Man_in_the_Middle
Seasoned Member
my Heart emoji is for the last sentence in your statement.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
How would you refute this argument?
- Thread starter MiddleEastMissionary
- Start date
Dowry killings?! Not surprising, sadly, but... how horrid!
I daresay, for those opponents of ours out there: Abraham, Jacob, David, and anyone here who legit is trying to live a Biblically polygynous lifestyle should sooner be entrusted with these women than such wicked men as would marry for money and murder!
I have had success by suggesting that perhaps He doesn't. He considers it "Breaking wedlock", and that while all adultery is breaking wedlock, not necessarily all breaking wedlock is adultery. This explains why Tyndale translates it differently in Mark 10:11 and Mark 10:12. When it is the wife doing this, Tyndale translates it as adultery, but when it is the husband doing it, he translates moichaia as "breaketh wedlocke".
I read somewhere online that the reason the Jewish priests stopped doing the jealousy test, was because men were overusing it, in an effort to try to get out of their marriages.
The answer was provided:
| Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, |
| 13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner; |
| 14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled: |
| 15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. |
| 16 ¶ And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD: |
| 17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water: |
| 18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse: |
| 19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse: |
| 20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: |
| 21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell; |
| 22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen. |
| 23 ¶ And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water: |
| 24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and becomebitter. |
| 25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon the altar: |
| 26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn itupon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water. |
| 27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and becomebitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. |
| 28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed. I wonder what today’s equivalent would be. |
I would think that there would be a huge social stigma attached to making such an ugly accusation and her proving to be innocent.
I can’t help but wonder if it was actually being too effective. Could the priests have been receiving pressure from their own wives because of what had happened to some of their friends?
It is notably the only prescribed PROCESS in the Torah which REQUIRES a miracle from YHVH.
I wonder if it worked in the Second Temple?
Man_in_the_Middle
Seasoned Member
Could be. There is a huge rukus among many modern women today over mandatory dna testing....
Coz men are finding out whether or not they are the father of the women's kids...
Yes, this mechanism exists: So, what happens after? Is she stoned or given a cert of divorce and sent away? I don't remember the prescribed manner in which the husband is to deal with her.
If she fails the test, she dies a death that sounds cancerous.
If she is innocent, she has no bad effects. Her husband has to bare the embarrassment of having accused her falsely. I would imagine that her ability to forgive was severely tested.
It couldn’t have been fun for either of them.
But it also sounds like she becomes pregnant by him. So, there is arguably restoration...
I wonder if this case is similar to the law about stoning a child. It feels like the law is saying "if you really want the law to intervene in your personal matter, this is what will happen. Are you sure you want the law to intervene? No? Okay, then deal with it personally."
If there's a similarity, it's arguably of the "threatened punishment" kind.
That 'Stoning of a rebellious son' process is often called "the commandment NEVER done" because there is no record in history, say the sages, of any such stoning. The threat, however, is another thing entirely. (It's almost a joke among some who were raised that way - "I never heard of it being done, but I SURE heard about it being threatened, personally!")
Note that with adultery, being "found out" thus doesn't require two witnesses...because YHVH says He will handle it.
I agree, but I also think it's a deterrent for the parents. It prevents parents from complaining overly much about their son being rebellious, because they know what would be done. A parent can't go to the community to complain, can't suggest public punishment of any sort, because this law is given. If they complain, or they want a public punishment, then this is what would be applied. So they have to keep the problem within their own family. Essentially, don't let it get so bad, and don't try to shame your child in front of the community. (This next part is pure speculation: perhaps God is saying that a public punishment of a child is akin to stoning, so you might as well stone them. But I'm hesitant about that interpretation.)
Similarly, if you doubt your wife, don't go spreading rumours, or suggest some sort of public consequence ("spend a day in stocks in the city square"), especially not "just in case". You have an option to take. Either take it, or keep your peace and handle it between yourselves.
Which is precisely why I tell my wife not to go talking about issues that come up with my kids to others. If we can’t handle it, we need to be selective about who knows, and who can truly lend sound advise.
Most people who are always willing to know others’ dirt only want the titillation of knowing, not being truly concerned. Privacy should still be a thing guarded.
That's probably why we are told to, Debate your case with your neighbor, And do not disclose the secret to another; Lest he who hears it expose your shame, And your reputation be ruined (Proverbs 25:9-10).