can he rape her?). Different culture and time, but the punishment was supposed to be for the man, not her. She couldn't marry anyone else after being raped,leaving her without care (she couldn't just go out and get a job), and they arranged marriages a lot in those days, so it's not like she would have known him extensively even if the wedding was planned.
2 - It was actually statutory rape but the men of the day couldn't fathom the idea that a woman would willingly sleep with a man she wasn't married to, so he just HAD to have seized her.(the "what - MY angel?" syndrome.) Again, even today people in modern-day America are flabergasted that teen girls seduce their boyfriends. People still have one-night stands. When you think of the term "one-night stand" it's still usually assumed that the man started it all. If we're still having this much trouble acknowledging female sexuality, it's not a stretch to believe that they just didn't get it, either.
In either case, the economic and social status of the woman would have left her in what they considered a "worse case" if she were "deflowered" and unmarried, so they made him marry her.
As for your observation that many people just apply what they were taught, I agree that happens a lot. I wish more Christians were taught to study the Bible in the context of the culture it was written in and then pay attention to the morals and principles rather than trying to argue about whether it's literal or symbolic. We give Aesop more respect than that, for goodness sakes! No one goes around getting into arguments about whether foxes can talk or whether they eat grapes, we just read the story and understand the moral.
Thanks for your posts as well. It's nice to have an intelligent conversation on Topix :)

Thank you, KayMo, for the explanation that you offered about two possible interpretations regarding Deut 22:28-29 If I may, I would to delve into both of these interpretations a little further as follows:

1 – To interpret this as an act of brutal rape versus statutory rape would be consistent with what is revealed in Deut 22:25-27 (NIV), right? After all, it would seem silly for a girl to cry out or scream for help if it was consentual sex (statutory rape), in my humble opinion. Also, I infer from your explanation that this passage had mostly based on the culture at that time, rather than being the inspired word of God.

2 – To interpret Deut 22:28-29 as statutory rape, in my humble opinion, would be adding to the exegesis meaning of rape. You see, it specifically state at Deut 22:25 that if the man rapes a girl in the country…. only he must be stoned to death. At Deut 22:26, it says that the girl has “committed no sin deserving of death,” but if it was in fact consentual sex (statutory rape), would not the girl have also been guilty? Deut 22:27 informs us that if the girl had screamed….there would be no one to rescue her. Again, does this sound like the sex was consentual? I respectfully submit that it does not, and thus, the theory of statutory rape must fail as a valid consideration.

more to follow....

continued.....

I totally agree that people should study the bible for themselves, and also use their critical thinking skills when trying to discern its exegesis meaning. And yes, we most definitely give Aesop more respect than the bible because we do not take these fables literally, but rather look for the moral meaning behind the stories. Perhaps, this is what many people are missing when they try to take the biblical stories literally. What do you think?

Again, thank you for sharing your interpretations of the scripture with this forum.