Help needed re the Levitical Law

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh, I found that very helpful. It constantly amazes me how many errors are in our translations. More and more I'm going to the original languages and coming to my own conclusions.

bb,

p.

How can you be sure that the Hebrew and Greek copies you are reading from are anymore accurate than the English translations? Unless you have a copy of the original, I would suggest you are at no more advantage reading the Hebrew and Greek than someone is with a KJV Bible and an Abington-Strong's Concordance with Greek and Hebrew dictionary for a reference. It was translated from the Textus Receptus, which I believe was the original Word of God. Since you cannot find an original copy of the TR today, I don't believe you are at an advantage when it comes to accuracy reading Hebrew or Greek.

English is incapable of communicating the various nuances in Hebrew in a single word or phrase. . And Hebrew is far more precise than English, as well.

[Guest shiloh357]

This atheist friend of yours is correct about the difference between the woman who was betrothed and the one that was a virgin. There is no place in this passage that gives the death penalty to someone who rapes a single woman who is not engaged or married. While it has been stated by some that it does, I haven't seen any scripture to back that up.

The OT does not address every possible sin that could be committed in every possible scenario that cold arise. It doesn't have to. Rape was punishible by death regardless of the marital state of woman involved.

There is a death penalty imposed to someone who rapes a married or engaged woman, and there was a financial penalty to the one who rapes a single woman, to be paid to the girl's Father. In addition, the person had to marry the woman and could not put her away ever. This is plain to me.

The betrothal price was paid to father by the man who had mutually consentual sex with his daughter. It does not say he paid that price if the single girl was raped. One passage is talking about rape, and the other about consentual sex.

[methinkshe]

Shiloh,

I had just begun to formulate an answer for my atheist questioner when I checked the NIV translation and was stopped in my tracks.

Here is the NIV translation and as you will see, in verse 28, "rape" is used where the KJV translates as "lay hold on".

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death

[anitarose]

I don't like the NIV translation for various reasons anyway, so I would have to agree with you.

You might go to various Jewish websites and ask the question of the rabbis there. I happen to frequent a site called aish.com. It's very simple to use. Go to the "ask a rabbi" section and submit the question there. You will get an answer.

a.

[methinkshe]

I don't like the NIV translation for various reasons anyway, so I would have to agree with you.

You might go to various Jewish websites and ask the question of the rabbis there. I happen to frequent a site called aish.com. It's very simple to use. Go to the "ask a rabbi" section and submit the question there. You will get an answer.

a.

Thanks very much for the web link - I may just do as you suggest, but I'll just wait to see what Shiloh has to say first since he has been so helpful in the matter.

I'm most grateful to you.

And I'm glad that you are in agreement re the NIV. My late father always used to say that it was a pernicious translation, and I am now learning exactly why.

[Arthur Durnan]

As a New Testament Evangelical Christian, I'm not under the Old Covenant of the Mosaic structure intended for the literal nation of Israel. Nor do I have to travel to the (long gone) Jewish Temple in Holy Jerusalem in order to render praise & worship to the Messiah-Savior. AMEN & AMEN!

http:arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh,

I had just begun to formulate an answer for my atheist questioner when I checked the NIV translation and was stopped in my tracks.

Here is the NIV translation and as you will see, in verse 28, "rape" is used where the KJV translates as "lay hold on".

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death

[kross]

As I read it, this series of laws is dealing with adultery.

I believe that it is clear that the greater crime in GOD's eyes is the crime of sex outside of marriage. Thus, I feel it is indeed referring to the rape of a virgin. The only way for her not to be shamed for the rest of her, and the only way to ensure that a woman so treated would be married, is to force the rapist to marry her.

This may not fit into our society, but it did fit into theirs.

The question I have for the OP is, what point is your questioner making? Is there a place in the scripture that states the rapist should be treated in a different way than what is written here? Or is the questioner suggesting that because our laws do not reflect this law, that GOD has s0omehow changed HIS mind about this?

I will add that rape today is an act of violence against women. It was not likely to be an act of violence as much as an act of uncontrolled passion bach in the day.

[traveller]

I will add that rape today is an act of violence against women. It was not likely to be an act of violence as much as an act of uncontrolled passion bach in the day.

What do you base this on?

[Guest shiloh357]

I believe that it is clear that the greater crime in GOD's eyes is the crime of sex outside of marriage. Thus, I feel it is indeed referring to the rape of a virgin. The only way for her not to be shamed for the rest of her, and the only way to ensure that a woman so treated would be married, is to force the rapist to marry her.

This may not fit into our society, but it did fit into theirs.

No, it didn't.

I will add that rape today is an act of violence against women. It was not likely to be an act of violence as much as an act of uncontrolled passion bach in the day.

I am sorry, but that is just wrong on any level.