Israeli Academic: Raping Palestinian Women Would Deter Future Attacks

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Let's try different translations of the text, maybe they'll help you?​

Deuteronomy 22 (NIV)

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her,

Deuteronomy 22 (NLT)

23 "Suppose a man meets a young woman, a virgin who is engaged to be married, and he has sexual intercourse with her. If this happens within a town,

Deuteronomy 22 (ESV)

23 “If there is a betrothed virgin, and a man meets her in the city and lies with her,

Nope........​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

What about here:

Bad translations are bad...........like your debating skills........​

Deuteronomy 21

10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive,
11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;
12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;
13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.
14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.

What you aren't aware of is that at that time, women could REFUSE to consummate the 'marriage'. They would then be released.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7075.html

..................Reading IS Fundamental.

You get an 'E' for effort.​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Keep trying. You don't know the text well enough to debate the issue and google won't help you.

I did warn you..........​

 

[Type Username Here]

You make this almost too easy for me. I'll give you some time to edit out your posts again before I get home and decimate your argument one last time.

You know where the edit button is.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

You make this almost too easy for me.

If it were 'easy' you'd have been able to prove your assertion by now instead of posting smilies and walls of text.

This is what happens when you lie.

EDIT: ....and use fallacious arguments.

​

 

[Type Username Here]

If it were 'easy' you'd have been able to prove your assertion by now instead of posting smilies and walls of text.

This is what happens when you lie.

EDIT: ....and use fallacious arguments.

​

You just don't know what ether is coming your way. Go ahead and edit your posts again. This time I took screenshots.

 

[The Real]

Bad translations are bad...........like your debating skills........​

What you aren't aware of is that at that time, women could REFUSE to consummate the 'marriage'. They would then be released.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7075.html

..................Reading IS Fundamental.

You get an 'E' for effort.​

The passage you quoted seems to suggest that the man can release the woman if HE has no delight in her. It doesn't say anything about her consent. Regardless, I did a cursory search for rape laws in the book. This is what I found:

...

...

Not much in the book about rape, really, just a few pages, and nothing about the treatment of women acquired through war who were raped/married.

 

[Type Username Here]

Bad translations are bad...........like your debating skills........​

What you aren't aware of is that at that time, women could REFUSE to consummate the 'marriage'. They would then be released.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7075.html

..................Reading IS Fundamental.

You get an 'E' for effort.​

So this man googled an image of this book, obviously without having read it. Because if he truly read it, he would understand exactly what Satlow had to say:

Page 127-128 in Chapter 5:

 

[Type Username Here]

The passage you quoted seems to suggest that the man can release the woman if HE has no delight in her. It doesn't say anything about her consent. Regardless, I did a cursory search for rape laws in the book. This is what I found:

...

...

Not much in the book about rape, really, just a few pages, and nothing about the treatment of women acquired through war who were raped/married.

You b*stard. Just posted this right before I did.

FunkDoc has been accusing me of misinterpreting the text while the credible author he himself posted acknowledges that rape was meant.

Self ether is the worst ether there is.

 

[Type Username Here]

Checkmate

 

[Type Username Here]

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

The passage you quoted seems to suggest that the man can release the woman if HE has no delight in her. It doesn't say anything about her consent. Regardless, I did a cursory search for rape laws in the book. This is what I found:

Exactly my point. 'Rape' means 'rape'. In order for a 'marriage' to be consummated, the woman must submit to sexual intercourse. If that does not occur, either due the woman's refusal or due to the man's impotence, the marriage can be declared null and void and the woman released or she would get a certificate of divorce known as a get. Women at that point in time were basically little more than property, but their worth was contained in reproduction, which is why so much emphasis was placed on virginity.

If you can't tell the difference between 'rape' and 'seduced' (which is why I keep harping on the terminology) then you have issues.

Outside of marriage, sexual intercourse was considered 'immoral'.

Thanks for proving my point.


​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Now, again, where in the Bible is 'rape' condoned?

​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

​