Featured Is spousal rape allowed in the Bible?

[AgnosticBoy]

After reading some passages in Deuteronomy, I am questioning if the Biblical writers were okay with spousal rape, and by that I mean the husband raping his wife. Or did they think that the relationship status precludes rape. Here are some passages that I find questionable:

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

After reading this, I may as well ask about rape in general and not just towards a spouse. Might have to find a good interlinear translation to shed more light on these passages!

Discussion:
1. Was rape wrong in all cases according to the biblical writers?
2. Is spousal rape wrong?

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

It doesn’t surprise me because basically the Bible has a 10-year-old child’s view of morality. You’ve got to follow the rules, the rules are hard, but you’ve still got to follow them.

There’s nothing about us being free people living in a free society. Or very little.

• and no, society wasn’t free back then. So, no wonder.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

It doesn’t surprise me because basically the Bible has a 10-year-old child’s view of morality. You’ve got to follow the rules, the rules are hard, but you’ve still got to follow them.

There’s nothing about us being free people living in a free society. Or very little.

• and no, society wasn’t free back then. So, no wonder.

Good points, esp. about living in a free society.

I see that patriarchy was the norm back then and it seems women had little to no say on a lot of issues. For instance, women couldn't choose who to marry; they were simply given to a man as part of an arranged marriage.

A long time ago, someone tried to tell me that the passages in Deuteronomy dealing with rape were not part of God's morals, but instead were part of Moses's civil rules. I brushed that off as being a way to explain away these passages, but I'm open if anyone wants to explain that view further or explain something else.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

A long time ago, someone tried to tell me that the passages in Deuteronomy dealing with rape were not part of God's morals, but instead were part of Moses's civil rules.

I’ve also heard about this being an attempt to triage a bad situation. Although making a woman marry her rapist sounds like a 2nd level of cruelty.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

And I urge people to be middle-of-the-road.

Please don’t say the Bible is terrible. Or, say that if you want, but I just don’t think it gets us anywhere. The Bible is a book written by ancient peoples, with parts both good and bad, and that’s that.

The Iliad and The Odyssey have parts both good and bad, too.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

It doesn’t surprise me because basically the Bible has a 10-year-old child’s view of morality. You’ve got to follow the rules, the rules are hard, but you’ve still got to follow them.

Imagine trying to apply some of those rules in modern-day society. Imagine telling a woman today that she has to marry her rapist ... ha.. The person to suggest that would probably be charged as an accomplice to sexual assault!

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

https://www.palomar.edu/tlc-esc/wp-content/uploads/sites/229/2016/02/List-of-Favorite-Books.pdf

The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test Tom Wolfe
My first book in which I read a style that matched the story, both wild and exuberant.

Final Jeopardy & Likely to Die Linda Fairstein
About Alex Cooper, a single, career woman in New York, who prosecutes sex crimes and watches Jeopardy.

The Foundation Trilogy Isaac Asimov
Any Asimov science fiction is good! But, this trilogy is the basis around which his entire written universe is built.

Grapes of Wrath John Steinbeck
Steinbeck’s novel looks into the Depression era with great characterizations.

Great Expectations Charles Dickens I like the social realism.

The Great Gatsby F. Scott Fitzgerald
A wonderful, but grim look into the decadence of America in the 1920s.

The Heart is a Lonely Hunter Carson McCullers
This is one of my all-time favorites. I like the content, point of view. Good coming-of-age novel.

————

To these, I might add—

Hard Landing: The Epic Contest for Power and Profits that Plunged the Airlines into Chaos
written by a Wall Street Journal reporter, the business side of commercial aviation, mainly focused on the 1980s

Nightwork
a novel by Irwin Shaw
an adventure and a romp, flawed, but it has its scenes

——————

Frankly, I think people might be better off reading any of these books.

 

[Scooter]

I would like to know what translation you used that uses the word “rape”. The Hebrew word is תָּפַשׂ “tâphas“. This word does not mean rape. It means to lay hold of, to take, to seize. The word is used 65 times in the OT and 39 times it is translated as take or taken. If a man takes a woman that does not always mean he raped her. It is quite possible the encounter was consensual.

 

[Scooter]

Ok after looking at the chapter as a whole, I am convinced verse 28 does NOT refer to rape. Look back at verse 25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:. Here we are told if a man "force" a woman, that is rape. The rapist was to be put to death. The word "force" is not used in verse 28. In fact, verse 28 says if both the man and woman are found, then the man must marry the woman. Verse 28 indicates both the man and the woman were willing participants and therefore must marry. So no, the Bible does not teach that a victim must marry the man that raped her.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Ok after looking at the chapter as a whole, I am convinced verse 28 does NOT refer to rape. Look back at verse 25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:. Here we are told if a man "force" a woman, that is rape. The rapist was to be put to death. The word "force" is not used in verse 28. In fact, verse 28 says if both the man and woman are found, then the man must marry the woman. Verse 28 indicates both the man and the woman were willing participants and therefore must marry. So no, the Bible does not teach that a victim must marry the man that raped her.

Interesting!

Deuteronomy 22:25, 28, and 29 (NASB)

25 But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die.

28 If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29 hen the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her;

In post #1, I was using the NiV, but I do notice other English versions use the word "seize" in vs. 28. That's also what the Hebrew word refers to, being "seized". That is a key point as you would think that the word "rape" or "forced" in vs. 25 would've also been used in vs. 28, if both passages were referring to rape.

Still some doubts...
One being that your point still does not answer the question of if rape is wrong when it's between a man and his wife or a man and a unmarried woman. Also, the word "seize" in vs. 28 could mean forcibly being seized. So at best, we may not know either way, although a case could be made that rape would be okay based on the culture. Are there any other passages in the Bible that would indicate otherwise - that shed light on if rape would've been wrong in all cases (including towards spouses and unmarried women?)