[b-hebrew] xrm and the Canaanites' VIP treatment

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Sat Jan 19 17:15:48 EST 2008


You have added an interpretation that goes beyond the text, and on the
basis of your interpretation then making judgments.

In Hebrew the text leaves open more than the possibility that the sex
was consensual.

On Jan 16, 2008 12:44 PM, Bill Rea <bsr15 at cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:

 I wrote:-

>> In the Bible the seduction of a married woman is a more serious
>> crime than the rape of a virgin. Most modern westerners would hold
>> the opposite view, me included.

> And Karl asked:-

>Could you please remind me of the verses that you are looking at? The
>only verses that I can think of are found in Deuteronomy 22 where
>"rape" is not mentioned. Rape always carried the death sentence.

> Here's the stuff about the virgin. KJV translation:-

28: If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed,
andlay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
29: Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father
fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath
humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

> Ok, it doesn't say rape. It says he lays hold of her and lies with her. In most people's books, mine included, that sounds like forceful sex, a.k.a. rape.

That's according to your understanding. What if that understanding is
not correct? My reading of the verse first of all does not say "rape"
and the context indicates consensual sex, at the very least seduction,
not forceable rape. That's why I did not recognize which verses you
indicated by your initial claim.

>All societies share common norms of ethical behavior. Stealing,
>murdering, lying, the coveting of what belongs to others, are all
>recognized as wrong. Even in sexually "liberated" societies, there is
>an implicit recognition that cheating on one's lover is wrong. Some
>try to justify their actions, but even the action of trying to justify
>themselves is an admission that they recognize that what they do is
>wrong. In that, ancient societies are no different from modern ones.

> This looks like a case of moving the goal posts after the goal had been scored. You asked for, and I quote:-

(delete repeat of claim that this refers to rape)

You haven't scored the goal yet. Your claim is based on your
understanding, and since I don't read KJV (I wonder if I have even one
copy of it at home) that is not a convincing proof to me. You need to
prove that the Hebrew used in these verses indicates "rape", and so
far you have not done so.

Bill Rea, ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
E-Mail bill.rea at canterbury.ac.nz                </   New
Phone 64-3-364-2331, Fax  64-3-364-2332        /)  Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator                    (/'

Karl W. Randolph.

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list