#missleismon

[now-she-is-very-amused]

I can't do this anonymously, so I guess if this falls flat, I can't hide behind a gray ball and sunglasses.

Hello, Miss Amused. I wanted to do this on the other account, but I couldn't, so here we are.

Below, I've added a screenshot that I took of a video while on Instagram. For context, the women in the video tells the audience something like, "If there's one thing I've learned, it is that if God won't do it, it just won't get done." 🤷‍♀️

She then proceeds to sing those same lines and as you can tell by the image text, it was a joke about laundry.

I saw it and thought of your many blogs about laundry. So I hope this makes you laugh. If not...well, I'll just keep this for myself and giggle. Have a blessed day.

🤣🤣😂 I love it!! There are literally two full baskets of laundry sitting next to me right now waiting to be folded. 😅

I didn’t realize anons weren’t enabled, sorry. It’s been so long since I set up a blog! They’re on now.

[papirouge]

I think your first sentence is referring to Lot attempt to give away his own daughters to appease the crowd who was trying to force itself inside his house(?) I know Christian haters & feminists use this passage to pass it off as a message that God did approve giving away women for rape when actually it's just the Bible simply explaining turns of events. Interestingly, those people never bring up the rest of the story and how Lot's own daughters actually raped him during his sleep to get impregnated by him, but *narrative*.... If anything, Lot's daughters are done much worse than Lot did and they are a few of wicked biblical women who got away for doing very awful things...something anti Christian feminists will never acknowledge because they are biased and think the Bible hates women for whatever reason.

Now about the Deuteronomy verses you quoted, I want to make it clear that's not about rape. Actually, the issue of rape is tackled a few verse before in verses 25-27

But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

The forceful nature of the act is explicited with "force" and "scream" (which in some Bible versions is translated as "rape"). And in this case, the Bible says the woman "did nothing" and that only the rapist has to die. So it'very clear where the Bible stands regarding rape.

That's why the situation of Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is not about a forced sexual relationship. They are both different situations and that's why they come with different outcomes. The translation of 'māṣā'' as "find" in the verse 28 can be a little confusing since 'māṣā'' also means "encounter" "gain" or "attain [something]" ; that doesn't necessarily mean that guy suddenly found that women and decided to have sex with her. They might as well know each other and consented to meet to have sex/attain sexual intercourse "in the field" (=hidden) because having sex outside of marriage was absolutely forbidden under Israel Law. "Lay hold" (or "seize" depending on the translation) emphasize this idea. The Hebrew word used here for "lay hold" is also used for people manipulating objects, it doesn't necessarily involve a forceful action. That word might be used to put emphasis in the fashion of the act, not its nature (supposedly forced).

That's why the "sentence" of this act was to wife the woman (with a dowry of 50 silver coins). It's interesting to note how neither the woman nor the man are sentenced to death, and also nothing says the woman is forced to get married to him. Because having sex outside of marriage was unthinkable, they have to "fix" this offense by eventually getting married together. I have a hard time to understand how any of that is negatively biased against the woman, when both of them have to bear the consequence of their act in a mutual way.

@missleismon

It might be either Colossians 3:18 or Deuteronomy 20:10-14. I've seen a bunch of feminists trying to argue this was about Israelite acquiring sexual slaves and I've rebuked it here, but I'll post again my rebuttal here :

Colossians 3:18

They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men. Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder. They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived. After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.

Deuteronomy 20:10-14

When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

Radfem love quoting these verses to argue these virgins got raped. But nothing said as such. It’s pure projection at this point. “Virgins” being very young girls or children, it might as well mean that they simply got spared and went under the soldiers’ guardianship. I really don’t understand why radfem argue that Israel soldiers would rape these children when the Law [of Israel] was literally condemning to death sex outside marriage* AND forbade marriage with foreigners…. It truly makes no sense.

.*to be more precise, the woman who's lying about being a virgin getting married was sentenced to death (Deuteronomy 22:13-21) or in case of adultery (both the man and woman are killed)

Christianity is the only ideology that preached that women have intrinsic value, no matter their socio political class, and thus should not be abused.

We can talk about abrahamic religions all we want, but christianity is the only one which doesn't recognize taking females as war booty and sexual slavery. The only one that doesn't let men marry multiple wives. The only one that specifically asks for a woman's own consent for marriage, in case she was forced, the marriage can be annulled.