The Christian Bible considers rape to be a property crime.
Got any specific verses to cite for this? It’s brought up often enough, but I’ve rarely if ever seen the source. I have a strong feeling that’s from the old testament, of which many Christians ignore the “laws” due to the events of the new testament.
Promise I’m not trying to sealion here. It’s just that these are big claims that I’ve not seen reflected first hand in my 30 plus years in and out of Christianity.
I’m also going to softly remind everyone that the old testament writings are also foundational to Jewish faith and Islamic faith, which is consistently left out of most of these discussions of the ills of religion.
orclev@lemmy.world 1 day ago
They’re likely basing it on a verse (that I don’t have handy at the moment) but it says something to the effect that if a mans wife is raped by someone he has to pay a certain amount of silver to the husband in compensation. I couldn’t tell you if it was old testament or not (probably though, sounds very old testament). I think the way it’s phrased was something like “if a man lays with another man’s woman, he must pay him X whatever”.
tomcatt360@lemmy.zip 2 hours ago
Here are the verses I could find with some quick searching: Deuteronomy 22:28-29 “28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.” Exodus 22:16-17 “16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. 17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.” Both of these require the rapist/seducer to marry the woman and to pay the standard dowry amount to the woman’s father. The exodus verse gives the father the option to reject the marriage, which is a good addition! (IMO since the Deuteronomy version was written later, the rejection clause might have been left out in later versions of the law.) Both of these verses are from the Old Testament, which Christians mostly use for cultural context, as Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses during his ministry. Most Christians take laws that only appear in the Old Testament as historical, but no longer consider them doctrine. Also, the culture of Old Testament believers was significantly different and so applying these laws to todays Christians doesn’t account for then assive cultural differences. (For example, Exodus 22:18, right after the passage above says “18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” Which has been used out of its cultural context to justify actual witch hunts!) In conclusion, both versions of this historical law are considered superceded by most modern Christians.
XTL@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
Not to mention the verse will be in the old testament, i.e. the non-Christian part.
Maeve@kbin.earth 1 day ago
So are the ten commandments. I'm ok with cherry picking. Take what reflects the best, discard the worst.
tomcatt360@lemmy.zip 2 hours ago
The thing is, Jesus quoted the ten commandments, and taught that they are still in effect, the same can’t be said for most of the rest of the Old Testament though.