Is the Bible wrong about virgins? Deuteronomy 22:13-21

[Angelina]

Just thank Jesus that we did not live during those times and that we did not have to follow the OT law.

 

[Skovand1075]

I did and I think that it can happen. There may be no evidence at all.

I guess I’m not 100% certain what your saying. I’m in many threads with many people and often it’s circling around and so sometime someone’s convo gets lost.

women can definitely not bleed on their first time. Even though ancient Jewish people believed it and it’s in the Bible, it’s just not true. It’s not a way to determine virginity.

 

[Skovand1075]

I did and I think that it can happen. There may be no evidence at all.

I’m definitely glad to live during the time post Christ. We are far more educated, emotionally intelligent and just kinder in general versus then. But the way they were was never Gods plan. That’s why Christ came and corrected it.

 

[Angelina]

I guess I’m not 100% certain what your saying. I’m in many threads with many people and often it’s circling around and so sometime someone’s convo gets lost.

women can definitely not bleed on their first time. Even though ancient Jewish people believed it and it’s in the Bible, it’s just not true. It’s not a way to determine virginity.

This is what I am saying...women do not always bleed...and some may have died unfairly but I think that God woud eventually deal with such an unsavory fellow....

 

[atpollard]

So do you think Yahweh wanted to stone adulterous people or that he always disagreed with it but permitted it because of their evil hearts?

I think that God is neither a fool nor a wimp nor senile. I believe that God is quite capable of saying what He means and meaning what He says. I think that God called a people to Himself and made it quite clear (in word and deeds) that God and His Law was not something to be played with or handled carelessly. God made it clear that HOLINESS mattered and VOWS mattered and being the People of God mattered. The wages of sin really are death and only a punk whines about ‘unfair’ when they make their bed and don’t want to lay in it.

As far as the death penalty for adultery, I think God was 100% correct in that law and modern society is 100% wrong. I believed that when I was still an atheist and cared NOTHING for religion; it was a conclusion based exclusively on the facts. Any talk about it being nobody’s business except for two consenting adults is full of s**t. Those two selfish consenting adults have chosen to destroy two families, causing immeasurable emotional pain, plunging single parent households and children into poverty. Here is an interesting statistic, children recover faster from the death of a parent than from the divorce of a parent. Divorce creates deeper emotional scars that by their nature, are less likely to heal and more likely to be carried into adult relationships.

So rather than worrying so much about being kind and gentle to the guilty evildoers, perhaps we might consider protecting the truly innocent a little more. Would it discourage the destruction of families if the selfish behavior that led to their destruction was punishable by death?

 

[Wrangler]

It seems Jesus also thought it was wrong.

after all when it came time to stone the adulterous woman, Jesus stopped it.

What a perversion of Scripture!

Indeed, Christ thought that it - adultery - was wrong. He told her to SIN NO MORE. This implies recognition she sinned in the present case.

And you claim Jesus stopped her from being stoned? Hardly. He merely put a condition on the one who ‘cast the first stone.’

The NRSV Cultural Bible explains the historical and cultural significance of being the one to initiate the execution. Nowadays a ‘jury of your peers’ decides your fate. Back then it was the wounded party. Who was wounded in the present case?

Not a trivial matter, the Study Notes go on to explain is the trap this was for Jesus. Under the law there need to be 2 witnesses. And beyond that, the nature of the crime requires a male accomplice. Where was he?

Under the law, the elements of the crime are not available for prosecution. Beyond that, a final test was that Jesus was not appointed a judge over the matter.

Rather than attend to these finer points of the law, our brilliant lord of defense simply asked the mob an inward facing question to squash their zeal to condemn. We humans are so hungry for justice involving others. When it is our turn in the pit, we tend to beg, not for justice, but mercy.

Jesus did not stop the stoning but merely turned his back to the mob, kneeling to distract himself from their deliberations by moving his finger in the sand. Their conscience convicted them in this most divinely inspired stories of all time.

 

[atpollard]

This is what I am saying...women do not always bleed...and some may have died unfairly but I think that God woud eventually deal with such an unsavory fellow....

The law did not OBLIGATE the Husband to have his bride stoned. Look at Joseph and Mary (who we KNOW the circumstances of and must assume that they both wished to obey the law and kill no one). This was an extreme law for an extreme case of an arranged marriage in which the bride turns out to be an evil woman that lied and tricked the groom … or an evil groom that falsely accused a good woman of being evil.

If you are starting from a premise that there is no god and these laws are all written by men to trick and abuse women, then I suggest that you stop nibbling at the edges and take a bite … throw the whole worthless Bible away and create a new age god of your liking. If you are going to start from the premise that there really is a God and the Bible is an accurate account of His words and message, then I suggest that you believe that God is quite capable of BEING GOD and can handle men and women that attempt to play games with His Law in His Theocracy.

 

[Skovand1075]

I think that God is neither a fool nor a wimp nor senile. I believe that God is quite capable of saying what He means and meaning what He says. I think that God called a people to Himself and made it quite clear (in word and deeds) that God and His Law was not something to be played with or handled carelessly. God made it clear that HOLINESS mattered and VOWS mattered and being the People of God mattered. The wages of sin really are death and only a punk whines about ‘unfair’ when they make their bed and don’t want to lay in it.

As far as the death penalty for adultery, I think God was 100% correct in that law and modern society is 100% wrong. I believed that when I was still an atheist and cared NOTHING for religion; it was a conclusion based exclusively on the facts. Any talk about it being nobody’s business except for two consenting adults is full of s**t. Those two selfish consenting adults have chosen to destroy two families, causing immeasurable emotional pain, plunging single parent households and children into poverty. Here is an interesting statistic, children recover faster from the death of a parent than from the divorce of a parent. Divorce creates deeper emotional scars that by their nature, are less likely to heal and more likely to be carried into adult relationships.

So rather than worrying so much about being kind and gentle to the guilty evildoers, perhaps we might consider protecting the truly innocent a little more. Would it discourage the destruction of families if the selfish behavior that led to their destruction was punishable by death?

You sound like someone with a very Christ like heart……. I noticed you skimped out on part of it though.

Was the Bible right when it says all virgins bleed on their time having sex? Is that a fact or is that wrong?

 

[Skovand1075]

The law did not OBLIGATE the Husband to have his bride stoned. Look at Joseph and Mary (who we KNOW the circumstances of and must assume that they both wished to obey the law and kill no one). This was an extreme law for an extreme case of an arranged marriage in which the bride turns out to be an evil woman that lied and tricked the groom … or an evil groom that falsely accused a good woman of being evil.

If you are starting from a premise that there is no god and these laws are all written by men to trick and abuse women, then I suggest that you stop nibbling at the edges and take a bite … throw the whole worthless Bible away and create a new age god of your liking. If you are going to start from the premise that there really is a God and the Bible is an accurate account of His words and message, then I suggest that you believe that God is quite capable of BEING GOD and can handle men and women that attempt to play games with His Law in His Theocracy.

Why would I have to throw the Bible away? I don’t have to throw any of it away. I just have to find a healthier, more educated and biblical sound way of interpreting it. So that’s what I do. I interpret the Bible in a way that places it within its proper context. The context it’s ancient readers understood.
The problem is y’all want to do away with the Jewish Bible, and Jewish Christianity and make it a conservative anti scientific American Bible.

so you thought adulterous people should be murdered when you were an atheist? Again…. Are you sure you’re not just a terrible human?

also let’s be clear. You obviously did not read my post. You got triggered and reacted emotionally without even knowing what was said. You did not read through the thread. I know this because almost every presumption you made, I actually stated the opposite.

 

[atpollard]

Was the Bible right when it says all virgins bleed on their time having sex? Is that a fact or is that wrong?

Quote the verse where the Bible says “all virgins bleed on their time having sex”.
I was being kind by overlooking your careless handling of God’s word.

What does the Bible ACTUALLY SAY and then we can discuss that. I am not here to debate your unfounded opinions about what you think God really meant when YOU read between the lines.

 

[atpollard]

I don’t have to throw any of it away. I just have to find a healthier, more educated and biblical sound way of interpreting it. So that’s what I do.

Joseph Smith says “Amen!”
David Koresh says “Amen!”
Jim Jones says “Amen!”

You stick with that plan and follow in the footsteps of so many great leaders of the faith.

 

[atpollard]

Why would I have to throw the Bible away?

Sentences are your friend. They express a complete thought. Try reading this one again:

If you are starting from a premise that there is no god and these laws are all written by men to trick and abuse women, then I suggest that you stop nibbling at the edges and take a bite … throw the whole worthless Bible away and create a new age god of your liking.

Hint: it is constructed using “if:then” logic.

 

[Skovand1075]

Quote the verse where the Bible says “all virgins bleed on their time having sex”.
I was being kind by overlooking your careless handling of God’s word.

What does the Bible ACTUALLY SAY and then we can discuss that. I am not here to debate your unfounded opinions about what you think God really meant when YOU read between the lines.

It’s literally in the OP dude….

 

[Skovand1075]

Sentences are your friend. They express a complete thought. Try reading this one again:

Hint: it is constructed using “if:then” logic.

So again….. why would I need to throw the Bible away?

show me where I said anything even remotely close to what you stated? You made a statement as if that’s what I’m doing? You actually made several statements , some I am and some I am not.
Was the Bible written by men? Yeah.
Was it written to abuse women? Sometimes yeah.

so why should I throw away the Bible because some bad authors got in it? Authors that Jesus corrected.

is it abusive towards women to only allow men to have multiple wives? Is it abusive against women when some of the men told the others after a genocide to take all the virgins for yourself and make them concubines? That’s pretty disgusting isn’t it? Do I think god told the prophet to write that or do I think maybe some of the authors were crappy and wrote crappy stuff that Jesus later corrected?
So again…. Why should I throw out the Bible or my faith just because I disagree with your terrible interpretation of it?

 

[Lambano]

What’s the evidence? It can only be one thing. The parents are going to the bedroom to find bloody sheets.

I told this story a couple of months ago, but I think it is appropriate here:

I was honored to attend the wedding of a wonderful Jewish couple, friends of mine since college. As we and all their friends sat around their hotel room that evening reminiscing about old times, the groom's father sent up a Maitre D' with a bottle of red wine and one of the hotel's towels. The groom then poured some of the red wine on the towel and sent the Maitre D' back to his father's room with the red-stained towel as "proof" of her virginity. My friend then explained the meaning of this ritual in Judaism. His father of course knew the bride was not a virgin; the couple had been living together since we were in college, for crying out loud. Yes, some ritual deceit was involved. But Judaism is not about heartless legalism (despite Christian stereotypes to the contrary). They understand "For I desire compassion and not sacrifice" full well.

 

[Skovand1075]

I told this story a couple of months ago, but I think it is appropriate here:

I was honored to attend the wedding of a wonderful Jewish couple, friends of mine since college. As we and all their friends sat around their hotel room that evening reminiscing about old times, the groom's father sent up a Maitre D' with a bottle of red wine and one of the hotel's towels. The groom then poured some of the red wine on the towel and sent the Maitre D' back to his father's room with the red-stained towel as "proof" of her virginity. My friend then explained the meaning of this ritual in Judaism. His father of course knew the bride was not a virgin; the couple had been living together since we were in college, for crying out loud. Yes, some ritual deceit was involved. But Judaism is not about heartless legalism (despite Christian stereotypes to the contrary). They understand "For I desire compassion and not sacrifice" full well.

perhaps today. But that’s definitely not the case historically of Mesopotamian tribes. Ancient Jewish men and women believed that all
Virgins bleed the first time. That myth even persisted to this day and age among many. The ritual your friend did is based off of the presumed science thousands of years ago. Most Jewish people nowadays don’t support beating a woman to death with rocks. But it did use to happen. Just like the Bible used to be misused to falsely justify burning women alive.

so your friend , or whoever it was of it was a story, is basing a ritual off of what used to be a actual practice. It’s why they were ready to stone the adulterous women Jesus saved.

so the Bible indicates it, but it’s not true. I covered it already a few times.

 

[Skovand1075]

But the point of the post is not “ Was Jewish people evil” because they are not. The point of the post is “ how can modern American Christian’s claim inerrancy when the Bible never claims it, Jews never claimed it and the virgin test is the perfect example to showcase how they ( literalist ) are often so wrong.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Well the Bible states that all virgin women will bleed on their first time. That’s the indication of the virgin blood test. You should read through my entire original post. Then maybe you’ll understand what is happening.

Yes under the law covenant a rag was to be used initially for proof of virginity, and you even posted the passage originally.

You are trying to say the Bible is wrong, but I don't find that to be true. I do however believe that what you say about virgins is true, but these women were Jehovah's people following the law, there is no doubt in my mind that Jehovah would see to it that the proof would be there if needed. After all it was His law sir. I admit that I see the logic in what you say, but think of the outcome for us if the Bible is wrong. Best to just wait to find out the proper understanding, correct? That could be a real hope breaker Skov.

 

[Skovand1075]

Yes under the law covenant a rag was to be used initially for proof of virginity, and you even posted the passage originally.

You are trying to say the Bible is wrong, but I don't find that to be true. I do however believe that what you say about virgins is true, but these women were Jehovah's people following the law, there is no doubt in my mind that Jehovah would see to it that the proof would be there if needed. After all it was His law sir. I admit that I see the logic in what you say, but think of the outcome for us if the Bible is wrong. Best to just wait to find out the proper understanding, correct? That could be a real hope breaker Skov.

I think it’s only a hope breaker if you believe that the Bible is inerrant. I don’t. So it’s expected. There are several more, but when people can’t accept scientific facts about periods, they usually don’t accept anything else. Deconstruction can often feel like hopelessness, but it usually results in greater hope than ever. Exchanging concordism for accommodation and exchanging literalism for
contextual analysis resulted in far better hope for me.

 

[Lambano]

But the point of the post is not “ Was Jewish people evil” because they are not. The point of the post is “ how can modern American Christian’s claim inerrancy when the Bible never claims it, Jews never claimed it and the virgin test is the perfect example to showcase how they ( literalist ) are often so wrong.

Oh, that.

Historically, the Protestant Reformation went with Sola Scriptura as a reaction to certain abuses by the leadership of the Church, most notably selling indulgences to finance a Vatican building project. Luther got into more trouble from getting in the way of the Vatican's money-making scheme than he did for his Sola Fide doctrine. Sola Scriptura was a means of taking ecclesiastical power out of the hands of an elite clergy and presaged the later upheavals in Western Civilization including the American revolution, the French Revolution, the labor movements, et. al.

Sola Scriptura assumes the Bible is the fixed standard for understanding God's will, and not some Magestrium's dictum. The leadership is held accountable to the same standard as the people. Biblical inerrancy is logically necessary for Sola Scriptura to work, so inerrancy is one of the core dogmas on which the whole system stands, similar to Euclid's Fifth Postulate.

Look, I've long recognized that Biblical inerrancy is not intellectually tenable. (Did Judas hang himself, or splatter his guts out in a fall?) Yet I am convinced that the basic facts about Jesus's sayings and life, death, and resurrection as recorded in the Bible are true. And as my company's representative Industry Standards bodies, I understand full how important standards are. I also know how flawed we humans are (the Reformers got that Depravity thing right); "Every man did what was right in his own eyes" doesn't work. My own faith tradition says to use Scripture, Church Tradition, Reason, and Experience. With compassion and mercy always in mind. May God's Holy Spirit guide me.