4 ms·

You are absolutely correct. I’ve heard many people quote Leviticus as evidence that homosexuality is wrong but then also think it’s an abhorrent idea that a wo

You are absolutely correct. I’ve heard many people quote Leviticus as evidence that homosexuality is wrong but then also think it’s an abhorrent idea that a woman who is a virgin that is raped must marry her rapist.

Chris2048 3y ago
Can you give the reference, there is enough ambiguity in the OT that it's required: https://cbmw.org/2018/03/05/did-old-testament-law-force-a-woman-to-marry-her-rapist/ https://cbmw.org/2018/03/05/did-old-testament-law-force-a-wo... But that aside, there is also the issue that circumstances have changed: > Among ancient cultures virginity was highly prized, and a woman who had been raped had little chance of marrying. These laws forced the rapist to provide for their victim. Paternity can now be determined far more easily, so virginity is no longer as prized. Women can more easily within society "be cared for", either by themselves, or the state; so its not as important to force a marriage. Divorcing from this context is a misrepresentation of the original law and its intention.
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  All you need to know is that nobody goes into the much depth for verses they like, such as something motivational and heartwarming in Psalms The answer is “it’s open to interpretation”, specifically your interpretation of the way you want to have power over others, or let them have power over you so lets just fast forward to that part and move on. unless you want to control people, in which case I’m amused
- synetic 3y ago
  Here’s the NIV version: If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. The people who wrote the NIV know a lot more than me about translating texts and whatnot. Apparently the immutable Word of God is not so clear when competing experts disagree over the meaning of verses dealing with morality. I’ll bet everyone who uses Leviticus to condemn homosexuality isn’t as nuanced on the meaning of those verses as you are on this one. It is curious that you chose to write about the nuance on interpreting the verse in Deuteronomy but not the one in Leviticus. This undergirds my point about picking and choosing. Furthermore, when you write things like: Paternity can now be determined far more easily, so virginity is no longer as prized. Women can more easily within society "be cared for", either by themselves, or the state; so its not as important to force a marriage. Divorcing from this context is a misrepresentation of the original law and its intention. You implicitly suggest that God was unwilling or incapable of telling his people to change their ways to be more moral/correct. One of the underpinnings of most Christians’ beliefs is the idea of God’s immutability and His righteousness. Are you suggesting that what God once considered moral is no longer moral?
  - Chris2048 3y ago
    > Apparently the immutable Word of God sure, but are you talking about the word of god, or the words in the bible. I was going off the KJB, as derived from Hebrew, so it would make more sense to look at the original Hebrew. I'm not sure why you pay more attention an translation produced by an American businessman in the 70s; The previous link I provided even discusses the issue of "ḥāzaq" vs "tāpas". The WP page for the NIV even details the various scholars taking issue with it, e.g.: > Mark Given, a professor of religious studies at Missouri State University, criticized the NIV for "several inaccurate and misleading translations" as many sentences and clauses are paraphrased, rather than translated from Hebrew and Greek. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_International_Version https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_International_Version Here is something similar in NIV without the word rape: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+22%3A16&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+22%3A16&... see https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/dooq5l/the_niv_makes_an_serious_obvious_translation/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/dooq5l/the_ni...
    - synetic 3y ago
      Therein lies the rub. All translations have critics. All of them are wrong in some way according to some expert. Pick the one you like. Pick the translator you like. While you quote a professor who knows much more than me it doesn’t mean much since equally qualified experts were involved in writing the NIV and every other version. And they translated it differently than this professor would have. What we have is a bunch of experts disagreeing with each other. What I’m left with is one immutable fact: the Bible - whichever version you choose - is wrong according to some expert who is a Christian.
      - Chris2048 3y ago
        Here's the rub-a-dub: whatever criteria you use to determine someone an "expert", they can't add any more information than their source material. AFAIK a lot of later bible are based on KJB - How can anyone, expert or otherwise, add information to the KJB (bar consulting Hebrew)? > equally qualified experts were involved in writing the NIV.. Then why are you dedicated to one particular translation if you think there is such ambiguity?

Chris2048 3y ago

Can you give the reference, there is enough ambiguity in the OT that it's required: https://cbmw.org/2018/03/05/did-old-testament-law-force-a-woman-to-marry-her-rapist/ https://cbmw.org/2018/03/05/did-old-testament-law-force-a-wo... But that aside, there is also the issue that circumstances have changed: > Among ancient cultures virginity was highly prized, and a woman who had been raped had little chance of marrying. These laws forced the rapist to provide for their victim. Paternity can now be determined far more easily, so virginity is no longer as prized. Women can more easily within society "be cared for", either by themselves, or the state; so its not as important to force a marriage. Divorcing from this context is a misrepresentation of the original law and its intention.

yieldcrv 3y ago
All you need to know is that nobody goes into the much depth for verses they like, such as something motivational and heartwarming in Psalms The answer is “it’s open to interpretation”, specifically your interpretation of the way you want to have power over others, or let them have power over you so lets just fast forward to that part and move on. unless you want to control people, in which case I’m amused
synetic 3y ago
Here’s the NIV version: If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. The people who wrote the NIV know a lot more than me about translating texts and whatnot. Apparently the immutable Word of God is not so clear when competing experts disagree over the meaning of verses dealing with morality. I’ll bet everyone who uses Leviticus to condemn homosexuality isn’t as nuanced on the meaning of those verses as you are on this one. It is curious that you chose to write about the nuance on interpreting the verse in Deuteronomy but not the one in Leviticus. This undergirds my point about picking and choosing. Furthermore, when you write things like: Paternity can now be determined far more easily, so virginity is no longer as prized. Women can more easily within society "be cared for", either by themselves, or the state; so its not as important to force a marriage. Divorcing from this context is a misrepresentation of the original law and its intention. You implicitly suggest that God was unwilling or incapable of telling his people to change their ways to be more moral/correct. One of the underpinnings of most Christians’ beliefs is the idea of God’s immutability and His righteousness. Are you suggesting that what God once considered moral is no longer moral?
- Chris2048 3y ago
  > Apparently the immutable Word of God sure, but are you talking about the word of god, or the words in the bible. I was going off the KJB, as derived from Hebrew, so it would make more sense to look at the original Hebrew. I'm not sure why you pay more attention an translation produced by an American businessman in the 70s; The previous link I provided even discusses the issue of "ḥāzaq" vs "tāpas". The WP page for the NIV even details the various scholars taking issue with it, e.g.: > Mark Given, a professor of religious studies at Missouri State University, criticized the NIV for "several inaccurate and misleading translations" as many sentences and clauses are paraphrased, rather than translated from Hebrew and Greek. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_International_Version https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_International_Version Here is something similar in NIV without the word rape: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+22%3A16&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+22%3A16&... see https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/dooq5l/the_niv_makes_an_serious_obvious_translation/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/dooq5l/the_ni...
  - synetic 3y ago
    Therein lies the rub. All translations have critics. All of them are wrong in some way according to some expert. Pick the one you like. Pick the translator you like. While you quote a professor who knows much more than me it doesn’t mean much since equally qualified experts were involved in writing the NIV and every other version. And they translated it differently than this professor would have. What we have is a bunch of experts disagreeing with each other. What I’m left with is one immutable fact: the Bible - whichever version you choose - is wrong according to some expert who is a Christian.
    - Chris2048 3y ago
      Here's the rub-a-dub: whatever criteria you use to determine someone an "expert", they can't add any more information than their source material. AFAIK a lot of later bible are based on KJB - How can anyone, expert or otherwise, add information to the KJB (bar consulting Hebrew)? > equally qualified experts were involved in writing the NIV.. Then why are you dedicated to one particular translation if you think there is such ambiguity?