Jump to content
IGNORED

Dinah and Deuteronomy 22:28


Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  104
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  3,776
  • Content Per Day:  1.29
  • Reputation:   4,746
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  03/31/2016
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, maryjayne said:

Great. I ask a genuine question and get called a victim blamer. Thanks.

If I have misconstrued what you were trying to say, then please correct me.  I've done that very thing this past month and hurt someone's feelings.

Help me understand what you were saying about her choice and deliberate actions putting her in harm's way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  69
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  1,625
  • Content Per Day:  0.80
  • Reputation:   2,033
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/10/2018
  • Status:  Offline

Easy @pinacled, maryjayne was just asking a genuine question. So what if she didn't read the entire thread? Be cool. 

@maryjayne I think your question was fair and appropriate. I'm sure you're not suggesting anything by it or being disparaging.  Please, do not be discouraged by asking difficult or provocative questions, ever! 

 

Edited by Tzephanyahu
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  69
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  1,625
  • Content Per Day:  0.80
  • Reputation:   2,033
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/10/2018
  • Status:  Offline

7 minutes ago, maryjayne said:

Thanks, I am not a Bible scholar. I was reaching out to search for knowledge on what was normal female behaviour of the time.

I shared my understanding so I can be corrected if it was wrong. I did not expect such harshness from others. 

Shooting down searchers of knowledge is rather a shock.

I will think hard about asking again.

One of replies to me seems to be to someone else post.

Shalom Maryjayne

I know. I have run into undue backlash for asking questions before as well. But do not be discouraged. There are still many people in the forum that are very open to difficult topics and questions. You will always get some who reach incorrect conclusions quickly though - it's the nature of online forums. 

Please continue to ask, seek and knock on any matter and topic, however difficult or provocative - that's how you will become a Bible Scholar.  You will be misunderstood by many along your way, but you and Yahweh know what is in your heart and motives.

Love & Shalom 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  69
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  1,625
  • Content Per Day:  0.80
  • Reputation:   2,033
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/10/2018
  • Status:  Offline

Let's keep peace everyone. I think this subject is emotionally charged and so our replies might be misread with their intention. 

Let's all take extra care with how we respond from here on and overlook what has been said, which may have been in haste or phrased incorrectly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  23
  • Topic Count:  133
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,864
  • Content Per Day:  0.62
  • Reputation:   2,596
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  08/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

12 hours ago, pinacled said:

If you had read the entire thread or not before responding, reveals that you are lacking.

The entire premise of the incident of nonconsent was disproved on the first page. Then details of hebrew context were given by someone blessed in knowledge and integrity.

I strongly suggest reading the entire thread before writing implactive post. Sincerity comes from listening to others and then responding according to the conversations flow of Truth. Any response other than such will be met with correction for interrupting. 

Do not continue to pursue a topic of nonconsent with various avenues of hypothecal scenarios, you will lose trust from the readers.

Now then,

Having brought Naomi and Ruth into the discussion was understood as an implication because that is how you presented the thought. How much do you know of them? I ask because there is value in discussing Ruth and her relations in context to the thread topic.

Keen Eyes

First I want to address remarks by pinacled

No one is required to read every post or even every thread on a message board before posting anything. A lot of folks do not have time to do so. Asking for clarification is certainly permissible and sometimes necessary in a discussion. People are allowed to post as they please as long as the posts themselves do not violate the terms of service. If there is something amiss, the forum mods will take care of it.

In the story of Dinah and Shechem,

we need to look a lot closer at Shechem's and Hamor's scheme. She was the daughter of Jacob a very wealthy man. The Hivites had much to gain wealth wise through an acquisition of Jacob's daughter. The Hivites, thought that Jacob and his son's weren't likely to consent to giving her to the them, Shechem defiles Dinah thinking that since she is now defiled and simply a financial pawn, her family won't take her back and not likely to say no to the marriage proposal. Hamor and his son wasn't really interested in Dinah, but her families wealth. As you read through the story, Dinah's brother's weren't about to let the Hivites have their sister irregardless of the defilement. She did not have to live with her rapist. What upset and worried Jacob was the method in which they chose to avenge their sister. Of how that would look to the neighboring communities.

Genesis 34:23 Won't their livestock, their property and all their other animals become ours? So let us agree to their terms, and they will settle among us."

As to maryjaynes question

It needs to be understood that Naomi's husband and two son's died while in the land of Moab. Naomi, had no choice but to go back to the town of Bethlehem since she had no one to care for her. Was a matter of survival. The one daughter in law, went back to her parents home. Ruth however, felt it necessary and very important to stay with her mother in law, Naomi. Scripture says there were others out in the field as well, so she was NOT alone while gleaning.

Ruth 2:9, 10 So Boaz said to Ruth, "My daughter, listen to me. Don't go and glean in another field and don't go away from here. Stay here with the women who work for me. Watch the field where the men are harvesting, and follow along after the women.

 

 

  • Oy Vey! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  23
  • Topic Count:  133
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,864
  • Content Per Day:  0.62
  • Reputation:   2,596
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  08/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, pinacled said:

And a greater than shlomo offered nourishment to those in need of bread.

I imagine a lack of hospitality ensued during shechem and dinahs consentual union. With circumstantial discretion ya'akov acted and spoke with Wisdom concerning His daughter and inheritance.

Haggadah compliments Halakhah.

Keen Eyes

In the previous chapter, Jacob had bought from them a plot of ground from the Hivites. If there was any ill will between the two, I don't think that a king and his son would leave the city to meet with Jacob and Jacobs sons, plus an army of Jacobs male servants by themselves without bringing with them an army of men from the city for protection. The two went alone.

What consensual union? There was nothing consensual about it. Shechem flat out raped Dinah. The incident of Shechem's scheme had to do with Jacob's vast wealth. Jacob had vast amounts of sheep, goats, camels, cows, donkey's and servants. And the Hivites saw all that Jacob had and wanted all of it for themselves. The Hivites thought they could force Jacob to stay in the land, through marriage and thus gain for themselves all of Jacob's wealth.

Genesis 34:2

(NIV) When Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, the ruler of that area, saw her, he took her and raped her. 

(ESV) And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he seized her and lay with her and humiliated her.

(NASB) When Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he took her and lay with her by force.

(KJV) And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and defiled her.

(HCSB) When Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, a prince of the region, saw her, he took her and raped her.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  23
  • Topic Count:  133
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,864
  • Content Per Day:  0.62
  • Reputation:   2,596
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  08/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

Maryjayne

 

talking about Jacobs son's Simeon and Levi

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  56
  • Topic Count:  1,664
  • Topics Per Day:  0.20
  • Content Count:  19,763
  • Content Per Day:  2.39
  • Reputation:   12,160
  • Days Won:  28
  • Joined:  08/22/2001
  • Status:  Offline

Maybe we can be nice and respectful towards each other?Please don't get  personal or rude?( The person who is snarky will understand the message of this post ..  

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  46
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  944
  • Content Per Day:  0.22
  • Reputation:   170
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/05/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/20/1980

On 8/1/2019 at 6:39 PM, Jayne said:
Quote

"If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days."

Just a reminder here.  The King James, ESV, NASB, NLT, ASV, and NKJV do not say rape.

[...]

In the Bible, "lay with her" is primarily consensual.

Why would God institute all of this hullabaloo over shekels of silver and marriage with a violent rapist when God had JUST said that a rapist must be put to death in verse 25.

A man who rapes a woman and is forced to marry her will rape her again and again.  Time has proven that over and over.  Marital rape is really a "thing".  I've listened to two women who suffered this.  Women who would not seek help from the police for fear they would be killed.

Marriage won't stop the violence.

 

 

Hi Jayne,

I love your effort for the case of young girls and women!

You've done a great job pointing out that Naomi indeed travelled alone great distances, as did Hagar in Genesis 21! Or the lady in Highsong 1:6 (keeper of the vine)?

 

Just a little note: if Deuteronomy 22:28 is not rape - then what is rape? It says "seizes". When you call it consensual than every rapist might just laugh and say "no no, I just seized her - had nothing to do with rape! ". It would be a cop-out!

Or imagine the following situation. A young girl comes to you entrusting herself to you telling you the same exact story as has happened in Deuteronomy 22:28. And then? If seizing is not rape, then how should this girl get to the conviction that he did forget to ask her?

 

(Verse 25 is about engaged women.)

 

As you say: marital rape is really a thing. Agreed absolutely. But marital "seizing" is what? (It's rape, too, unless the woman said "seize me, please!" - my opinion)

In my opinion, it's just wise from God to avoid the word of rape here (I mean the same word used in the Dinah case). So this makes people think about consensuality.

 

But please feel encouraged to go on thinking about that verse and fighting for the case of young girls& women. You do have a great potential, I feel!

Thomas

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  5
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  33
  • Content Per Day:  0.02
  • Reputation:   42
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/31/2019
  • Status:  Offline

Joyce Meyer has a program called projectGRL.org She teaches young girls in the USA and in third world countries about Jesus Christ's love, to love and respect themselves, to read the Bible and pray and take care of their bodies, minds and souls. It is a good program. I watch Joyce Meyer's preaching on week days at 9:30 in the morning.  What makes me sad is that the ancient Bible laws do not respect and empower women. We are treated like chattel. A lot of the detailed laws outside the ten commandments seem petty and unfair. God expected old testament Jews to obey all those detailed prezise nitty-gritty laws? No wonder they failed and disobeyed! Well, the worse thing is the Hebrews practiced idol worship, which is really bad, they could have at least tried to obey the basic 10.

 

I wonder if lust or imagining romance stories, is as bad as adultery, or taking the Lord's name in vane, coveting, drawing pictures of fairies or mermaids, could be graven images, putting my own dreams, imaginations, wants, desires, ahead of God, Bible study, prayer, if that could be idol worship, I have told white lies for convience, to protect myself or someone I love, I have gotten really angry with people, especially some very bad, evil people and have wished they were dead, is that like murder according to jesus? And maybe I have accidentally stolen a pen or a pencil  or paper clip. So I guess I am guilty of breaking the 10 commandments. 

 

That is why I need Christ's blood shed on the cross to redeem me of my sins just like everyone else.  Back in Bible days women needed good men to protect them from bad men. That's why they had laws about women submitting and obeying their husbands. The laws against adultery made sure that the children men had with their wives really belonged to their husbands. If a woman was raped, and she was engaged or married, their was the worry that she could become pregnant with another man's baby. The rapist was taking over another man's property. I don't think God intended for women to be thought of as property.  That was something that happened with the middle eastern culture. I think it was a trick of the devil. 

 

About the Dinah incident, this was in the book of Genesis, the law of Moses had not happened yet. So that marry your rapist law had not been given yet as part of the detailed law God gave to Moses, so Jacob and his sons did not have that law yet, and neither did Shechem. I think Shechem lusted after Dinah, and his city must have been quite wealthy, so Jacob would benefit from Shechem's wealth, and in return Shechem would benefit from Jacob's wealth, all of his livestock.  It was mutual benefits. 

  • Oy Vey! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...