Is it Rape or Not

Judgement for what? Being 12 year old girls. Or I know punishment of the sins of their fathers. Don't worry I understand biblical principles. Don't waste your breath on this.

​

You cannot escape the fact that these girls were forced into marriage (ie sexual intercourse). You defined rape as forced sex. The only logical conclusion is that this is RAPE by your own definition.

​

Your waving your hand in the air about this is God's judgement or being captives does not change that it is Rape. You can call it Holy Rape if you want. It is rape while being held captive and being subjected to god's judgement because their father were bad men.

​

To be logically consistent you should have have defined Rape as forced sex unless if it is God's judgement.

​

This has been my clearly stated opinion. Good grief, can't you read?

​

I can read but I can't believe you are attempting to make evil look somehow not so bad - maybe even good and family oriented. In my view that is itself evil. If the devil himself ever needs defending you would be good choice.

​

Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

​

Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Good lard there you go again! These were scared sh*tless traumatized little 12 year old girls. Again you make it sound, based on absolutely no evidence, that the girls lined up, giggling and flirting with the Israeli hunks. Attempting to spin this into to some positive light. Absolutely ludicrous. Rape is rape doesn’t matter which century or the status of my imagination. Evil is complete independent of my view of "god of the Bible". History is littered with examples of people who committed heinous crimes because of their steadfast belief in the "god of the Bible".

CS when i hear of a group of Iraqi civilians that were killed in a bomb blast which do you think is more speculative (and inhuman) line of thinking

The spouses, family and friends of the these victims are experiencing pain, anger, depression and grief.

​

This is dating opportunity! Within a 30 day cooling off period there would be some Iraqi women who just became available! I am sure the wife’s and girlfriends of the male victims would be looking for a good man in short order.

​

I don't exist in that culture so it is pure speculation on my part to assume the first.

​

I appeal to your own human empathy to think this thru. Faith in prior posts tried to make Genocide sound like the "Dating Game" and then slings accusation of fervent imaginations.

​

cs writes:

​

or to make this look like it isn't the word of god

​

This is not the word of god who created all the grandeur we see in the universe. God is omnipotent so why didn't god just bring a plague on these evil people? Instead you are trying to say that this must have been a faith building exercise for the Hebrew men to experience first hand the delight of running a sword thru a pregnant women.

​

These are the same guys that Faith would have us believe would respect the “feelings” and virtue of the captive slaves virgins.

​

This is the description of bronze age warfare. Nothing extraordinary for the times. Not the WORD of GOD.

​

I am not trying to make God look bad you are!!!!

​

Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

​

Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Looks like you are on the same tajectory as Faith. At first Faith says these are just descibing events, not that god approved or anything. Well these are "thus sayeth the lord" like commands.Is the Bible the Word of God or not?The Numbers reference is one of many btw.Here is another.... These folks are not even necessarily evil people just in the way.Replay for effect..... Notice who is being attributed with the "giving". Does "enjoy" include marriage proposals.Maybe they had a BC style Dating Game between the women, ahhh.... newly freed from prior commitments and relationships, and the swaggering warrior hunks.Do you beleive this is from God? Only an issue if you really think these are God's thoughts or inspired words. I don't question God I question if this are God's thoughts and commands.BTW there more references.

Sorry if i put you into a box.

Faith how many times do you have say this to convince yourself.Rape - forced sex without consent.The passages considered here involves rape because the captive women had no choice, voice or option.Your fantasy that these captive children would be eager to cuddle up to the guy that just killed their family defies common sense and understanding of human beings - are you completely without empathy!You used terms like “after a cooling off period” and “allowing marriage with a fair degree of consideration of the feelings on both sides”. Good lard this is deceitful language.Let's look at the instruction for captive virgin children... What do you suppose compulsion means? There is rape! Where is the consideration of feelings of the women here?Can you imagine being a women and being released with nothing, after you youthful bloom has past no property and no family as they have killed and you are completely destitute.Call it Holy Rape if you prefer. But a Rose-is-a-RoseMore Murder Rape and Pillage and Plunder.... Repeat "Enjoy the spoils of your enemies"....Now if rape does occur and the women is a Hebrew here is what the law is: The woman has no say in this affair, she get raped and now she gets to marry the aggressor!!! This is the law for a Hebrew woman what do you think would happen for a women or child of the enemy.Can you explain for the audience were the "consideration of the feelings" are? I get it she can't be divorced no matter what. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

CS before we go any further please supply a definition of rape.Concepts such as rape and murder are somewhat timeless IMHO. All that is missing in the descriptions provided are the pornographic details.Also your comment acceptability for "those times" indicates these are words of men not God. Nothing extaordinary here folks just the prevailing culture.Sigh... As I pointed out here Message 193 and several times prior the events described are rape - forced sexual relationships without consent. Let us not stray too far from the text.This is getting tedious but I refuse to allow God to be defamed. and And now the instruction for handling this delicate affair... Keyword c-o-m-p-u-l-s-i-o-n. Some here want us to go to extrabiblical (and delusional) speculation that these are somehow sexless marriages or these captives realized they have found "a good man" and the sex was consensual. Something I have a hard time believing that a guy that could run down a 8-year old boy and hack him in two would be respective of the feelings of his new captive bride.I can see the 1500 BC addition of Woman’s Day magazine front cover copy"How I got over witnessing my husband hacking my family and learned to appreciate his sensitive side" CS, since we are discussing the OT can you provide relevant scripture?Let me share with you what I found discussing rape in general. Now I am just speculating but I would guess this liberal law does not apply to a captive child. Remember this is if you get caught. If there are no witnesses I doubt the women’s testimony counts for much.Your parallels about arranged marriages being rape. Yes if the women has no say it would be rape. Ask most women how they feel about this. Most cultures that have strict arranged marriages do so for religious reasons.

Ya Sure sounds warm and fuzzy. Let retain that thought and see where this love and mercy shines thru in the following discussion. The primitive vision of god as a described in the OT, an alpha-warrior primate, did command rape. If you describe rape as "unconsented sex" there is no other conclusion. The fact that it was "codified" and allowed for a mourning period still does not change the issue - it was force "marriage" with no rights of the female partner.Furthermore if the Canaanites were as wicked as you try to claim how young to suppose a virgin girl was in the situation described. I believe we have forced marriage probably prepubescent. Please explain the Love and Mercy here. Proof is required here, reference one scientist that is amazed or aghast. I have read the accounts by theologians (ie those with a bias) to described the Canaanites as wicked and unworthy of breathing air. Sounds more like a classic case of demonization of the enemy, a very effect propaganda tool.The command “Do not Murder” must contain fine print that says but spite the bastards, the women, the little ones and the unborn if they meet a certain threshold of wickedness. In this case Love your enemy with the pointy end of sword.Also, study shows the Hebrews absorbed common phrases, literary idioms, myths and even concepts and practices of the Canaanites and surrounding pagan religions. So be careful in making the Canaanites too wicked.And furthermore if the Canaanites were so wicked why didn't god the warrior god just bring down a plague, famine or do some supernatural badass stuff and do these people himself? Why would your god require his people to the undertake these scriptural uplifting and purifying experiences of running a pregnant women thru with a sword or running down and hacking little boys but sparing any virgin girls that catch your fancy? Balance of justice and mercy? How is "keep the young virgin girls for yourselves" mercy or justice. It is booty and enticement to get men to go to war. Please stop the whitewashing. I am not judging God! Far be it. I just do not commit blasphemy to attribute common run-of-mill Bronze Age code of ethics to God. Those who practice biblical idolatry are forced to do that. I think it is wrong to attribute "condoning rape" to God. Again I am not judging anyone. I am just claiming that these commands attributed to God in the OT were not from God but were common practices of warring tribes of that era.However note the concepts of mercy, love and kindness are not relative to some age or time. Genocide and rape in 20th century BC was still genocide and rape, just more accepted and common. You certainly have a smallish vision of God. Your vision is like God is some efficient manager and he has to compromise or worry about being practical. Why do you think God has to be practical in human terms? If you look at the scale of the earth, the only rock we know of that contains life, compared to immensity of the cosmos, do think that was practical?Also how can complete genocide be considered “too soft”? The acts described by today’s standard are war crimes and genocide.Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

How many people would willing marry their "new husbands" after their new husband just killed every love one they ever knew? It does not take much empathy to understand this. Their lives were not spared out of some sort of mercy!Their lives were spared because they were useful and were sexually attractive young females. And I guess this includes wicked toddlers, children and the unborn, but excludes attractive virgin female children. Nice foundation to build a set of ethics from. 1. Ok why not just stop the beating of the small black wicked hearts?
2. Sure but then your god is hardly loving and merciful. You can't have it both ways. I am not painting God as a cruel monster. Surprisingly you are, by having to believe these ancient texts describe God and your failed attempts to provide apologetics. Blasphemy I say.I have stated this point over and over in this thread. The events described are primitive and not out of the ordinary for the era. They are not the thoughts, commands or direction of God. It is obvious - stand back 30 ft and think about it.
Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

OK and What's your definition of rape?Now as far as your link. It is bad form to provide a link and say "there it is all explained there". You are required to think and that means putting thoughts into your own words.As Jazz says there is a lot there but there is a summary at the bottom. I find this.... and All through this thread many of the defenders of the anthropomorphic alpha-male god of the OT say "you are reading between the lines to say this was rape".Yes maybe, but I understand basic human behavior and mores of the time and the context and the language used.The keeping of virgin girls was NOT an act of mercy. They were spared as war booty and they were allowed to "enjoy the spoils of your enemies" which included women! Also note that the priests got their cut of the women along with the sheep and goats.Now your reference tries to spin this that "they would care for them, feed them, train them" demonstrates a bias that is working overtime. Time for some intellectual honesty.Finally, if these Midianites were so rotten why can't God the powerful just send a pestilence, famine or stop the beating of their evil black hearts?Why does god supposedly require his chosen people to experience the spiritually uplifting act of running a pregnant woman thru with a blade or hacking little children as the run for cover?This god who supposedly stopped the sun in the sky and flooded the earth is powerless to exterminate these Midianites on his own accord. Why did god even allow these Midianites to propagate since each of us is knitted by god in the womb?Maybe these "scriptures" are just the recorded history, religion, politics and popular myths of a people that struggled in that region and were trying to understand the divine. The bible (and other literature of the era) is valuable as it shows the progression and development of human ethics over the course of many centuries covering the early beginnings of civilization.

You don't know your bible very well do you. Keep in mind here are talking about a harsh judgment on children (you own source mentioned average age of 5).Let's open our bible to a new chapter. Now tell me what does enjoy your plunder mean when that plunder includes women? Now just who is straining at a gnat but swallows a camel.Further.... This will give some background on the normal spoils of war at the time and it is not the strained fairy tale in the apologetic you provided. I am sure they took damsels (little girls?) to feed them, care for them and train them.In Zechariah 14 it tells how a god will punish Jerusalem by making "all nations" invade and the "women will be ravished". What is the hymn about "all things are in your hands"?I am sure you know the story of the host offering his own virgin daughter and a concubine to a mob of perverts to protect his guest. This may also further clarify the social norms concerning the raping of women.Further in Deuteronomy do you know what the penalty was for raping a unbetrothed virgin? Severe. Required a monetary transaction to the father and you 'have' to marry the victim. A twist on victim rights.There is more but I get tired of writing.Now earlier you mentioned that Jesus clarified the attitude towards women and sexual sin. No I would say, contradicted not clarified. Unless you take a different meaning to "love your enemies" than I do.Did you ever get the feeling that maybe the OT might just be some stories and description of a bronze age people and not necessarily the "word of god". I always thought it was blasphemous to attribute this to the creator of the universe but that is what your simplistic spoon-feed religious world view demands. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Jay I don't think anybody can really be that naive? When the OT says “to know” does that mean really good conversation.For review...

quote:

---

"But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves"

​

"keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies"

​

"They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man"

---

Answer me this. What forms of enjoyment do you think was in mind within the given context? You can put away your self-righteousness. This is not my corrupted mind, we are talking about. You know nothing of me so do not assume some righteous superior position, thanks. The NT was centuries into the future when these command were given.Explain how this all dovetails with - love your enemy, if you really believe that NT philosophy should be considered here.I gave you plenty of contemporary background scriptures which you have completely and conveniently ignored.Further your twisted vision of god is commanding burn-to-the-ground genocide (sucklings, toddlers, aged, pregnant women, etc) and you think that raping the enemy was somehow out of context?If your commander in chief is sending men-of-war to battle with the guidelines to "enjoy the women" do you think they might misunderstand that really you meant take them in, feed them, care for them and train them.Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Regarding Deuteronomy 21:10-14 One month to find closure over the extremely traumatic life event of having her parents, brothers and sisters killed. Keep in mind the age of the person we are considering. Now try to empathize a little here, can you see yourself in the position of these young girls?Do you see yourself finding closure and ready to marry the guy who just hacked your little brother within the time span of month.And if she does not want to marry - what are her options? And this would be fate probably worse than death. What are the prospects of a women in those days, passed the flower of her youth, no family, no property, no rights, no children, nothing. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

You are taking this topic off course. The topic is "is it rape?" if don't wish to debate this issue fine I will not participate.I think there is plenty of evidence to establish that the puny vision of god of the OT did indeed allow rape for war booty (in addition to slavery) on several occasions.It is intellectual dishonesty to convert "enjoy the spoils" to mean something like sitting around the campfire making smores while "enjoying" your new found little friends. Ha! That would be projection and is *exactly* what you are doing. You are avoiding the clear meaning of text and trying to make it say something else. You have been forcing fitting meaning to meet some larger agenda that is built on a flimsy foundation of faith - it is error. Great! Now that is progress. If you can admit that the described vision of god of the OT was a rash harsh god, then you have made progress towards intellectual honesty. That is not what you were doing earlier by straining definitions, ignoring context and norms of the day to force god into your view that god could not possible allow these things. I do know Christians that have this view and it is a more honest position.From a rational objective perspective it is obvious that the Bible is not a revelation from God.It is a untidy compilation, written by many different people, over many centuries, changed and edited from time to time. It contains legends, borrowed myths, fables, and even secular and erotic writings. The bible is no more a revelation from God than are the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Ramayana or the Mahabharata, books which the Bible resembles quite closely.The principle value of the bible is that you can see ethics progress thru the ages form "love your Hebrew male neighbor" to "love your enemies".I would encourage you to start a thread showing how you can apply NT philosophy to OT "topology". Interesting study, never seen it done before. However, yes there will be counter and challenging opinions and if you view that is overt hostility, then yes shrink from the task. Truth should be able to stand the fire, it is only falsehoods that need to be protected.I am going to quit responding to you on this particular thread as you are more interested in preaching non-sequitur's than debating the subject. You have avoided the material I provided and continuously escape on a scripture quoting agenda. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.