Does the Bible condone rape?

I have many discussions with many different kinds of people. Some believe in God, others do not care about God, while still others are militant in their hatred of God. While talking with the militant ones, I come across the same lame reasons why the Bible is not a moral Book and how It is full of mistakes. Since it is the same recycled fodder over and over again, the argument is easy to win. After having gone through the same process for the millionth time, I have decided to write articles explaining the so called “mistakes” in the Bible as well as the passages that “claim” to be immoral. If you talk to enough atheists, you will hear these questions and statements over and over again. Here is the first one, “the Bible condones rape, therefor it is an outdated book and no longer relevant for our modern times“. I make it a point to ask for the specific locations of the claim. I am not shocked to learn that most who make these claims have no idea where it is in the Bible. They are just recycling what they heard someone else say. When they can give the location, I usually get the following account from Deuteronomy 22:

22 “If a man is found lying with a married*woman, then both* of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman ; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel. 23 “If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and another man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death ; the girl, because** she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because** he has violated his neighbor’s wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you. 25 “But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. 26 “But you shall do nothing* to the girl ; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death, for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. 27 “When he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but there was no one to save her. 28 “If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because* he has violated her; he cannot*divorce her all his days.

There are 4 distinct situations here but only one of them would actually be considered “rape” or violation. Let’s analyze them one by one and see if the claims of the atheists are true.

1) The man and woman are caught in the act of adultery. The woman is married and is caught having sexual relations with a man who is not her husband. She is to be put to death and so is the man with whom she was sinning. This protects the victim of this entire situation, the woman’s husband. Who knows what diseases she will bring home to him after sleeping around. This will purge the evil from the land. It will also set an example for those who might consider adultery in the future. There is no rape here.

2) The woman is engaged (which according to God is the same as marriage) and is caught having sexual relations with a man who is not her future husband (before the wedding when sex is forbidden). She is not raped because she is in the city (literally public area) and does not cry out for help. This is a case of consensual sex. She is not raped but willingly participates in the act. She and the man are to be put to death to protect the victim, the future husband, as well as purge evil from among the people.

3) This is the only case of rape in this entire passage, and God severely punishes the rapist while protecting the victim. The woman was taken by force and she cried out but there was no one there to rescue her. She is raped. Once the man is caught, then he is put to death but nothing is done to the woman because she has done nothing wrong. If we applied God’s Law today, there would no longer be men who commit multiple rapes. It is hard to create another rape victim when you are 6 feet in the ground where you should be. Since we do not, we have an entire society at risk of being victimized by rape (usually multiple counts). God punishes the guilty and protects the victims and the innocent people. We protect the criminals today and leave the innocent people of society susceptible to rape and rapists.

4) This is a case of consensual sex between 2 people who are not engaged to anyone. This would be compared to today’s one night stand, or cohabitation. When they are discovered (probably by her expanding belly) the man must go to the girl’s father, ask for forgiveness, and ask for her hand in marriage. If the father agrees, he must marry her (so she will not be a victim, accused of adultery) and stay married to her all the days of his life. She was not raped, she went willingly. The problem is in the word “seized” of verse 28. The original word is trapped, but not necessarily by force. It could be translated as manipulated (with words and promises). If it were rape, like in the previous case, then the man would be put to death. Since it is not rape, he deceived her or manipulated her to come to bed with him, and he is not put to death.

We can clearly see from this passage that God does not condone rape, in fact, He condemns it. He punishes the criminal and protects the victim. Our modern society, which claims to know more than God, protects the criminal and punishes the victim. Simple study of the Bible clears up all the problems. If you are a victim of rape, God is on your side. If you have committed rape, then God can forgive you if you will humble yourself and repent of your sin.


58 comments on “Does the Bible condone rape?

  1. “Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.” Number 31: 17-18

    Rape isn’t good…except when they’re women children you now own thanks to war…

    • That was my next passage to address. Thanks for bringing it up for me. Now people can see that there are those who actually use these stupid arguments.

      Keeping in mind all of Scripture (what we saw in Deut, about rape), we see what was meant by by sparing the women. To be the wives of the soldiers. God only allows sexual activity in the confines of marriage. The people knew this well. Death was the result. This passage does not stand alone in a vacuum. It goes along with the rest of Scripture and must be interpreted that way. Plus the war with the Midianites was God’s vengeance upon them for the way that they treated Israel. The got what they deserved in other words. The Israelite men had been negatively influenced by the Midianite women in the past. They paid a heavy price for it. That is why they were to stay away from the non virgin Midianite women. They could take the virgins (the Israelites were to marry virgins only) as their wives. This is opposed to the heathens, who raped and murdered the women. With Israel, the women were protected (the innocent ones, that is).

      One more little bit of info. This is Moses’ command to the people (not God’s). God told them not to spare anyone and especially not to marry the women. In fact, the actions taken here (taking the women for wives) is a sin that God told them not to do. There is still no rape here though (you are reading in to what is there, or, trying to judge Israel based on what heathens do with the spoils of war, both are incorrect on your part).

      So, this is a weak argument on your part and shows a lack of intellectual integrity. Before recycling what you read on a website or out of a book somewhere, learn to study the passage in context. Thanks for your participation. Bring on the other ones that you have “read somewhere”.

      • “To be the wives of the soldiers. ”

        Don’t worry, girls. We aren’t going to rape you. We’re going to kill your families, then force you to marry us, THEN rape you, so technically it isn’t rape.


      • Oh boy, more reading in to what is not there. Genius on your part. Again you judge the Israelites based on the heathens.

        Secondly, they should be thankful. They were not supposed to be spared. Instead of dying, they were taken in to the nation blessed by God and able to prosper along with them. Not a bad trade I would say.

  2. So your god is the god of the less-icky results? Not terribly impressive.

    We could kill you…but instead we’ll force you to marry us against our will. Just always remember that we could have killed you, and you’ll be happy…sort of…

    • You wrote “So your god is the god of the less-icky results”

      Where did you get this? All were to be put to death because of their sinful lifestyles. Moses and the people did not obey and they paid the price (look at what the Midianite women did to the nation, read what is written in the Bible).

      So you do admit that there is no rape and you were reading into what was not there? Thanks for seeing reality. We will work on the rest of your issues one at a time.

      BTW, He is not “my” God. He is God.

      BTW, do you know the list of sins that were being committed by these people? It is scary.

      16 In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.”

      What is their sin? Take a look:
      1. Adultery
      2. Bestiality
      3. Homosexuality
      4. Incest
      5. Murdering their children (like abortion today)

      The list goes on and on. They were not good people so do not make them victims here.

      • “So you do admit that there is no rape and you were reading into what was not there?”

        Within the story, Moses tells them to take the women. Whether they marry them or not, it’s rape.

        “BTW, He is not “my” God. He is God.”

        He’s the version of the Christian deity that you happen to believe in.

      • So you define what is and is not rape now. Sex within the confines of marriage is a blessing, not rape. Sorry but nice try.

        He is God, the Creator of everything. You can choose to believe that or not. You can accept reality or not.

        Did you check out the lifestyle of those “innocent” people of Median?

      • Sorry for necro-ing this discussion, but – Erik, really?

        Sex within the confines of marriage is a blessing, not rape.

        Actually Erik, sex any time the woman* doesn’t say yes is rape. Wherever and whenever it happens. And if she says yes out of fear or for any other reason that isn’t because she wants sex to take place, it also counts as rape. At least, for normal people.

        * I say “woman” here to fit into the existing discussion, but it also counts whenever either party doesn’t say yes, regardless of their, or their partner’s, gender.

      • Can rape take place in marriage? Yes of course. I never denied the fact. I believe that you are trying to twist what I wrote again. The quote that you took is an answer that I gave to the person who claimed that God told the men of Israel to rape the women of a defeated people, which is false. The person took a portion of Scripture and tried to twist it to say what it did not say. I believe that I have already pointed that out to you before, in your own writings.

      • oops – forgot…

        Did you check out the lifestyle of those “innocent” people of Median?

        So you’re saying that if someone is “sinful” (in your eyes), then you can do anything to them that you like? Including murder and rape. Wow – I know that many believers have very low morals of their own (relying as they do on their god to scare them along the straight-and-narrow), but I thought that you would at least try to justify those acts – not just say that the people were bad so they deserve anything and everything that happens to them.

      • So you’re saying that if someone is “sinful” (in your eyes), then you can do anything to them that you like? Including murder and rape.

        Once again, no, that is not what I wrote. God called the lifestyle of the Medianites sinful (do you not think that murder, rape, child sacrifice, bestiality, homosexuality, incest, fornication, adultery etc.are sins?, take away homosexuality, fornication, and adultery and I am sure that you would agree that the others are sinful).

        God never tells the soldiers to rape the women. He allows them to take the women as their wives. The Medianites had over 400 years to mend their ways yet they did not. I would say 400 years is showing a lot of mercy.

      • God never tells the soldiers to rape the women. He allows them to take the women as their wives.

        So the rape becomes legitimised.

        Can rape take place in marriage? Yes of course. I never denied the fact.

        Erik, I know you can’t, but seriously – you should just admit that the bible encourages rape here. I’m pretty sure that everyone else sees it, if they actually read what’s written.

        I know you like to say variations of “read it in context”, “there’s a word in the ancient language that is also used elsewhere which shows that it means something else”, or some other apologetic excuse. But if god were real, then he should be able to get the writers of his book to write things clearly, not limited to only what people of that time understood and accepted as normal. Unless, of course, you think that we should all go back to living like that – warring and fighting other countries (OK, you’re American, so I guess that’s OK for you ;-)), stoning our disobedient kids, having rape victims marry their attackers, etc.

        Just admit that the bible is a story book – nothing more. You will get a lot more inner peace that way.

      • Taking women as wives and rape are two different things. You are confusing the two on purpose. There is no rape mentioned in the text. That is you reading into what is there. You view the Israelites like you do the pagans and assume that the Israelites would act like the pagans. The Israelites were taught to be pure sexually speaking and that rape is condemned in every situation. You just overlook that and impose what you feel and believe. Sorry to inform you of your errors.

        You are showing what you do not know more and more with each comment.

        Here is another of your fallacies:
        stoning our disobedient kids

      • So, I guess you think it was okay for Saddam to rape and murder his own people. I also assume that you feel that he should not have had to pay for his crimes. You seem to be protecting the guilty and not really caring about the innocent (or worse, not caring if the guilty continue to prey on the innocent). I assumed that you are a humanist but from what I see, you do not have much compassion on innocent humans.

      • Taking women as wives and rape are two different things. You are confusing the two on purpose.

        No Erik, I’m not. As you also said, rape can take place in marriage. As the bible describes here.

        Marriage at that time was largely done without much input from the women. Marrying the survivors of your defeated enemy was just legitimising the rape. And being a marriage (at least, as far as the soldiers and the prevailing society were concerned), the rape could be repeated again and again.

      • Just a quick cross reference for you about how the Israelites acted with the women of a conquered city. Have you ever heard of Jericho? Do you know about Rehab and how the Israelites treated her (a former prostitute)?

        She was taken into the nation of Israel and married, becoming part of the lineage of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world. She was not raped. She was not left to fend for herself (a death sentence for sure). She was warmly embraced by the Israelites and honored by God. This is actual evidence instead of your reading into what you want to see.

      • I think you’ll find that there was a reason the Israelites treated her that way. I’m actually surprised that you don’t rail against them for being so friendly towards one who was a sinner. But she repented, right? So that’s OK.

        Anyway, I’m off for a while. It’s been fun – maybe I’ll check this out again later. Have a good day 😉

      • All of us are sinners and need compassion. Compassion does not mean that you accept people’s sins. It means seeing the root of their suffering and reaching out to help. The root of mankind’s suffering is sin and therefore, I (as a Christian) must point them to the One who can forgive them and heal them.

      • I (as a Christian) must point them to the One who can forgive them and heal them.

        Especially when it also means that you can move the discussion away from you trying to defend the indefensible rape that your god (whether directly or through Moses) commanded the soldiers to commit, as described in the bible.

        If you applied the same level of grown-up reading comprehension to this passage as you accuse us of not applying to other passages – where you then proceed to explain that what it says is not what it means, because, blah, blah, blah – then you’d see what everyone else sees. Your god is condoning – no, worse – commanding rape.

      • I will point to this comment that I have written to the answer of this accusation. The passage of the soldiers taken the women is not in a vacuum. We must analyze it in the light of the entire teaching of the Old Testament. Once again, you are avoiding context and looking into and imposing upon the text what is not there. You see what you want to see and not what is there.

        Again, there is an example with Rehab that proves how the Israelites treated the women (no rape, instead, a position of honor) while you just have your assumptions (based on the way that pagans treated the women). One of us has evidence while the other is making decisions based on assumptions 🙂

      • Erik, there can never be a justification for rape. I hope that we can agree on that.

        That the word “rape” doesn’t appear in this story doesn’t mean that – with an adult level of reading comprehension – you would fail to understand what is meant. Saying that the soldiers could take the women as wives doesn’t let your god off the hook. At least, not if you apply any intellectual integrity to your reading comprehension 😉

        As for the context, the Israelites had quite a few laws about how to deal with various cases of rape, so it’s pretty clear that it did happen. Trying to imply that the soldiers in this case were pure and clean-thinking – and married their captives out of love – won’t work.

        But that raises another problem: the soldiers could take the women as wives. That doesn’t seem to allow a lot of leeway for those future wives to object to the idea. The soldiers could take them as wives, discussion over. As I mentioned in an earlier comment, “being a marriage (at least, as far as the soldiers and the prevailing society were concerned), the rape could be repeated again and again.”

        And what about the soldiers who were already married? Didn’t they get any booty for defeating the enemy? (When I wrote that sentence, I meant “booty” in the sense of captured treasure or swag, not as it’s currently often understood. But in the context of this story, maybe the modern meaning is also correct – unfortunately.)

        In the post to which you link, you mention (talking of Rahab) “If the Israelites treated prostitutes that well, just imagine how well they treated the virgins.” That’s you assuming they would treat virgins even better 😉 Also (same post), I’m not sure I’d call it “the art of rape”, regardless of who practices it. As I mentioned above, the Israelites had laws condemning rape, so they clearly practiced it too – it wasn’t just the dreaded, scary pagans.

        You also make a comment in this exchange mentioning Saddam (May 18, 2012 @ 6:17 am), but it was inserted mid-stream so I don’t know whether you were trying to refer to something I wrote. But looking at what you write in that comment, it seems pretty obvious that it’s not actually a response to anything I said.

  3. “So you define what is and is not rape now. Sex within the confines of marriage is a blessing, not rape. Sorry but nice try. ”

    So wives can’t say no? And these women, according to the story, had no choice about marrying their abductors in the first place. Sorry, but that’s rape mate. I really hope you’re single.

    “He is God, the Creator of everything. You can choose to believe that or not. You can accept reality or not.”

    I do accept reality. Which is why I’m an atheist.

    “Did you check out the lifestyle of those “innocent” people of Median?”

    And the way a supposedly omnipotent being deals with it is by killing them all except a few and forcing them to be married to their enemies. Sounds like a very weak, impotent god to me.

    • Yes, a man or woman can say no. But, before you jump to conclusions.

      3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

      Sex is a gift from God given to a husband and wife, but is only to be practiced within marriage.

      Again, you are not paying attention to the text. God said put them all to death. He gave them over 400 years to change their ways, yet they did not. Moses is the one who told them to take the virgins. Why are you confusing Moses with God.

      I had an atheist professor in college who taught me something interesting, “you can learn a lot simply by paying attention“. I think this would be great for you.

      • Erik, the fact that you refuse to yield to ANY valid points makes you look silly. I’m sorry, but I believe you’re uglier to those with credible arguments then you are with those just taking digs at you and it shows. You really rely on “you’re not reading it right” and “if you would reread my response” more than is necessary. If you’d made any remotely realistic statements, I’m sure at least NotaScientist would agree or agree to disagree with them. He seems like a completely reasonable person. I think it’s ridiculously ironic that the whole time we’ve been messaging you’ve been in Charleston where I am. You need to be praying for a certain Spanish loving preacher buddy of yours because he’s the one who needs it. It’s easy for people to be self righteous assholes, but it’s another thing to admit your own back porch needs to be swept.

      • I will always agree with valid points. The key is, the points have to be valid. There is no mention of rape in this passage and the Hebrews did not treat their pow’s the way that the heathens did. They had God’s law and they knew the consequences from breaking them. Rape was punished with the death penalty. Every Hebrew knew this. Claiming that the soldiers spared the women to rape them is absurd, and it is also reading into what is not there, as well as assuming. Reading into and assuming (with not reason) are not a sign of intellectual integrity (I do not mean this in a degrading sense, it is just a fact).

        What I do not get is how people will flip out if you do not read Shakespeare “right” yet when it comes to the Bible, they are open to whatever junk you want to spew about it. With Shakespeare, you have to use logic yet with the Bible you just throw logic out the window. I just do not understand the double standard.

        I am sure he is reasonable, yet when it comes to the Bible, he has his blinders on, (his rose colored glasses). I am sorry that I see things as they are, but I have to point out error when I see it. It is like a person who deals with money. He is not trained in every kind of false money so he can detect it. He knows the authentic so well that any fake is recognized instantly. The same applies to the Bible. I do not have to study all the heresy about the Bible to recognize a false argument, I just need to know the authentic (and I do, I have dedicated every day of the last 12 years to studying and understanding It).

        I hope you were not referring to me when you say “self-righteous” because I have explained that I am far from that. I cannot speak for a friend of mine. He makes his own decisions. If you are referring to his kids, they also make their own choices.

        If I were you (just trying to help) I would focus more on myself in stead of pointing out what someone else is or is not doing. You have admitted that your “house” needs a lot of cleaning. Jesus did say to take the plank out of your own eye before offering to help someone else out with the speck in theirs.

      • With Shakespeare, you have to use logic yet with the Bible you just throw logic out the window.

        Erik, that is one of the most accurate things you have ever written.

        I realise you’ll say that I have to read it in context, yada, yada, yada. But seriously – as a comment it stands perfectly as a description of how you (and most believers) read the bible.

      • That is the problem, you twist the words of the Bible like you twist the words that I write. In the context, you will see that I was explaining how people scream to read Shakespeare in context yet when it comes to the Bible, they just clip bits and pieces out of context and try to twist the Bible to their own preconceived ideas. The mass media today is a prime example of this. You have just proved my point.

  4. Pingback: bible prophesy, 21st century, world war 3, WikiGate, debates, target, julian, World, genre, hub | world war 3 predictions

    • Can you elaborate? Is it because I am doing as Jesus said, “being the salt of the earth”? Salt stops decay and immorality causes great decay within society, so what am I doing to give Christians a bad name?

      • Erik, keep doing what youre doing. Youre saying things a lot of christians, including myself, are scared to say at times because of the exact responses you are getting on here. You are quoting exactly from the Bible and that is all you can do. What people take from the truth is their own decision. Thanks for being the “salt of the earth.” I hope more Christians read your blog- its encouraging and motivating- to spread the Word of God. Which is what we were called to do. Whether or not people believe is up to them. But we are responsible for making disciples of all nations- to the ends of the Earth.

      • Thanks Jill. I am just tired of all the lies out there, especially about the Bible. Spread the word about the Word.

        It is so nice to get a positive comment (although extremely rare). I really appreciated it. It was like a breath of fresh air on the blog. The negative can start to wear you down after a while. I am just glad that I stay connected to the source of true joy or I would have given up a long time ago. Be blessed.

  5. Erik,

    Regarding the 4th situation, you say: “The problem is in the word “seized” of verse 28. The original word is trapped, but not necessarily by force. It could be translated as manipulated (with words and promises).”

    I don’t think you’ve thought this statement through very well. If a person uses exploitative, deceptive, or abusive (emotional or mental) tactics in order to coerce someone into committing a sexual act, the fact that the person did not use actual physical force is irrelevant.

    It would behoove you to familiarize yourself with the word “duress” and its implications for your theology in this context. At the moment, it appears that misogyny is alive and well therein.

  6. Okay, let’s say soldiers didn’t rape young virgins, but kidnapping them and take them forcefully as wives isn’t less immoral, right???? As if they enjoyed to be kidnapped and live against their will in a country so-called “blessed by God” :@ Is this justifiable?? Is it good to view women as property?? clearly, for me, they AREN’T people of God, nor warriors of God. I hope it isn’t justifiable in christianity!!! Haha, that’s it, so called “sword of justice” and “sword of war” —- take women and treat them like worthless slaves, perfect!!! fine.. and I should be thankful and grateful to my abductor?? fine…

    • Where do I even begin? First of all, we do not have to “say soldiers didn’t rape young virgins” because there is nothing that implies that they did (nothing in the immediate context, or the entire context of the Torah, in fact, there was severe punishment for rape, death). You are trying to judge the people of Israel by the way that the pagans acted (Greeks, Romans, etc). The pagans did practice the art of rape because they did not fear God.

      Nothing in the text implies that the women were kidnapped and taken by force. That is, again, what YOU assume (wrong again, 0 for 2)

      There is a specific case in the Old T. about a harlot, Rahab, who was taken into the nation of Israel when all of her people were destroyed. It was the blessing of a lifetime because she met the One true God and she became part of the lineage of the Savior of the world, Jesus Christ (pretty good blessing if you ask me). If the Israelites treated prostitutes that well, just imagine how well they treated the virgins.

      God never says that women are to be property of men. That is something that mankind brought to the table so please do not confuse the actions of man and the desires of God. For example, God intended marriage to be between one man and one woman. Mankind started the multiple wives things (which was a bad idea).

      That leaves you at 0 for 3 (in baseball that is not a good game). Maybe you should try again when you are a little better informed.

      • Wow! Thank you Erik for setting things right. I read a website that basically said that God permits rape, the bible is evil. They gave these same verses that the non-believers are using and I knew that wasn’t right. You just proved it! I can see how many people can take the words of the bible and twist their meaning or misread a verse due to not reading the whole chapter. Thank you so much for the help. God bless you! 🙂

      • Thanks for the encouragement. If you read very many of the comments then you will see that there is not too much positive feedback. Glad I could be of service.

  7. Pingback: Are you surprised B. Hussein Obama won, I am not | Erik and Elena Brewer's Weblog

  8. Please allow me to say that if we are to correct or guide one another, we should try to refrain from the insults. Erik, you mentioned the phrase “stupid arguments” in your comment to Notascientist. They aren’t stupid to people who genuinely don’t understand and I am one of those people so please have compassion for me and don’t talk to me like that. OK? In this same response, you mentioned “virgin women”. Why does the Bible focus on a woman’s virginity and not a man’s? I personally feel God is just as concerned about the innocence of both men and women but women had to prove their virginity. Additionally, the women were referred to as harlots and concubines throughout the Bible while men were referred to as husbands. I don’t understand this and it seems sexist to me.

    Why would God, regardless of whether a group of people were bad, command Moses to kill? Thou shall not kill is a commandment? When was the Book of Number compiled; before or after the listing of the Ten Commandments? Why would Moses instruct his people to kill the male children? Why would God? I sincerely don’t understand why God would condone killing of anyone, especially of children and regardless of whether they are evil or not?

    If you had a female child or sister and told her to go with this man so he can be your husband and she refused, that, in my opinion is rape and I don’t understand your point. Forgive my ignorance but please elaborate? If you start talking down on me and using derrogatory language with me, you are no better than the Pharisees and I will wipe the dust off of my feet and move on to a more understanding and compassionate Christian that is willing to patiently take the time to answer my “stupid” questions.

    Why was Lot willing to allow his virgin daughters to be raped by the men in Gensis 19: 6-8? That was potential rape? Lot, according to the Book of Peter, was considered a “pious man”. What kind of “pious” man, never mind, father, would allow his daughters to be thrown to strange men to be raped? That really saddens my heart. I believe Lot raped his daughters later on. The Bible states that the daughters made him drunk and had sex with him so that the lineage could continue but before Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed, they entered the city of Zoar. Are we really supposed to assume no one lived in this city like the next passages claim the women believed? Only Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed, not Zoar or its inhabitants. For some reason, Lot didn’t want to be there so they went and lived in a cave somewhere. In the meantime and in Genesis 19: 27:35, Abraham assessed the destroyed cities and it casts blame on the women for assaulting their father. Again, Lot was a “pious man” yet he lived in a sordid city, was going to give his virgin daughters to the masses to be savagely raped, refused to go to Zoar and had sex with his daughters. If you were drunk out of your mind, wouldn’t you still know you are having sex with your daughters? If not, would you even be able to get an erection? Really? Alcohol is a depressant and most men who drink can’t get erections if they drink excessively. Furthermore, both daughters are mentioned as getting Lot drunk on one occasion. If that is the case, what is the liklihood of both of these women being impregnated by one sexual act? Is it a “miracle” condoned by God? I don’t believe that and don’t understand it. I believe things were covered up in the Bible. Why was the woman who caught in the act of adultery in one of the gospels going to be stoned and not the man? Where was the man? Was he a Pharisee that was being protected?

    Look at Judges 19: 22-30. The man initially offered his “virgin” daughter. Again, you seldom hear any mention of “virgin” men in the Bible. Anyways, they took the concubine because again, a woman that has known more than one husband is a concubine or harlot and the man is a husband….and they killed her BECAUSE they savagely raped her all night. To make matters worse, her body was cut up into 12 pieces so each tribe of Israel could have her. Can you explain that please?

    Thank you for your time and I hope you are patient with me.

    • I appreciate your sincerity. I will answer as best I can.

      There is a difference between asking questions to learn something and asking questions to trap. Jesus had to deal with those who asked questions, not wanting an answer but instead trying to set a trap for Him. He was not very patient with those people. He scolded them with His answers, to the point where many times, they wanted to kill Him after hearing His answer. If you are sincere and want to know, I would love to answer your questions.

      The Bible does focus on male virginity. There are clear references all through the Bible. If you would like, I can put them here.
      When a man took a concubine, he demonstrated that he was not taking his role and responsibilities seriously. When a man took a concubine, he basically said, “I want sex and do not want to be responsible for the children who are a result of my lust and pleasure.” It is shameful for the man to take a concubine.

      Immoral men face the same consequences as immoral women.

      Killing and murder are two different things. God forbids murder not killing. You can kill without murdering. When men go to war they kill, not murder. When a person protects his family and in the process takes the life of the intruder, that is not murder. If a man accidently kills another (an axe head slings off its handle while he is working and hits another person) then he is not guilty of murder. If a man carries out the death penalty for a person who did commit murder, then the executioner has not committed murder.
      The people of the land of Canaan were offering their children as living, burnt sacrifices to their gods, should those who practiced this be held accountable for their actions? What about adults who sexually abuse children, should they be held accountable? These and many more atrocities were being practiced in Canaan. God gave them over 400 years to repent of their actions and they did not. They finally had to pay the price for their actions.

      Calling an argument invalid or stupid is not the same as calling the person stupid. During the time of the Old Testament, the women who were spoils of war were usually raped and killed. God, on the other hand, cared for the women and protected them. He commanded the men to take them as wives instead of raping and killing them. Their lives were spared and they were given the privilege of becoming part of the people of God. As an example, look at Rahab the pagan, harlot, who was included in the lineage of Jesus Christ.

      Why was Lot willing to allow his virgin daughters to be raped by the men in Gensis 19: 6-8?

      Lot had been influenced by the immorality that surrounded him on a daily basis (Peter explains this in one of his epistles). Like Paul explains, bad company corrupts good morals. Lot was corrupted by his environment. His daughters had been influenced as well, to the point where they got their father drunk and had relations with him. Lot did not rape his daughters. In his case, he was the victim, even though he was guilty for his actions and the fact that he got drunk. Sodom and Gomorrah were not the only cities destroyed. Read the text once again.

      Immorality spreads like a virus and that is why we must oppose it on all fronts. If not, then we will pay the price, either directly or via our children.

      In Judges, we see the same problem, immorality was tolerated and it spread throughout the society. When immorality flourishes, women become the victims (look at the sex slaver industry, as well as porn).

  9. Thank you for taking the time to address my questions, Erik but I still have questions. Do you really think Lot’s daughters raped their father and it wasn’t a cover up? Do you think cover ups in the Bible existed? Why, when the woman adulteress was brought to Jesus to be stoned, the man couldn’t be found? Was that a cover up? I believe men are evil, not God. There is a multitude that we don’t understand about God or spirituality because we live in this physical realm and God didn’t disclose certain things to us for reasons we may never know in this lifetime. Regardless, I still believe in Him and The Trinity and I do believe He is fair, good and just. However, I have difficulty dealing with the sexist society in which the bible was written and the poor treatment of women and others including slaves. The woman in the book of Judges was clearly raped. There is no doubt about that. I would like to know why? Why and how could a God fearing society allow women to be savagely raped but men needed to be protected at all costs? Again, the Book of Peter describes Lot as “pious” but he was going to allow his daughters to be raped. That isn’t very pious to me. Anything written about him isn’t very pious so why would this legend about Lot being so pious be continued well into the New Testament? Did they cover up his dirty deeds? Why would God allow women to be taken against their will and be forced to have to have relations with men they didn’t want to be with? Again, I really don’t understand that and construe that as rape. That is why I made it personal and used your family as an example. Did God really condone that or did someone in the Bible say he did? Why would God condone that? Please point out to me the Scriptures that lead you to believe that Zoar was not destroyed also after Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed. I didn’t see it. It states: Genesis 19:23-25 “The sun had risen upon the earth when Lot entered Zoar. Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gommorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens. So he overthrew those cities, all the plain, and all inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. Genesis 19:30 “Then Lot went up out of Zoar and dwelt in the mountains, and his two daughters were with him, for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar”. Again, how pious could this man have been if he initially states to the angels that the mountains are “evil” and asked to go to Zoar? Once he went to Zoar, he decided to go to the mountains anyways. Genesis 19: 18-22, “then Lot said to them, “please no my lords! Indeed now, your servant has found favor in your sight and you have increased your mercy which you have shown me by saving my life; but I cannot escape to the mountains, lest some evil overtake me and I die. See now, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one; please let me escape there (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live”. And he said to him, “See, I have favored you concerning this thing also in that I will not overthrow this city for which you have spoken. Hurry, escape there. For I cannot do anything until you arrive there”. Therefore, the name of the city was called Zoar”. Additionally, Zoar was a city so are we supposed to believe that no one LIVED in this city if it was supposed to be spared?

    I understand your point about murder and killing. Thank you. I thank you for stating it was wrong for men to have all of these wives but if they were so religious, why did they do it? It sounds hypocritical to me. Furthermore, how can I as a Christian, trust hypocritical leaders that contributed to some of the writings in the Bible? God knows my heart. I’m not trying to trap you or have you say something I think you will say just to argue. I really don’t understand these things and would like to ultimately come to terms with these issues and grow as a Christian. I also believe Lot raped his daughters and the reason why the man was not brought to Jesus along with the woman that was going to be stoned to death is because that man may have been a Pharisee or someone the religious leaders wanted to protect. They said she was caught in the very act but the man mysteriously escaped. Interesting. I also wonder how much of the Bible lost its meaning in translation throughout the years. Again, I will always believe in the Trinity but I have doubts about the Bible. I’m sorry. I’m not trying to be disrespectful but simply honest. It doesn’t make sense to me sometimes so that is why I’m asking these questions.

    Please point out the excerpts about male virgins because I honestly haven’t seen them. Thank you.

    Last, please take this for what it is worth, if I called your arguments “stupid”, you would be offended. I think you should refrain from using such words because God put you in a position to guide his sheep. I thank God for that because I need people to help me and religious leaders at my local churches don’t take the time to address my questions. Anyways, when you use words like “stupid”, it puts people on the defensive and makes Christians look bad. “The measure in which we judge others will be used against us”.

    • The text clearly says that the girls enticed their father to drink and get drunk and then lay with him (sexually) while he was drunk. They planned it out ahead of time and took turns on different nights. There is no rape here. The only way you can draw rape out of the situation is if you begin “assuming” instead of letting the text speak for itself.

      There was a reason that the man could not be found, the accusers laid a trap for Jesus but ended up falling in their own trap. They, the teachers of the Law, forgot one major point, that both adulterers were to be punished and not just one. That is why when Jesus said “he who is without sin (in this situation, not in general), cast the first stone”. They were all guilty because they were not interested in justice. They were using deception to try and manipulate the legal process. That was not acceptable then and it is not acceptable now. The only cover up was that they claimed to have caught the two in the act and then only brought one to trial.

      There is much that we do not know about God because our minds cannot wrap around who He is. He has given us enough in His Word and human history to attain enough knowledge of Him to enter in a personal relationship with Him. St. Paul explains that we view God like looking through a dull or cloudy mirror on this side of eternity, yet one day, we will see Him in all of His glory. Having said that, He has already given us all that we need to know for life and godliness (St. Peter)

      You cannot blame the Bible for the sexism and slavery of the day. Sexism and slavery exist because sin exists and humankind is to blame, not God. God teaches us how to live with each other in the midst of a fallen world where things like sexism and injustice will always be present.

      The woman in the book of Judges was raped, by men who had no restrictions when it came to sexuality. They were so engrossed in immorality that homosexuality was prevalent among them. Again, God is not the one to be blamed for man’s sinful state. God did defend the victim. After that event a civil war broke out and if you read the details carefully, the surrounding cities, who were fighting on God’s side, were soundly defeated 3 times before victory took place. Why? I believe it is because they were “tolerant” of the sexual sins that had been taking place for a long time and let the things get out of hand to the point where women became victims of sorry men. When sexuality is not restrained who suffers the most? (the women and children) God also almost utterly destroyed the tribe that sided with the evil men. In other words, God punishes those who practice evil, those who try to cover up evil, and those who are indifferent or tolerant of evil. He punished them all the same way. Why? Because of the victims. He does offer hope to all, even those who are trapped in immorality.

      Pious does not mean perfect. Plus, as Paul says, “bad company corrupts good morals”. Our modern proverb is, “if you lie down with dogs then you rise up with fleas”. Lot was influenced by the evil around him. Peter says that the evil men around him put constant pressure on his soul. He and his daughters were negatively influenced by evil. It can happen to anyone and that is why it must be combated.

      If you have read the Bible then you notice that God shows reality as it is. He keeps nothing back. He shows His people, warts and all.

      Again, you try to blame God for the evil deeds of men. God gave men freewill, the ability to choose to do right and wrong. He tells us what the consequences are ahead of time yet He still allows us to make our own choices. I would say that this is a good thing. If He forced us to be robots then one would ask, “why do we not have free will?”

      29 Thus it came about, when God destroyed the cities of the valley, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when He overthrew the cities in which Lot lived.

      Which cities?
      Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim

      Like the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah with its neighbors (Jeremiah 49:18)

      7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.

      You are not trusting the men who penned the words. You are trusting the original Author, God, who moved these men to write.

      As far as male virginity, there are many passages that could be used but I will limit to one, Proverbs 5 because it is a father’s advice to his son in the area of sexuality.

      15 Drink water from your own cistern And fresh water from your own well. 16 Should your springs be dispersed abroad, Streams of water in the streets ? 17 Let them be yours alone And not for strangers with you. 18 Let your fountain be blessed, And rejoice in the wife of your youth. 19 As a loving hind and a graceful doe, Let her breasts satisfy you at all times ; Be exhilarated always with her love. 20 For why should you, my son, be exhilarated with an adulteress And embrace the bosom of a foreigner ? 21 For the ways of a man are before the eyes of the LORD, And He watches all his paths. 22 His own iniquities will capture the wicked, And he will be held with the cords of his sin. 23 He will die for lack of instruction, And in the greatness of his folly he will go astray.

      His sexuality is to be expressed with his wife and her alone, not some stranger (any person who is not his wife). This cannot be applied if men are not expected to be virgins.
      I understand your concerns and hear your points. I want to point out something very important to you about God and His Word. The two cannot be separated. If God’s Word is not authentic then He is not real. If He does not keep His Word then He ceases to exist. He has tied Himself to His Word. The Holy Trinity cannot be separated from the Word. God is not like a modern buffet, you pick and choose what you like and want. It is a packaged deal and your either accept it all or none of it. These are not my words and ideas. This is what God says about Himself.

  10. One additional comment, Erik. If people come to view your blog, it is for a reason. Maybe they want to argue with you. Maybe the have unsettled questions and are believers or maybe they are self proclaimed agnostics or atheists. Did Jesus, when he was on Earth, call anyones questions stupid? Even though He knew the Pharisee’s were setting a trap for him, didn’t he still try to fulfill His mission and teach people? His teachings are still a focal point today! His message will live on. You wrote this blog over 2 years ago and it is still being used to convey information and teach people. However, the manner in which you interact with others speaks volumes to all of these people that view your sight. Maybe God brought them to you because He knew you would be just the right person to handle the issues. Personally, I’m glad you responded and thank you immensely for that. However, Satan likes to influence people also as well as distort truths and use God’s platform in the process. People viewing your sight might not get your message because Satan is hard at work allowing non-believers to take one further step back because you may have used insulting words or made comments that put people on edge. It is our job as Christians to spread the word, not cast judgement. When we cast judgement on others, we are doing the job of our Heavenly Father and sinning because Jesus warned us not to judge others. May God give you the strength to continue. I sincerely meant no harm.

    • I do apologize if the “stupid argument” phrase offended. That was written in a context to a person who wants to sit as God’s judge yet all he or she does is cut and paste lame arguments from others who claim to be God’s judge with their arguments that they cut and pasted from somewhere else. That argument really is a bad one and shows a real lack of intellectual integrity on the part of those who do the cutting and pasting. I was a bid hard on the person for that very reason. I do apologize for offending. You have valid points and really want to discover things while many already have their minds fixed and could care less about the answer.

      • Erik thanks for creating a website that debunks criticisms that the bible condones rape, murder and other negative actions.

        If you want you could on Good Morning America, or some other talk show spreading the truth that the bible doesnt condone rape, murder, etc.

  11. Eric….thank you so much for taking the time to think about what I wrote and provide biblical excerpts to support your thoughts. The excerpt from Jeremiah helps so I’m less inclined to believe the women were raped by Lot but I’m not fully convinced. How can any father sleep with his daughter? How can any daughter sleep with their father. How can both parties be willing participants? The Bible also said each daughter slept with their father one time so are we supposed to believe that God allowed both women to be impregnated by their father at about the same time? That can be considered a miracle, right? If someone wanted to argue that that is an assumption and the immoral act kept going on and on, night after night, then we have to believe that Lot was a major alcoholic for drinking all of those nights because what is the likelihood of both of them being impregnated on one occasion, never mind Lot being able to perform if he was so drunk. Furthermore, if Lot slept with his daughters, how is he pious? If he drank that much, how is he pious? I know pious doesn’t mean perfect but I don’t believe Lot was even a good person. I’m sorry. Please convince me? As a result, I believe the writers of the Bible may have covered up some of the facts. Do I blame God? Absolutely not. I blame men. Do I believe the Bible was written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Absolutely. However, men could have changed the story as the years went on. Why was the whole story about the woman at the well in the other blog even included if it was added years later? Who added it and under what circumstances was it added? What other excerpts were added that we don’t know about? How can we fully trust the Bible if things are added that weren’t originally there? How can I trust the writers fully if they believe Lot was pious? I don’t believe he was pious. Can a drunkard be pious?

    Please know that I don’t blame God for sexism or slavery. I believe He allows things for a reason but I don’t understand the reasons. I’m not blaming Him. I pray to God I never do! That is NOT fair that you make that comment because I never said it was God’s fault. That is a perfect example of how you are putting people on the defensive. This time, it was by making a statement that is not true. I truly want to know the answers, Eric so I’m being blunt and asking you. Many people read these types of blogs because they are disgusted with religious institutions but still have an interest in knowing God and our purpose on earth. Please be patient with me and help me find the answers?

    Anyways, I still believe the Bible is sexist and I believe it started when the first sin was committed because Adam was ticked off at Eve for encouraging him to sin. Why was Eve’s punishment to bear children in great pain? She supposedly ate an apple so every single woman must endure this horrific pain until the end of time and women’s husband’s “shall rule over you”? Remember that punishment. How many religions, made up of MEN, go to town exploiting that last verse? Look at the Book of Timothy. It sickens me. It also says that God said to the serpent: “And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed”. Remember that punishment. Why was that a punishment for Satan and particularly against women? Look at Adam’s punishment “Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, And you shall eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread……” Genesis 3:12-20. How many men endure their punishment today? How many men cultivate the land? Some people speculate that Eve had sex with the serpent. Look back at the punishments for Eve and Satan. If you get time and would like to start a blog on that, I will definitely be interested in reading it. Anyways, what disturbs me about that whole incident is Adam heard from God Himself to not eat from the tree. Eve got second hand information from Adam and decided to eat (or have sex), who really knows. I believe that is why Satan tempted Eve first because he knew she had second hand information and Satan couldn’t spread his seed with Adam. However, Adam was just as sinful because God told him directly not to eat the fruit yet women get punished more! Why? It makes sense that Eve and the serpent may have had sex. I think later, she had sex with Adam and that is where he sinned. Satan probably taught her how to seduce Adam. Where did the giants in the Bible come from? Cain was the firstborn and killed Able. His lineage supposedly ended with the flood. Why? Was Cain the “demon” child?

    The other blog regarding the woman at the well was extremely informative and I would like to finish reading that within a week. It is so informative that I want to look all of the information up. Excellent blog! I understand that the whole incident was a trap but I also believe that the man was hidden because he was a Pharisee or a good friend of one of the Pharisee’s. I don’t believe the Pharisee’s made it up. I believe there is the possibility that someone may have found the two and told the Pharisee’s but the man usually gets away with his nonsense and the woman gets the blame. Just like Eve.

    Last, if that is the only verse you can find about men and virginity, I’m not impressed. I’m sorry. It doesn’t even state that the man has to be a virgin. Women are specifically told they need to be virgins AND have to prove it by showing the bloody sheets to interested family members the next morning. That is horrible! Throughout the Bible, women have to be modest, be quiet, can be bought, sold, traded, exchanged, beaten, and raped by who?

    Again, Eric, I’m not trying to be disrespectful. My family either has little faith or no faith at all. They ask me very difficult questions that I don’t have the answers to so that is why I turn to sites like this for help. Thank you for your advice and patience.

  12. I am always “amused” to see how atheists pretend to have higher morals and use this as an argument to demolish the single source of objective morality.

    The problem with your false morals is that is absurd. It’s like accusing God of murder because he created gravitation and you stepped over your balcony.

    Those girls where exposed to ritual prostitution, perversions, drugs, children sacrifices etc. Even in their families they didn’t have anything to say about their marriage, their parents chose for them. So they are getting “raped” anyway.

    Those pagan nations were perverted beyond recovery, that’s why God wanted to eradicate them, to prevent the spreading of the evil and to protect the good people.

    So getting girls from such a perverted environment and marrying them to men who are commanded to love them and to treat them nice was a form of saving them and educate them. If the only thing you see here is “rape”, you are just a nitpicking ignorant.

  13. Wow. Are you assuming I’m an atheist, Mens Sana? Are you a Christian? If so, you should obtain the facts about a person by asking them directly for the answers before casting judgement on them. Instead of looking at the speck in my eye, look at the plank in your own. I also find it incredible how others, whether they are Christian or not, feel it necessary to call people names. That is a form of abuse. Look it up in the dictionary. Eric mentions people’s “lame and stupid” arguments which is uncalled for because he is a Christian and you, whether you are a Christian or not, cast judgement on me and call me “nitpicking ignorant”. If this type of exchange continues, I will have to look somewhere else and you will be held accountable to God if you are a Christian because through your hurtful comments, a sheep sincerely seeking to find answers to questions felt forced to leave! Why? Because I’m not tolerating abuse by anyone! I shouldn’t have to and especially on a CHRISTIAN BLOG! Please pardon my “nitpicking ignorance”, Mens Sana! I sincerely came on this blog to seek answers to questions I had. The measure in which you judge others will be used against you.

    God is still good because even though your method of conveying a message wasn’t compassionate, I can understand your point. Thank you!

    • Wow. Where in my post did you find “to Vicky” or “about Vicky”?? This says a lot about how you read. Maybe the plank is in your eye(s).
      Funny how from all the arguments I posted you just picked to complain about the last 2 words, in a sentence that starts with “if”.
      Try to be more calm, read slower, more carefully, and use less exclamation marks. “You will be held accountable to God” too.

  14. This is why I specifically asked you, Mens Sana. Furthermore, unless my computer malfunctioned, the last comment from anyone beside Eric or myself was from Sandy on September 11, 2012 so in all sincerity, what was I supposed to think. If I’m wrong, I can humble myself and apologize but if you were me and you noticed that no one else beside Eric or myself wrote something on the blog since 2012, what would you think? I know I will be held accountable, this is why I asked you first and then I said, “If so”. If you didn’t, then it didn’t apply to you so again, I’m sorry. When you write to people, you don’t address them by name either. Maybe you should. Who was that comment for specifically?

    • My comment was not addressed to you, and it’s easy to see that. The fact that your comment was the last means nothing. You are a little to sensitive and misinterpret a lot. If I wanted to reply to you, my comment would appear as such, indented. Are you new to this? My comment was a general one, about all who think like that. It was not specifically addressed to you and I hope you don’t fit in the description.

  15. @ Mens Sana, your derrogatory comment was uncalled for also, regardless of who it was projected at. It puts people on the defensive. Why do people think they have the right to speak to one another that way? “How atheist pretend to have higher moral standards”. How do you know what standards they have? How can you draw that conclusion if you aren’t judging them? Their false morals are “absurd”? That is like an atheist saying your morals are “absurd”. If someone says your morals and religion are absurd, how does that make you feel? Again, I’m sorry but I think most people would have drawn the same conclusion based on the fact that no one else wrote on the blog in a whole year with the exception Eric and you which was immediately after my comment. Yet, to be fair, I did ask if that question was directed at me and then gave my “if so” response because, believe it or not, I believe the Holy Spirit guided me to ask that question. I initially wasn’t going to. It would have been easier to assume but The Holy Spirit pushed me to be fair and ask you point blank if the question was directed at me.

    Maybe you didn’t fully read my response because I was one of those people with “the absurd” line of reasoning that the women were raped. I can now allow my mind to sway in the opposite direction BECAUSE your point was succinct and seemed to speak directly to me but the delivery wasn’t well received. Thank you again.

    • “How do you know what standards they have?”

      I know from what they say.

      ” If someone says your morals and religion are absurd, how does that make you feel?”

      They say that all the time, even on this page. HOW IT IS is more important than HOW I FEEL. I prefer to debate facts, not feelings.

      ” How can you draw that conclusion if you aren’t judging them?”

      I judge what they say and what they do and I see no problem with that. You’re also judging me, the Bible and the others. Otherwise we wouldn’t debate here.

      This “judging” thing is another misinterpretation, The Bible forbid another type of judging not just any judging.

      I’m sorry if you felt offended, but I think you are a little oversensitive. Look at how much you write about something not important, and nothing about my arguments on the topic.

  16. BACK TO THE TOPIC, calling that “rape” is like calling a surgical intervention “armed assault” or “stabbing”, when you are on the verge of dying.

    Sometimes to be healed you need to do things that hurt: a surgical intervention, to drink a bitter tee etc. But you either do this, or you die.

    God intended to save Midianite women, but for that they needed education, they needed to change their habits radically. Obeying a husband who is commanded to love you and to treat you nicely is not such a bad thing, especially when compared with the alternative (death).

    This universe cannot function if people are let to action against its laws without to suffer the consequences. The normal consequence of sinning is death and this is not just a caprice of God, its how the universe function.

    Also the good people need protection against evil, otherwise the whole human race would be extinct.

    So God has a very difficult job. Like it or not, our duty as dependable and limited human beings is to obey, not to revolt and question every action of God. Face the reality.

  17. Some people are not succinct. I’m working on that. Thank you for that criticism. I needed that reminder and will try to be more concise through my responses with you. I didn’t know about the indents or even notice them to be honest so thank you for the information. If I had known that, I would have known the comment wasn’t directed at me.

    People respond and react to other people’s comments differently and that is not necessarily wrong. If the two greatest commandments are to “love God and each other”, then I interpret that as having respect for all people, including those that don’t agree with our viewpoints which means refraining from insulting and derogatory comments and trying to understand why people pose the questions to begin with. Maybe you should consider that reality.

    I tried to seek religious guidance from actual people in my community for 20 years but wasn’t successful so I’m here. What is wrong with questioning God? I don’t construe questioning things in the Bible as a form of judging it. Why shouldn’t I question things, especially as a woman? Women were treated so poorly in the Bible and that sexist line of thinking is carried over in the NT. They couldn’t walk out of the house with out permission from their father/husband. They couldn’t testify in court unless it was under certain circumstances (i.e., if they were defending themselves on a personal nature such as adultery charges). They were bought through dowries. When a woman gave birth to a male child, she was unclean for one week. If it was a female child, she was unclean for two weeks. C’mon now. That is ridiculous! I don’t believe God made these rules up. I believe man made them up. How do we know God made these rules? I’m pressed for time and have to go to work so I can’t look this up but isn’t Jesus quoted as saying that because people’s hearts became cold, we have all of these rules? Moses was our ruler and made these rules. God allowed him. Just like God allowed women to be treated like property and for other human beings like slaves to be owned. I sincerely don’t believe God intended for any human being to be owned or women to be treated so poorly.

    I thought God wanted all of the people destroyed but some of the men decided to spare the women. If that is the case, why? I will have to look that up. I believe the hearts of men, who also had full say in the laws, were evil and even though God wanted/commanded them to treat women good, they failed. Why else do we have all of these terrible laws about women?

    I will touch on the comment about people needing protection from evil later.

  18. Mens Sana……..Sometimes I can’t be succinct. This is one of those cases. Please read the following below and if you want to address the issues, thank you. If you want to insult me, then please don’t bother because the truth be known, I perceive your comments to be harsh. I’m sorry but I’m being honest. If I’m too sensitive, then I’m sorry but that is who I am and I’m working on it. Those are two of the many planks in my eyes.

    Isaiah 13:15-18 (NIV)

    15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword. 16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives violated.

    17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes, who do not care for silver and have no delight in gold. 18 Their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants, nor will they look with compassion on children.

    Zechariah 14:1-2

    1 A day of the LORD is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls. 2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city.

    2 Samuel 12:11 (NIV)

    11 “This is what the LORD says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight.

    I wanted to look up 2 Samuel 12:11 and stumbled upon these other two excerpts. I am learning to understand the Bible in it’s entirety but it can be challenging because the Book is not in order and it is difficult to understand. With that being said, I can say that I understand why the women were raped in Isaiah 13: 15-18 based on the title of the chapter; Proclamation Against Babylon. Knowing basic history from the Tower of Babel, the people were evil so I had an idea. Reading further into the Chapter, I understood but I don’t understand because why did God essentially torture them? Why didn’t he just kill them in the flood like he did with Noah? I know He said He would never destroy the earth again like that but why didn’t He just kill them if He knew they were no good? Why are evil people allowed to exist at all? Why was Hitler allowed to exist? Why were innocent babies killed also? Was it to teach their parents a lesson? Is that why God allowed my sister to die tragically when she was 12? Was it to teach my parents a lesson?

    The excerpt from Zechariah makes sense on the same argument but doesn’t make sense for the same conclusion. The only difference is God’s people were sinning so they had to be punished. I just don’t understand why God would allow people to suffer like that.

    The excerpt from 2 Samuel 12:11 is still a mystery to me. I’m really sorry. I will tell God on this site that I’m sorry but I can’t, for the life of me, understand why women are treated like complete garbage throughout the Bible. Why do the women always seem to be punished for sexual purposes? Is there any credence to the argument that Eve had sex with the serpent? Please read a comment I made a few days ago.

    You said I shouldn’t question God because it is a form of revolting. Then I guess I should have blind faith? I sincerely want to understand God and I think it is an insult to Him, Jesus, and The Holy Spirit if I label myself as a Christian and don’t even attempt to obtain answers to questions that I have; never mind questions that are posed to me by non-believers. Jesus died on the cross for all of our sins. If my purpose in life is to know, love and serve the Lord and the two greatest commandments are to “love God and each other”, I owe it to God to give Him a pure love that is not tainted with doubts of Him. If the Bible can be proven by other excepts, I want to know the other excerpts so I can free myself of these doubts and worship Him better. It is my duty as a Christian to be genuine and to help others also. How can I help others if I don’t even know or attempt to find the answers myself.

  19. Pingback: Does the Bible condone rape? An Essay. | Happy Christian Apologetics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s