Optimist Prime

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii If the man doesn't marry the girl he must free her. That doesn't sound like concubinage Balak used the Moabite women to seduce the Israelites into idolatry.(shouldnt have said forced) There had been previous attacks (not positive need to check) the move was to remove combatants.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Concubinage is not marriage arrangement but if you see it that way good for you. Can u explain « to force idolatry »? What’s the purpose of killing everyone but non-virgins women ? What do you think will happen to these women ? Would you consider a forced marriage as a real one?

Why is Islam like this? Answer: Because Mohammed was like this. A pedophile.

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii lol ok we can just let whoever views this see who was commiting ad hom etc. since I'm the hypocrite. You clearly don't want to stick to the topic anymore so I will move on. Thank you for the conversation it was productive. I hope you have a blessed day.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Dude you aren’t a serious person. You don’t get to just assert things without any argument that are contrary to the COMMON KNOWLEDGE facts that are fundamental to Biblical scholarship. As for whining about ad hominem, lol, the hypocrisy is rich. And also, laughing is not ad hom

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Oh cool the ad hominem phase. Who was the original author of Ex and Deut? Also you keep saying scholarship but you refuse to cite any sources. Like you can see the verses but you refuse to answer why the author changed verbs you just insult me and claim all this scholarship.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Hahahhahahaha lmao you think Moses wrote those? Dude you are not at all engaging actual scholarship. You can’t pretend to be seriously discussing scholarship when you’re holding a dogmatic belief with literally no evidence for it, and a mountain against

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Same author. Both are Moses. That is, in fact, univocality.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Where’s the rape law for an unengaged woman? Immediately after the rape law for an engaged woman. And appealing to exodus is not at all reasonable since you are just flatly assuming univocality, that the author of exodus 22 meant the same thing as the author of Deut 22.

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii It is. You just haven't shown me a single verse that condones it yet. Num 31 Just says dont kill the girls who didnt use sex to force idolatry Ex 21 is a rule for slavery as a means to a marriage arrangement. Has to marry her. Deut 21:10-14 cant have sex with them w/o marriage.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Sexual slavery is not sex outside of marriage ?

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii That is not coherent. If the author had no concept of rape they could have simply said "lay with" or "gone in to" like the majority of inferences to sex in the Bible. The usage of the verb "forced" explicitly shows they have an accurate conceptual grasp of rape.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii What the author believes they are describing and what the author is describing are two different things. The author does not believe that rape is a thing, so in that sense, none of these are about rape. However, the author does have a conception of sex as an act done to a person

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii The status of the woman does not change the useage of the verb. Thats not coherent. And the price of the the bride tax is further proof that this is a protection of the woman. She is protected from losing social stability and possibly starving from not being married due to this.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Because the status of the woman is different. It is a lesser crime since the woman is not engaged. The sexual access rights of another man have not been violated, only those of a future man which eliminates the sell value the father gets.

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii You're not answering my question, friend. I said show me where the Bible condones sex outside of marriage. If it helps I acknowledge that the Bible describes laws on the practice of slavery. I asked you for a specific thing in response to your comment about sexual slavery

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Only present in the Old Testament, but i guess you don’t count that. Fair enough Deuteronomy 21:10–14 (take women as war captives) Numbers 31:17–18 (take only the virgin girls and kill everything else) Exodus 21:7–11 (allows exactly what’s shown in the video)

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii You're the one claiming that this is UNIVERSALLY agreed on to be rape by textual critics I simply asked you to prove your claim. No it's not, just because it can be forceful does not mean it is in this context. The author used the verb for FORCED twice before this, so why change?

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Do you own research dude. Go look at the BDB for how the word is used. I’m not digging through for papers that you will not read nor will you change your mind by. The very fact that you admit this CAN be rape and that it was applied then is sufficient to demonstrate the point

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii OK ignoring that obvious, uncharitable reading and probably a red herring... If v.28 was referring to a rape, why did the author not use the same word previously used in the prior two examples? They used a completely different verb but still meant rape?

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii The previous verses do not hold a death penalty for rape. There is a death penalty for rape IF AND ONLY IF the victim is an engaged woman raped in the field. If she’s raped in the city, it’s her fault for not crying out loudly enough, she dies.

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii No it doesn't. The root is used in many contexts. I already granted that. My point is if the previous verses hold a death penalty for rape and the same fine is also found in Ex 22:16 for seduction it is an entirely reasonable conclusion this isn't speaking of a rape.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Yes, in the context of how that word is used throughout the hebrew bible, it is only possible to understand that as a word that does not take into account the sexual agency of the woman. The act is done to her. Violently. biblehub.com/hebrew/utefasa… Check the entries for the root.

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Show me your source that all critical scholars agree the word is rape, if you please.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii All critical scholars agree that the word is rape. That alone is enough to refute the people who do not know hebrew at all.

@basedone23 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii and this verse is not referring to rape its referring to sex outside of marriage. the exact parallel verse/ law referenced is 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."

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii 65:4 does not say child bride 23:5-6 was the common practice throughout the known world at the time the Bible has verse like this as well if you criticize 23:5-6 also critique number 31-17-18 The punishment for grape in Islam is death in the Bible it is 50 sheks to the dad

@basedone23 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii "for those women who have ceased menstruating and for those who have not [yet] menstruated;" What age hasnt menstruated. Num 31:17-18 is after Balak had the Moabites seduce Israelite men into idolatry...This passage says not to kill the ones who didn't commit the act.

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii No you said both allow "sexual slavery" so by that also rape. So show me the Bible verse that allows you to have sex outside of marriage.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Sorry, were you talking about the bible ? I wasn’t even talking about any particular verse, i just said that both allow slavery. Leviticus 25:44–46 Ephesians 6:5

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii How about this, you show me the Bible verse that condones sex outside of marriage and I will learn about Islam before responding.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii bruh learn about islam before responding pls i’m tired of this debate, was talking about literal slavery

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii This Bible passage I'm directly referencing is speaking about you must MARRY the woman... Literally says nothing about slavery.

@Yayay82827 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii There is a parallel passage that reiterates this. Ex 22:16-17 "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." You're right seizes can be against their will but it doesnt have to in context

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Hi. That passage is rape. Which is why the bride price is inflated The passages says the man “seizes her”. That verb, to seize, is only ever used for violent force when the direct object is a person. Slaves, prisoners of war, etc. Nowhere in the OT is a woman’s consent asked for

@yoasuuw @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Marriage is slavery?

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii both allow sexual slavery so both allow rape, same thing

@basedone23 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Surah 23:5-6 Your allowed to grape "what your right hand possesses" (slave) whenever you please. Bonus points. Surah 65:4, You can divorce and remarry your child bride as long as she doesnt have her period in the span of 3 months.

@robadob0913 @AmerMuslims @MikeWingerii Show me a Quran verse the equivalent to this