SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Women as Booty of War - OT

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Irreverence

Quote:
Those same laws sentenced the rape victim to death as well... because she didn't "cry out". Just imagine how many children and women were threatened, coerced, or forced into sex with a dagger to the throat - and they were stoned for "not crying out".



If a woman was being raped she would scream. If the person had a knife to the throat obviously that would be taken into consideration.


Quote:
Anglicans and Catholics used the verses on slavery (even from the NT) to condone slave ownership. [i]I see where you're going.[/i]



I'm glad you do cause I'm trying to look at these questions one at a time. ;-)

Quote:
Well, to put the Law in perspective, all of the millions of children, teenagers, and women that have been forced into internet pornography, if they were Jews, and were reassimilated by the Jews, ought to be stoned - along with their manhandlers.



Error begets error. You start off from a false interpretation and it only snowballs. Hopefully you don't really believe some of this stuff? The God of scripture is a God of justice and righteousness- are we to assume that some ladies or men in a class someplace are in a position to counsel God on justice? The problem is their gross ignorance of Him and the Law. The questions themselves strike me as both ignorant [u]and[/u] arrogant. If there is a genuine interest in this topic I will be more than happy to try to share what I know or can research. But if this is an attempt to call God to the carpet as if men were righteous and just I'll have no part of it.

Any discussion I engage in begins with the fear of the Lord. If the person does not have enough sense to reverence their maker I dare not cast pearls before swine. They will turn again and rend me. Fools despise wisdom and instruction. They are too proud to see their own ignorance.

God's word is not a Book to be placed on trial. It is to be prayerfully and reverently studied and searched out. For those who desire to know- God will reveal.

You will likely know that [u]irreverence[/u] is a mechanism employed by folk who sense their guilt before God. Mockers deal irreverently with God and His word. What can bring a person closer to utter ruin than to respond to guilt with mockery and irreverence? What could shut down the channels of grace any more? This is what it is to call God a liar.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/8 18:36Profile
lovedove88
Member



Joined: 2007/4/23
Posts: 7
Harlem

 Re: Irreverence


I think we have to be careful of judging and jumping to conclusions. I fear God that is why I am on a site like this with teaching that promotes the holiness of God. I brought up my concerns with Hosea not to disrepsect God but to have an answer for the hurt women at my school who are not Christians who were almost in tears over this subject. I personally know God so I know he woulcn't condone rape but many do not. Rape and abuse is a sensitive topic so as to protect any sisters on here who have been raped or abused maybe we shouldn't talk about any longer because this conversation is not edifying.

Please know that my questions came out of a general interest in wanting to know how to deal with these text and not out of trying to be irrevant towards God.


_________________
Onleilove

 2007/5/8 21:44Profile









 Re: Irreverence

RobertW said

Quote:
But if this is an attempt to call God to the carpet as if men were righteous and just I'll have no part of it.



I'm not "calling God to the carpet". I'm asking difficult moral questions about the law.

Somewhere on this thread someone pointed out that the law was made to show us how utterly sinful we are. I assume the hundreds of laws were the result of countless sins we had committed.

Quote:
God's word is not a Book to be placed on trial. It is to be prayerfully and reverently studied and searched out. For those who desire to know- God will reveal.



Thanks. I needed to hear that.

Quote:
You will likely know that irreverence is a mechanism employed by folk who sense their guilt before God.



And thanks again. I really needed to hear that, too.

God Bless You RobertW!

 2007/5/9 0:12
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Lovedove's: I brought up my concerns with Hosea not to disrepsect God but to have an answer for the hurt women at my school who are not Christians who were almost in tears over this subject.



I certainly do not feel you are being disrespectful. I tried to give a few thoughts on Hosea earlier. My previous post is directed at the attitude I addressed towards the Old Testament Law in general. It is not uncommon for folk to mock at God's word in the secular world- especially in colleges.

Personally I think an honest reading of the text in Hosea 2 is plain enough. Lots of people have been hurt by lots of terrible things. We all have a story. You have one and I have one. I think we have to keep the blame on the right person though and that person is the one who committed the crime and the devil that inspired Him. The word of God is written to bring God's wisdom to man. We simply cannot in any wise give in to any notion that somehow God is anything other than [u]good[/u].

The whole thread started off as an attack on God's word (so it appeared). Look at the title; it is intended to stir the pot? Women as booty of war? As if God were legislating crimes against humanity or something. So long as the questions come up they almost have to be answered.

If folk are being genuine and want to know the truth they will be reasonable. If they are looking to pick a fight you will know that also. If they accept no answer they are not rational. The challenge is not to allow our experiences (as bad as they are) to somehow indict the word of God. If a professor pointed to the passage to stir the pot- maybe you should have challenged them on the subject. Maybe not? Knowing me I'm sure I would have unless God seriously checked me. We are there to be salt and light.

I would say that the person who has been abused needs to be counseled as much as possible towards knowing that Sin is what causes the hurt she went through. We have to tear down strongholds. [i]We have to tear down these lies that people believe that make them feel safe towards God while in their sin.[/i] We cannot be saved or excused by the hardships we suffer in this life as terrible and painful as they may be. Folk can't keep pulling these things out every time the subject of God comes up as if its an excuse. Just keeping it real here. We have no excuse before God. Our sin is as scarlet. There are people today who are sexual predators and use the excuse that it happened to them as a kid- so now they are doing it. I have heard these kinds of things used in court. The judge does not generally buy it. We are accountable for what we are doing right now and cannot keep looking to the past as an excuse for our life. What we do is what we do and God is going to hold us accountable.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/9 0:14Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
"Why isn't a man who lost his goodies (genitals), and fatherless bastards, acceptable in the congregation of the LORD?"(DEUT 23:1)



I think the question for me is; "Why is [u]any[/u] sinner allowed to draw near to God?" Why were only spotless lambs allowed to be sacrificed and not any lamb? Why did God require a perfect sacrifice? Why a near perfect Priest from a certain Tribe? Why can't the King go into the Holy of Holies? Why the closer to God one seems to get the more perfect they are required to be? Why does everything have to be exactly like God described it?

Why can't animals come into the Temple alive? Does this mean that God is prejudiced against animals? Why was a man of war not allowed to build the Temple- was God against soldiers? Why were Gentiles not even allowed in the Holy Place- did God hate the Gentiles? What about women? So on and so forth. The key, I think, is understanding that there is a protocol for doing things God's way and that in that protocol God is teaching us something. The enemy will try to take each illustration and mix the metaphors until God looks like the devil. The question can be summed up as follows:

Rom 3:29

Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:

Is He the God of women? Yes. Is He the God of illegitimate children? Yes. Is He the God of the other 11 Tribes? Yes. Is He the God of Eunuchs? Yes. Then what is it? We all have certain roles to play, and certain places 'positions' required certain qualifications. It did not mean one person was exalted above the others. It was how it was designed.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/9 0:37Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
"Why can't a man ever have sex with his wife after she was raped?" (DEUT 24:4)



That is not what this passage is about. It is about divorcing a wife and taking her back after she has married and had relations with the other man. If it were a sin for a man to take back his wife simply because she had had relations with another man then forgiveness and restoration of a marriage is impossible in cases of adultery. This passage could never lend to such an interpretation because it is contrary to the character of God.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/9 0:46Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
"Why is a woman 'untouchable' or 'unlovable' if she's had another man, but a man can have more than one wife - and multiple concubines - why is she abominable and he clean?" (DEUT 21:15)



I can't recall any such law except that a [i]priest[/i] was to marry only a virgin woman. Non-virgin unmarried women were not brought into serious jeopardy unless they attempted to lie and say they were virgins when they got married to their husbands, but had in the past given their flower to another (not the man she married). She could be stoned to death for that. But I know of no such law that says she could not be married if there was disclosure.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/9 0:51Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
"If a man marries a woman who's hymen is not in tact - even if it's because she rode horseback or fences, or whatever... ought she really to be stoned?" (DEUT 22:21)



NO! But it is certain that many have used this excuse- even to this day. That is a terrible thing also if it was a lie. The truth will come out sooner or later.

Again, someone would make note of it when and if it happened. The girl would tell someone out of fear if nothing else. I know of no case where anyone was stoned for this in the scriptures.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/9 0:56Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
"If a woman's raped in the city, but is petrified with fear and doesn't cry out... ought she to be stoned?" (DEUT 22:24)



She could cry out now or later. If a person came by and caught the people in the act then the eye-witness would have seen the knife to the throat. If she saw someone and they made eye contact or some visual contact she could have yelled at that time. HELP! HELP!! Otherwise there would be no witness and she could not be stoned. The law was to make distinction between rape and adultery. I think it was a quite effective law that demonstrates the wisdom of God. Sort of like the wisdom Solomon had in asking to divide the child. He knew how people would react and so also with this law. A person who is being raped will REACT in desperation and panic.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2007/5/9 1:02Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Quote:

"Why can't a man ever have sex with his wife after she was raped?" (DEUT 24:4)



That is not what this passage is about. It is about divorcing a wife and taking her back after she has married and had relations with the other man. If it were a sin for a man to take back his wife simply because she had had relations with another man then forgiveness and restoration of a marriage is impossible in cases of adultery. This passage could never lend to such an interpretation because it is contrary to the character of God.



Yet after Absalom "went in unto", or raped, David's concubines in the sight of Israel, the Bible says David took those women and "put them in ward", under lock and key - and they never knew another man.

I assume this was done out of consideration of that law.

 2007/5/9 3:32





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy