17 Nov '11 17:58>
Originally posted by FMFActually I was just explaining my position to you, landing more insults was just a happy bi-product.
You are now trying to land even more insults on him by way of a post addressed to me.
Originally posted by FMFI quoted the American Standard Version for you already. Many of the other
I contend that the following bibles constitute legitimate scholarship, and that this body of published scholarship trumps your assertions, at least in my estimation: New International Version, English Standard Version, New American Standard, King James, God’s Word Translation, King James 2000, American King James Version, American Standard Version, Bible in Basi ...[text shortened]... e" is not an 'argument' per se, I accept that it is your view and I agree to disagree. 🙂
Originally posted by FMFExcept for the last case in which the woman does not cry out for help
[quote]New International Version (©1984)
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married [b]and rapes her and they are discovered,
English Standard Version (©2001)
“If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found,
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"If a man finds a girl w ...[text shortened]... bibles that the verse refers to non-consensual sex. But I understand your view completely.[/b]
Originally posted by FMFIt is obvious that you are not as knowledgeable about the Holy Bible as
You seem to be saying the numerous scholars and theologians who translated those bibles are "laughable" and "sloppy" and "simplistic", and I understand your view totally. I just don't agree. And presumably they don't agree with you either. And you don't agree with me or with them. I think the situation is pretty clear. I reckon you've argued your point pretty we ...[text shortened]... ranslations that I cited. If you need to have the last word, by all means go ahead. 🙂
Originally posted by RJHindslol, you wouldn't know a bible if a crate of them fell from the sky and smacked you on
It is obvious that you are not as knowledgeable about the Holy Bible as
FreakyKBH and myself. But I think if you wanted to really understand this
you you look for comments by various scholars on this. You do not have
to rely on the opinions of anyone here on RHP.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIn a forum populated mainly by men, I am not surprised this issue hasn't been called out as wrong.
In essence, he has become her security for her entire life all for one rash act of sensuality.
Originally posted by SuzianneYour ire is aimed incorrectly. I take the verse to mean an act of consensual sex between a man and an un-betrothed virgin, not a rape, as translated by the NIV.
In a forum populated mainly by men, I am not surprised this issue hasn't been called out as wrong.
I know this is a relatively old post, so I won't belabor the point, but I must point out that rape is NOT an "act of sensuality". It is an act of violence. Period.
Rape is as much an "act of sensuality" as is murder. Which is not at all.
Every time ...[text shortened]... eed to start realizing this so that they don't sound stupid when discussing the issue.
Originally posted by SuzianneI understand the feeling behind this post but if you could refine the aim of your ire a bit it
In a forum populated mainly by men, I am not surprised this issue hasn't been called out as wrong.
I know this is a relatively old post, so I won't belabor the point, but I must point out that rape is NOT an "act of sensuality". It is an act of violence. Period.
Rape is as much an "act of sensuality" as is murder. Which is not at all.
Every time ...[text shortened]... eed to start realizing this so that they don't sound stupid when discussing the issue.
Originally posted by googlefudgeAhem.
I understand the feeling behind this post but if you could refine the aim of your ire a bit it
would be appreciated.
I am not sure I could rant against this part of the bible and how some people rationalise
and justify it more vociferously without getting forum banned.
And I am not the only one by any stretch.
Not all men are this frickin stup ...[text shortened]... re so strongly guarded/enforced women's rights was
top of the list of things I had in mind.