The “Islamic Dilemma” conversation on PIERS MORGAN?

2 Up 2 Down

Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,611
Reputation
3,180
Daps
71,937
Reppin
NULL
My guy

These are not new arguments you are coming up with.

Are trolling or asking serious questions?

Deuteronomy 22:28–29 doesn’t use the Hebrew word typically associated with rape (anah), and instead uses taphas (seize) and shakab (lay with), which in most times refer to premarital sex or seduction, not violent assault. That’s why the punishment is marriage and a fine and not death as in the rape case a few verses earlier (Deut. 22:25–27), where the woman cries for help and the man is executed.

The septs choice of “biasamenos” in this passage is a Greek wording choice not the original Hebrew.
25-27 states is for a young woman who is engaged.

28-29 is for a virgin who is not engaged to be married. If a man sleeps with her consensual or not, he has to marry her and pay her father.

Also Deuteronomy 22:23-24 it states if an engaged young woman is raped and doesn't cry out then she is stoned too
 

Hov

All Star
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
2,388
Reputation
1,969
Daps
11,158
Reppin
NULL
You seem very well versed on the Old Testament :ehh:

Do you speak Hebrew as well? :ohhh:
No I read those dual digital Bibles (the one by Olive Branch where you can compare text) and I research all the different variations of the scriptures and the meanings behind certain words, so I can be sure of the original intent.

One of my favorite "discoveries" is how we read Genesis as "the Earth was formless and void" but the original Hebrew is tohu wabohu which moreso means desolate wasteland. There original word "was" is strongly infered to mean "became" in Hebew, which long story short (I skipped some things) strongly suggest the Earth being created in six days, but the gap between day 0 and day 1 could've been thousands of years, which the original text supports; and scientist biggest hurdle when they say "b-b-but these trees are 50,000 years old"

The Word does not contradict and diving into it with a real mind of discovery (not confirmation or trying to retrofit your own belief system either way) is really what changed the game for me.
 

2 Up 2 Down

Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,611
Reputation
3,180
Daps
71,937
Reppin
NULL
ILL START BY SAYING THIS DUDE IS NOT A REAL RABBI LOL .. DUDE NOT EVEN COVERING HIS HEAD, CMON NOW

BUT I DONT DISAGREE WITH HIM

ISLAM AT ITS PUREST IS NOT ANTI-SEMITIC

ALTHO IT DOES PAINT NON-MUSLIMS AS SECOND CLASS CITIZENS

SO HISTORICALLY, WHEN JEWS WERE LESS SUBSERVIENT TO MUSLIMS THAN THEY LIKED, THATS WHEN THE VIOLENCE WOULD HAPPEN
I don't know about him being a rabbi but his was a professor at Princeton
 

DoubleClutch

Superstar
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
17,342
Reputation
-2,144
Daps
30,891
Reppin
NULL
25-27 states is for a young woman who is engaged.

28-29 is for a virgin who is not engaged to be married. If a man sleeps with her consensual or not, he has to marry her and pay her father.

Also Deuteronomy 22:23-24 it states if an engaged young woman is raped and doesn't cry out then she is stoned too
I haven’t been keeping up but….

What’s your point?

I already explained to you why the Old Testament Laws don’t apply to us today multiple times in multiple threads
 

Hov

All Star
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
2,388
Reputation
1,969
Daps
11,158
Reppin
NULL
25-27 states is for a young woman who is engaged.

28-29 is for a virgin who is not engaged to be married. If a man sleeps with her consensual or not, he has to marry her and pay her father.

Also Deuteronomy 22:23-24 it states if an engaged young woman is raped and doesn't cry out then she is stoned too
Ok let's take a step back, you're losing me and I don't think you are doing it on purpose.

In my eyes I am answering your question, in your eyes I am not.

Deuteronomy 22 is a collection of new laws set forth in a land that people had their own way of doing things, and they were especially brutal to women. The new laws delivered were very controversial and pivotal for that time period, and were wiping away social norms.

When you keep bringing up the "rape and not cry out thing", it would be behoove you to understand it was written that way for women to not set men up for death by sleeping with them and claiming rape. Since the man had to die if he raped someone or was caught doing so or whatever. I'm not sure what you have a problem with here.

Also 28-29 you are leaving out that this is against MEN. Men were having sex with virgins and leaving them high and dry and also virginity was sacred in those days and many days to follow.

It's basically like you have sex with her? Well you gotta marry her, take her in and pay all her bills broadie. And pay her Daddy too. :sas1:

Because you may have messed up her chances for marriage and marriage is how people secured income and families etc.

You also have to add the additional text to the law which is here: Exodus 22:16–17 “If a man seduces a virgin... he shall pay the bride-price... If her father refuses, he must still pay money.”
 

2 Up 2 Down

Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,611
Reputation
3,180
Daps
71,937
Reppin
NULL
I haven’t been keeping up but….

What’s your point?

I already explained to you why the Old Testament Laws don’t apply to us today multiple times in multiple threads
We are discussing Deuteronomy 22.
It started because you wanted to know what was awful in the Bible.
Whether you like it or not, plenty of Christians pick and choose scriptures from the old testament
 
Last edited:

2 Up 2 Down

Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,611
Reputation
3,180
Daps
71,937
Reppin
NULL
Ok let's take a step back, you're losing me and I don't think you are doing it on purpose.

In my eyes I am answering your question, in your eyes I am not.

Deuteronomy 22 is a collection of new laws set forth in a land that people had their own way of doing things, and they were especially brutal to women. The new laws delivered were very controversial and pivotal for that time period, and were wiping away social norms.

When you keep bringing up the "rape and not cry out thing", it would be behoove you to understand it was written that way for women to not set men up for death by sleeping with them and claiming rape. Since the man had to die if he raped someone or was caught doing so or whatever. I'm not sure what you have a problem with here.

Also 28-29 you are leaving out that this is against MEN. Men were having sex with virgins and leaving them high and dry and also virginity was sacred in those days and many days to follow.

It's basically like you have sex with her? Well you gotta marry her, take her in and pay all her bills broadie. And pay her Daddy too. :sas1:

Because you may have messed up her chances for marriage and marriage is how people secured income and families etc.

You also have to add the additional text to the law which is here: Exodus 22:16–17 “If a man seduces a virgin... he shall pay the bride-price... If her father refuses, he must still pay money.”
Before we go any further. Which translation are you using?
 

DoubleClutch

Superstar
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
17,342
Reputation
-2,144
Daps
30,891
Reppin
NULL
We discuss Deuteronomy 22.
It started because you wanted to know what was awful in the Bible.
Whether you like it or not, plenty of Christians pick and choose scriptures from the old testament

No sir, I wanted to know the awful stuff that Jesus taught/did. :mjlol:

Jesus (if you believe him to be the word of God and image/representation of God on earth) has the final say/revelation to us.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hov

2 Up 2 Down

Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,611
Reputation
3,180
Daps
71,937
Reppin
NULL
I always read ESV, it’s the one most scholars use. And if I want to do deep research I’ll just line by line in the orginal Hebrew Greek or Aramaic side by side
Gotcha

Well going back to Deuteronomy 22. While looking for scholar views on the texts I came across these



Further information: Rape in the Hebrew Bible § Deuteronomy 22
A marry-your-rapist provision is believed by some to be found in the Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy 22:28–29, which according to the New American Standard Bible reads:

"If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes (תָּפַשׂ tāphaś) her and lies (שָׁכַב šākhab) with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay (שָׁכַב šākhab) with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated (עָנָה anah/inah) her; he cannot divorce her all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28–29, New American Standard Bible)[24]
Bible translations interpret the passage differently, with many modern editions translating the term שָׁכַב šākhab as "to rape", where older translations usually preferred "to lie (with)". Similarly, most modern translations render תָּפַשׂ tāphaś as "to seize", whereas older translations generally preferred "to lay hold on".[25] Finally, עָנָה anah/inah is almost universally translated as "to humble" in older English translations, but almost always as "to violate" in modern translations. The Good News Translation even rendered the passage as "he forced her to have intercourse with him", and God's Word Translation made it "he raped her".[26] Irrespective of whether or not the woman had given consent to the sexual act, or will give consent to marriage, the man is required to marry her by paying her parents a dowry to settle the matter.[27]

Some Christians believe that the command in Deuteronomy 22:28 does not refer to rape, but to a man enticing a woman to engage in consensual intercourse, as in the passage in Exodus 22:16–17,[28][29] which also explicitly states the father's right to confirm or refuse the marriage.[30] The Hebrew sometimes rendered as "rapes" here is the verb שָׁכַב šākab, which literally means "to lie (down)" or "to sleep", is sometimes used as a euphemism for "to lie/sleep (with someone)", and when the context adds force, it can mean "to rape", for example in Genesis 35:22 or 2 Samuel 13:14.[23]: 92–93 [31] Adjacent scriptures that speak of forced sexual relations with engaged (versus unengaged) virgins prescribe the death penalty for rapists (Deuteronomy 22:23-27).[32] As apologist Kyle Butte argues, "It is clearly evident from the immediate context of Deuteronomy 22 that rape is not being discussed in verses 28-29," arguing that "verses 25-27 give a clear instance in which rape is being discussed. ... The text says that the man who committed the crime 'shall die' (v. 25)".[33] But not all Christian scholars agree that Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is mere consensual fornication. Eugene H. Merrill (1994) pointed out: "At first glance, the next example, the rape of an unbetrothed girl, might appear to have been a lesser offense than those already described, but this was not the case at all. First, he seized (Heb. tāpaś, "lay hold of") her and then lay down (šākab) with her, a clear case of violent, coercive behavior."[34]

Although commentators such as John Gill (1746–63)[30] and Charles Ellicott (1897)[29] who think Deuteronomy 22:28–29 describes consensual sex often compare it to Exodus 22:16–17 (which almost all scholars agree is a consensual situation), the latter does not specify that the man "violated" her, whereas Deuteronomy 22:29 does.[23]: 141  The Hebrew word used here for "violated" is עָנָה anah (or inah[35]), which (depending on the context) can mean "to rape, to force [sexually], to defile, to violate, to ravish, to mistreat, to afflict, to humble/humiliate, to oppress, to subject/submit/subdue, to weaken".[23][36] Especially when a Hebrew verb is in the pi'el (intensifying) form, this adds force,[23]: 120  and in Deuteronomy 22:29 עִנָּ֔הּ ‘in-nāh is in the pi'el.[23]: 141  In several other cases in the Hebrew Bible where this word is used to describe a man and a woman interacting, it is usually describing a man forcing a woman to have sex against her will (i.e., rape).[23]: 78 [note 1]

Twelfth century Rabbi Moses Maimonides said the man's use of force would require that he marry his victim and never divorce her:[38]

Every maiden expects to be married, her seducer therefore is only ordered to marry her; for he is undoubtedly the fittest husband for her. He will better heal her wound and redeem her character than any other husband. If, however, he is rejected by her or her father, he must give the dowry (Exodus 22:16). If he uses violence he has to submit to the additional punishment, "he may not put her away all his days" (Deuteronomy 22:29).
 

2 Up 2 Down

Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,611
Reputation
3,180
Daps
71,937
Reppin
NULL
No sir, I wanted to know the awful stuff that Jesus taught/did. :mjlol:

Jesus (if you believe him to be the word of God and image/representation of God on earth) has the final say/revelation to us.
I don't believe him to be the word of God or God.
I believe Mark gives the closest representation of the real Jesus and the other gospels build from Mark while adding more miracles, parables, and whatnot
 

DoubleClutch

Superstar
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
17,342
Reputation
-2,144
Daps
30,891
Reppin
NULL
I don't believe him to be the word of God or God.
I believe Mark gives the closest representation of the real Jesus and the other gospels build from Mark while adding more miracles, parables, and whatnot

Right. But in this case you are judging Christians from the perspective of knowing what they Believe Jesus to be and trying to use scriptures against them.

All things considered, your argument falls flat. You still must address Jesus. Unless you’re just attacking the beliefs of JUDAISM alone.

And I’ve said over and over, I’m not a believer in Judaism alone but rather “messianic Judaism”.

Regardless, you can still judge Jesus objectively as a man by even a lower standard since you’re not holding him to a “God standard” of perfection

So religion aside, what’s the Awful things Jesus taught or did historically in the 1st century
 

ReasonableMatic

................................
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
18,328
Reputation
7,618
Daps
115,727

IMG-4682.jpg

IMG-9402.jpg



IMG-9403.jpg

das-ende-der.jpg.webp


:scust::scust::scust:
 
Top