Exodus 22 Casual Sex

seekeroftruth

Well-Known Member
Exodus 22:16 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. 17 If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.​

I knew it would get more exciting.... well at least it's not about oxen and sheep.

This is from GodVine.

This was an exceedingly wise and humane law, and must have operated powerfully against seduction and fornication; because the person who might feel inclined to take the advantage of a young woman knew that he must marry her, and give her a dowry, if her parents consented; and if they did not consent that their daughter should wed her seducer, in this case he was obliged to give her the full dowry which could have been demanded had she been still a virgin. According to the Targumist here, and to Deuteronomy 22:29, the dowry was fifty shekels of silver, which the seducer was to pay to her father, and he was obliged to take her to wife; nor had he authority, according to the Jewish canons, ever to put her away by a bill of divorce. This one consideration was a powerful curb on disorderly passions, and must tend greatly to render marriages respectable, and prevent all crimes of this nature.​


I found this in Blueletterbible.org.

This law emphasizes the principle that there is no such thing as "casual" sex. Both Old and New Testaments state that sexual relations carry lasting consequences (1 Corinthians 6:15-16).

This was an exceedingly wise and humane law, and must have operated powerfully against seduction and fornication; because the person who might feel inclined to take the advantage of a young woman knew that he must marry her, and giver her a dowry.

This law is only effective when virginity is prized among women; here, a woman's virginity is her guarantee that she cannot be treated "cheaply".

Far too many people - especially women - sell themselves cheaply by easily giving away their virginity. A man illustrated this with a true story about a friend who owned an antique store and had a table for sale. The table was worth $600, but was marked down to $300. A man tried to bargain her down to $200, and not only did she refuse, but she realized the true value of the table, and upped the price to its true worth - even when offered $300. The man finally bought the table for $600, and certainly treated it like a $600 table - because it's worth had been fought for. Many women who know men treat them shabbily have contributed to the problem by selling themselves cheaply.

The story of the antique table is good one to pass along to kids. The first time I heard it, the pastor's wife used it in a Sunday School lesson for a teen class. The boys and girls had been segregated for that one class and the girls talked about it for quite some time.

Now remember, back in Genesis 34, we read about the rape [or seduction] of Dinah and the consequences. When Dinah's brothers found out about the rape [seduction], they had every man in the village go through circumcision and then Simeon and Levi murdered them all. So this is, in contrast, a very humane and wise law.

:coffee:
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Waiting for Gude's answer, but I'm sure Bush will have something to do with it.

Well, I certainly can't turn down a challenge like that. :buddies:

It should suffice, the simple and obvious male dominance of the proposition; the female is obligated to sell herself high while not one word of mention of self respect or restraint on the part of the man. It's not OK for HER to just sleep with whomever but it IS ok for him.
That's a very human, and male, thing to think.

Next up, setting a specific price places the thing, squarely, in a place and time. Is that what a loving, caring god would do? Place a price, and a specific one at that, on the union of man and woman? Or, is that, again, a rather human sort of thing to do? "If you're gonna be a whore, be expensive". Staying with this very human reasoning, if she's worth 50, why not 100? Or 1,000? Obviously, because men went down the path of putting a price on women, it had to conform with the economy of the time as opposed to the more innate value god would be expected to place on all his children.

Next, if god put these desires into us, how is it that they are also crimes with the sole exception of 'proper' pricing? Sounds a lot more like a hucksters version of man and god rather than a loving, caring god who created us sick and commanded us to behave by virtue of economics. Isn't there something we're also accept as divine reasoning concerning love of money?

Last, at leas for now, if men, and women, desired one another, didn't god make them this way? If he then commanded that women hold out for the going rate of the day, how does this reconcile with Jesus' admonition to have no care for the morrow, set aside all things and follow me?

Obviously, none of it makes sense from a divine being, a one true creator who loves us and cares about us, made in his image. Obviously, these are man made rules and reasoning in order to have a more orderly and controlled community.

I mean, come on. "Now, kids. Jesus wants you to be a $600 table, not some $300 POS. Your value and self worth should be based on what is paid for you as your husband, when he gets done with the cheap and easy tables, will come around to seeing he wants a nice, unused table. Once he can afford it..."

It all made sense in it's time and place. The logic and reasoning of man. 2,000 years ago.

:buddies:
 

seekeroftruth

Well-Known Member
Well, I certainly can't turn down a challenge like that. :buddies:

It should suffice, the simple and obvious male dominance of the proposition; the female is obligated to sell herself high while not one word of mention of self respect or restraint on the part of the man. It's not OK for HER to just sleep with whomever but it IS ok for him.
That's a very human, and male, thing to think.

Next up, setting a specific price places the thing, squarely, in a place and time. Is that what a loving, caring god would do? Place a price, and a specific one at that, on the union of man and woman? Or, is that, again, a rather human sort of thing to do? "If you're gonna be a whore, be expensive". Staying with this very human reasoning, if she's worth 50, why not 100? Or 1,000? Obviously, because men went down the path of putting a price on women, it had to conform with the economy of the time as opposed to the more innate value god would be expected to place on all his children.

Next, if god put these desires into us, how is it that they are also crimes with the sole exception of 'proper' pricing? Sounds a lot more like a hucksters version of man and god rather than a loving, caring god who created us sick and commanded us to behave by virtue of economics. Isn't there something we're also accept as divine reasoning concerning love of money?

Last, at leas for now, if men, and women, desired one another, didn't god make them this way? If he then commanded that women hold out for the going rate of the day, how does this reconcile with Jesus' admonition to have no care for the morrow, set aside all things and follow me?

Obviously, none of it makes sense from a divine being, a one true creator who loves us and cares about us, made in his image. Obviously, these are man made rules and reasoning in order to have a more orderly and controlled community.

I mean, come on. "Now, kids. Jesus wants you to be a $600 table, not some $300 POS. Your value and self worth should be based on what is paid for you as your husband, when he gets done with the cheap and easy tables, will come around to seeing he wants a nice, unused table. Once he can afford it..."

It all made sense in it's time and place. The logic and reasoning of man. 2,000 years ago.

:buddies:

IMHO.... rather than showing that men would come up with a book that would curtail this event.... it shows that God saw it, knew it was demeaning and gave us a law to curtail it.

It's been my experience that if a man loves to do something.... he's not likely to make a law to forbid it.... making, IMHO, your whole argument that man made this up, utterly absurd.... lol.

According to the commentaries.... the amount was set to take the burden of coming up with a punishment that fits the crime off of the human judges. If the punishment were left to humans.... it could range from a slap on the wrist [or an attaboy], to the destruction of the whole town as shown in the story of Dinah, Simeon and Levi.

:coffee:
 
Last edited:

Larry Gude

Strung Out
IMHO.... rather than showing that men would come up with a book that would curtail this event.... it shows that God saw it, knew it was demeaning and gave us a law to curtail it.

It's been my experience that if a man loves to do something.... he's not likely to make a law to forbid it.... making, IMHO, your whole argument that man made this up, utterly absurd.... lol.

According to the commentaries.... the amount was set to take the burden of coming up with a punishment that fits the crime off of the human judges. If the punishment were left to humans.... it could range from a slap on the wrist [or an attaboy], to the destruction of the whole town as shown in the story of Dinah, Simeon and Levi.

:coffee:

if you read what you've provided, man didn't forbid it. We simply put a price on it.
 

seekeroftruth

Well-Known Member
if you read what you've provided, man didn't forbid it. We simply put a price on it.

God knew it was going to happen.... and He balanced the consequences....

Let's not forget... the 50 Shekels was just the dowry.... they had to marry for life.... The guy had to take care of the gal for the rest of their lives....does that sound like something man would put in the mix?

:coffee:
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
God knew it was going to happen.... and He balanced the consequences....

Let's not forget... the 50 Shekels was just the dowry.... they had to marry for life.... The guy had to take care of the gal for the rest of their lives....does that sound like something man would put in the mix?

:coffee:

If he was selling his daughter, yes. If he was tying to get a good son in law, yes.
 

seekeroftruth

Well-Known Member
If he was selling his daughter, yes. If he was tying to get a good son in law, yes.

The problem with this argument is the stigma of loosing virginity back then... was horrifying. check out Deut. 22:13-21.

Dueteromony 22:13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[a] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.

It was a different time....

:coffee:
 

PeoplesElbow

Well-Known Member
God knew it was going to happen.... and He balanced the consequences....

Let's not forget... the 50 Shekels was just the dowry.... they had to marry for life.... The guy had to take care of the gal for the rest of their lives....does that sound like something man would put in the mix?

:coffee:

Look at it from the fathers point of view...."oh goody I will make money off these otherwise useless girls."
 

seekeroftruth

Well-Known Member
She brought shame to the household and deserved it?

This is pretty much the same way the modern Muslim world works now.

The dad wants his daughter to be a virgin because one that isn't is of no value.

So women are of little value in the Old Testament?

I've been saying that for quite some time.... Rebecca, Rachel, Dinah and others have made an impact on the path that Israel was born into.

I do agree that the laws that will come later, written by Israeli men, are even worse.... but as I recall, Moses has gone up on the mountain to discuss things with God while the Israelites are sitting around at the bottom of the mountain waiting for Aaron to interpret what's going on.

So if that's the case.... which, it seems to be, then this part of the law is from God Himself at the same time as the Ten Commandments were being laid to stone.

:coffee:
 

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
I know this is good dialogue, but it reminds me of a joke......

Moses came down from the mountain top a stated he had good news and bad news......
The good news was he got them down to ten.....
The bad news was adultery was still one of them.....
 
Far too many people - especially women - sell themselves cheaply by easily giving away their virginity. A man illustrated this with a true story about a friend who owned an antique store and had a table for sale. The table was worth $600, but was marked down to $300. A man tried to bargain her down to $200, and not only did she refuse, but she realized the true value of the table, and upped the price to its true worth - even when offered $300. The man finally bought the table for $600, and certainly treated it like a $600 table - because it's worth had been fought for. Many women who know men treat them shabbily have contributed to the problem by selling themselves cheaply.[/INDENT][/INDENT]

The story of the antique table is good one to pass along to kids. The first time I heard it, the pastor's wife used it in a Sunday School lesson for a teen class. The boys and girls had been segregated for that one class and the girls talked about it for quite some time.
:coffee:

The Biblebelt States have the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the US. Moreover, western nations that are more secular and less pious than the US, have much lower teen pregnancy rates.

What kids need is self esteem and respect for themselves...and good sex education. NOT dogma influenced abstinence teaching. And certainly not the belief that a virgin is somehow worth more than a non-virgin.
 

seekeroftruth

Well-Known Member
Exodus 22:16 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. 17 If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.​

I knew it would get more exciting.... well at least it's not about oxen and sheep.

This is from GodVine.

This was an exceedingly wise and humane law, and must have operated powerfully against seduction and fornication; because the person who might feel inclined to take the advantage of a young woman knew that he must marry her, and give her a dowry, if her parents consented; and if they did not consent that their daughter should wed her seducer, in this case he was obliged to give her the full dowry which could have been demanded had she been still a virgin. According to the Targumist here, and to Deuteronomy 22:29, the dowry was fifty shekels of silver, which the seducer was to pay to her father, and he was obliged to take her to wife; nor had he authority, according to the Jewish canons, ever to put her away by a bill of divorce. This one consideration was a powerful curb on disorderly passions, and must tend greatly to render marriages respectable, and prevent all crimes of this nature.​


I found this in Blueletterbible.org.

This law emphasizes the principle that there is no such thing as "casual" sex. Both Old and New Testaments state that sexual relations carry lasting consequences (1 Corinthians 6:15-16).

This was an exceedingly wise and humane law, and must have operated powerfully against seduction and fornication; because the person who might feel inclined to take the advantage of a young woman knew that he must marry her, and giver her a dowry.

This law is only effective when virginity is prized among women; here, a woman's virginity is her guarantee that she cannot be treated "cheaply".

Far too many people - especially women - sell themselves cheaply by easily giving away their virginity. A man illustrated this with a true story about a friend who owned an antique store and had a table for sale. The table was worth $600, but was marked down to $300. A man tried to bargain her down to $200, and not only did she refuse, but she realized the true value of the table, and upped the price to its true worth - even when offered $300. The man finally bought the table for $600, and certainly treated it like a $600 table - because it's worth had been fought for. Many women who know men treat them shabbily have contributed to the problem by selling themselves cheaply.

The story of the antique table is good one to pass along to kids. The first time I heard it, the pastor's wife used it in a Sunday School lesson for a teen class. The boys and girls had been segregated for that one class and the girls talked about it for quite some time.

Now remember, back in Genesis 34, we read about the rape [or seduction] of Dinah and the consequences. When Dinah's brothers found out about the rape [seduction], they had every man in the village go through circumcision and then Simeon and Levi murdered them all. So this is, in contrast, a very humane and wise law.

:coffee:

Just wanted to remind myself where this conversation started. Moses was on the Mountain talking with God. Aaron and the rest of the 2+ million refugees were waiting below. According to the Bible, these laws were handed down about the same time as the Ten Commandments were laid to stone.

:coffee:
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Well, I certainly can't turn down a challenge like that. :buddies:

It should suffice, the simple and obvious male dominance of the proposition; the female is obligated to sell herself high while not one word of mention of self respect or restraint on the part of the man. It's not OK for HER to just sleep with whomever but it IS ok for him.
That's a very human, and male, thing to think.

Next up, setting a specific price places the thing, squarely, in a place and time. Is that what a loving, caring god would do? Place a price, and a specific one at that, on the union of man and woman? Or, is that, again, a rather human sort of thing to do? "If you're gonna be a whore, be expensive". Staying with this very human reasoning, if she's worth 50, why not 100? Or 1,000? Obviously, because men went down the path of putting a price on women, it had to conform with the economy of the time as opposed to the more innate value god would be expected to place on all his children.

Next, if god put these desires into us, how is it that they are also crimes with the sole exception of 'proper' pricing? Sounds a lot more like a hucksters version of man and god rather than a loving, caring god who created us sick and commanded us to behave by virtue of economics. Isn't there something we're also accept as divine reasoning concerning love of money?

Last, at leas for now, if men, and women, desired one another, didn't god make them this way? If he then commanded that women hold out for the going rate of the day, how does this reconcile with Jesus' admonition to have no care for the morrow, set aside all things and follow me?

Obviously, none of it makes sense from a divine being, a one true creator who loves us and cares about us, made in his image. Obviously, these are man made rules and reasoning in order to have a more orderly and controlled community.

I mean, come on. "Now, kids. Jesus wants you to be a $600 table, not some $300 POS. Your value and self worth should be based on what is paid for you as your husband, when he gets done with the cheap and easy tables, will come around to seeing he wants a nice, unused table. Once he can afford it..."

It all made sense in it's time and place. The logic and reasoning of man. 2,000 years ago.

:buddies:

I'm not sure how this explains your contention that the entire bible is man made?

First, what do you mean by "man made"?

Second, is there some implication somewhere in the bible that man couldn't make some of his own rules?
 
Top