- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Duchess64
Me:
"I have heard though that in ancient times when two nations were at war, the women would
purposely make themselves look beautiful and desirable IN CASE their people were defeated."
--Sonship
[quote]
Contrary to this fantasy, there's ample historical evidence that women and girls often preferred to commit suicide (or ask their men to kill them) rather than be captured and raped by their enemies.
I did not mean to imply that this was ALWAYS the case.
I did not mean to communicate that NO excepts ever existed.
Of course Masada in Israel is a famous example of mass suicide preferred to capture. So first off, my point was not that there were no exceptions to "Making the best of being captured if defeat is inevitable. "
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Sonship seems to have a fantasy that conquered women looked forward to being
raped almost as much as the conquering soldiers looked forward to raping them.
The law as Moses delivered to Israel was that captured womens next event to assimilation into the conquering Israelite society was the mandatory shaving, nail cutting, donning mourning cloths, and spending a long time in closure.
Now if you want to argue that some Israelites disobeyed the law of Moses given to him by God, I won't argue against that. But at least we see God's intention in designing the LAW for captive women in warfare in the Canaanite conquest.
It was understood that part of the payment for victorious soldiers (who often were
paid little) when a city fell was to enjoy seizing possessions, including desirable women.
I have to look more on a case by case bases. You should know that, for instance, NOTHING ... was to be a spoil from the cursed city of Jericho at God's command.
And even THERE Rahab the harlot and her family (a house of prostitution) were saved. She married Boaz and was counted as an ancestress of David the King and of Christ the Messiah.
Its hard for me to jump to some of the conclusions skeptics like. So while I hear you all, I also have to sometimes go on a case by case examination in the Old Testament.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Does Sonship fantasize that, after watching her father and brothers killed, a young virgin could 'relax and enjoy' being raped perhaps one hundred times (five minutes per turn) in one night by the soldiers who had just killed them? Even if she could survive her physical injuries, would she not wish that she were dead rather than become the sex slave or submissive concubine (at best) of a conquering warrior?
Since you're missing the point that the law of God was that the captive women could not be treated as sex slaves, we have a lack of communication here.
I have no fantasies that WAR as then so now, is not still a terrible thing for all around. God made provisions for some of the ills of warfare which I think were more ethical.
Now if gang rape was on the heart of God, you can explain the tragedies which befell the Benjaminites for their unbridled lust in the book of Judges. If Jehovah was so much in favor of gang rapes why did He have the other Israelite tribes SORELY chastise the Benjaminites in Judges 20:1 - 21:25 for the gang rape of the man's concubine in 19:25-28?
The incident became a national tragedy and an occasion of severe punishment to the entire nation, especially the tribe of Benjamin which was almost wiped out and discontinued for the crime.
Do we see God looking the other way?
Do we see God condoning or pleased with the gang violation of the woman ? No.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Trivializing rape is not that far off from endorsing rape. Right.
I thought you held this holy book as being direct from your god ?
The penalties for crimes come from your god ? Right.
Or perhaps, just perhaps, much of this holy book is a manmade, not divine, construct.
I see no trivialization of rape in the law of Moses.
I see no sanctioning it either.
I see provisions being made should some sinful man violate a women. Most of those words seemed aimed at protecting the rights of the woman.
I also see inherent self control being prescribed in the divine law. For example, the command not to try to have sexual relations with a woman in her menstrual cycle.
God is saying ie. "Israelite men, you are to have some self control. No unbridled rampant fulfilling of your physical appetites concerning your wife."
So let me get an overview of your line of reasoning here:
1.) What is written as history in the Old Testament (generally) did not happen. How much did and how much didn't is left vague - generalized - open ended. The net effect is " Generally, a lot of this simply never happened."
2.) What is recorded there portrays God has less of a Person of moral perfection then you and some critics you refer to.
3.) Atheism is apparently in the backround. But without God you borrow from SOME kind of moral absolute and level criticisms that God's behavior is morally inferior.
Inferior to what? Inferior to some herd mentality only designed to cause genes to be passed on for evolutionary survival - truth taking quite secondary or non-existent part ?
Let me guess now. You must be vehemently pro-life too ?
We're arguing here about slaughter and violation of women's rights.
Should I assume you are also an anti-abortion activist, or at least very displeased with the millions of unborn women slaughtered in the wombs of women in more "civilized" modern societies ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
20 Feb 19
@Duchess64
Can you site maybe two CONTEMPORARIES or near contempories of Josephus that contradicted Josephus on this account of Masada ? How about in the first 800 years after the life and writings of Josephus ?
According to Josephus, the siege of Masada by Roman troops at the end of the First Jewish–Roman War ended in the mass suicide of 960 people, the Sicarii rebels and their families who were hiding there.From Wiki.
I mean any "Johnny Come Lately" professor can get attention by saying a lot of things never happened, over a thousand years latter.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
@sonship saidYou wrote recently that you had been 'waiting' for more women to post in this forum. (Which sounded a little creepy, but we'll park that for another time).
@caissad4
You're anti God bigotry FOGS up you head woman.
Show me God pleased, condoning fornication or rape.
There is also difference between what the Bible records as having happened and what it TEACHES as a way of conduct.
Was this 'waiting' so that you could at last post such bigoted comments as, 'Your anti-God bigotry FOGS up your head woman'? (I corrected your spelling).
The post that was quoted here has been removedduchess64 shows no empathy for women or girls who lived among the ancient pagans in the Mideast.
duchess64 also demonstrates her woeful lack of knowledge of the history of the ancient Mideast and the religious and cultural practices of the ancient Canaanite people groups of the era in question.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
@secondson saidAre you in agreement with sonship that forcing a young girl to marry her rapist is a 'remedy'?
duchess64 shows no empathy for women or girls who lived among the ancient pagans in the Mideast.
duchess64 also demonstrates her woeful lack of knowledge of the history of the ancient Mideast and the religious and cultural practices of the ancient Canaanite people groups of the era in question.
Sonship wrote:
'It is a divine remedy for the misfortune of someone being raped.'
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
I have not been flippant. Or I have not withheld precise explanations of expressions I have used.
I do not think that some things you disagree with should be described as "flippant or compromising the seriousness of discussion here.
Perhaps it would be convenient for you to make that a focus and issue rather than demonstrate the invalidity of certain ideas presented.
How about we determine that flippant remarks YOU have made about the Christian life and gospel have "compromised" your credibility on this Forum?
20 Feb 19
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI would not agree with anyone who holds to that "remedy".
Are you in agreement with sonship that forcing a young girl to marry her rapist is a 'remedy'?
Sonship wrote:
'It is a divine remedy for the misfortune of someone being raped.'
I didn't read this thread except for the OP and a few other exchanges between a couple of posters.
I didn't read any of sonship's posts.