Do critical commentaries show I’m wrong about Deut

[@godotwaiter146]

How many of us former Christians see ourselves in that young man? It's embarrassing when I think about how I used to be, how arrogant I was simply because I believed I was right. Live long enough and sometimes wisdom has a way of sneaking up on you. ❤

[@matthewnitz8367]

Yep, I can see myself doing the exact same thing, finding sources I felt like agreed with me and not bothering to dig further because OBVIOUSLY I've discovered something the scholar that has studied this in depth missed in my hour or two of research. This only makes me further appreciate Dan's work. If I made a mistake like this, I would absolutely be embarrassed. But then also extremely thankful to have someone respond to me with both extreme precision and accuracy on the evidence for why I was wrong, and also patience and sincerity in showing me how I got it wrong. Hopefully the creator can move past the embarrassment part to realizing he is wrong, and also realize that the solution to avoid embarrassment is to not confidently make claims in subjects against others have significantly more education in than you.

[@CoachBriceWilliams]

It's possible to remain faithful as a textual critic btw. 😮

[@matthewnitz8367]

@@CoachBriceWilliams Don't believe anyone here in this section of the comments anyway said it wasn't.

[@FernLovebond]

@@matthewnitz8367 I too remember conclusion shopping. Imagine what things I do now that I'll cringe at later.

[@CoachBriceWilliams]

@@matthewnitz8367 True, but time and time again, it leads to it. Sometimes I wish he threw a little bit of Dogma in there but he really does keep is Faith separate

[@noneyabid]

I'm always fascinated by the folks who throw out the "You'll have to answer to God for misleading people" line and are blithely unaware that the warning would apply to them, as well.

[@johnpetry5321]

I have had a number of street preachers and online folks use that line on me over the years. I typically refer them to Rowan Atkinson's skit - Welcome to Hell. It's one of my favorites since Rowan finishes it off with "It seems the Jews had it right all along".

[@noneyabid]

@@johnpetry5321 Which, to them, is just evidence that Rowan Atkinson is going to hell. 🤣

[@johnpetry5321]

@@noneyabid Probably so, they aren't very bright for the most part.

[@xaayer]

Its a final gotcha to punctuate the point and subtly appeal to a higher power for aithority to their side. A person that includes that little jab in what they say is backed against the wall and yet is confident that they are correct to the point that they cannot comprehened even the thought or idea that they could be wrong. They are also the kind of person that reinforces the stereotype encompssing the quote "there is no hate like christian love"

[@CB66941]

I remember this sort of line being told to me by my parents in regards to something that I said: "Do you actually want your teacher to know about this?" (It was in regards to my opposition of caning as an appropriate punishment for failing to do schoolwork) And I hid my smile because the teacher I had did not cane their students. They were the kind that though generally unsuccessful always wanted students to be interested in the work they do. When I hear Christians say this, I know now that this is a fear tactic. They know that this is something to be afraid of, that honest mistakes and ignorant beliefs simply have no negotiation or compromise with the Christian god. Because otherwise why point it out? Yet we humans easily forgive these things, and we don't say these things if we knew how some people brushed it off. It genuinely makes god sound like a petty asshole

[@melissamiller2696]

Even when I was growing up 55 years ago, "seduced" included rape.

[@digitaljanus]

When Luke raped Laura on _General Hospital_ in 1979, the show tried to frame it as a "seduction", and they were criticized for it at the time! (20 years later the show firmly called it rape.)

[@josephcollins6033]

You are incorrect. Learn English.

[@johnpetry5321]

​@josephcollins6033 that's a lovely declaration of opinion without context or supportive facts. Try again

[@sugarfrosted2005]

​@@josephcollins6033 I'm assuming the original poster is talking about the euphemistic use of "seduced" rather than the more common "correct" use.

[@pansepot1490]

Language changes over time. I used to read a lot of nineteenth century novels. When society was far more prudish than today definitely “seduction” was used euphemistically to refer to rape. You got the correct meaning by the context in which the word was placed. And now that I think of it, even in the milder meaning, it never had a positive connotation.

[@theoutspokenhumanist]

Facts matter. Research and understanding what you read matters. But, most importantly, honesty matters. Dan is never unpleasant, never personal but he is always, always accurate. Why? Because he is a genuine bible scholar who does this stuff for a living, not a KZbin apologist who thinks he knows better than the rest of us.

[@MyBucketOfScapulas]

This has been wild to watch. One of the best series of response videos yet I think. It shows so clearly the difference in understanding here. Thanks for your rigor Dan.

[@rahrahrobbbieee]

Tell me you don't understand words without telling me you don't understand words. Your patience is astounding Dan.

[@user-gk9lg5sp4y]

World class mental gymnastics, I'm in awe. As in "aww, you tried, little guy."

[@kyrroti]

I love how this is mostly just clarifying that the guy’s sources actually aren’t supporting the argument.

[@Wandering_Vet]

He made a whole video proving himself wrong 😂

[@billirwin3558]

Isn't it amazing how strongly or stubbornly some people fight back when they are proved wrong. I think we all know people like that. Many of us may not be as patient as you have been Dan.

[@Tmanaz480]

Especially on social media. Doubling down is the tactic of the day.

[@lisaboban]

There is such a level of arrogance to that last segment. I am truly aghast. He really pulled the "I love you and you're going to hell" card.

[@erinbyrd5181]

What aggravates me the most about people like the other creator is the whole “I pray for you, I care about you” crap. I have always found it so condescending.

[@TheMesomovie]

You have no idea how many people are like that guy in the Tiktok. I run into at least 2 a week and to a man, they think they're equipped to do critical biblical exegesis with only a grasp of English. Thanks, Dan, that felt great.

[@TacticusPrime]

And not even that firm a grasp on English.

[@Aldrnari956]

Did… did this dude just suggest that a person can go to Hell for misunderstanding the prescribed punishment in an ancient Semitic rape law that no longer applies to today? Even if we took this creator’s world view AND assumed he was right in this particular discussion, I don’t know of any part of the Bible that says you go to Hell for not understanding Exodus 22 a few thousand years after the fact.

[@hrvatskinoahid1048]

It's a Jewish law that still applies to Jews. It never applied to Gentiles.

[@naysneedle5707]

I think Dan's sin was implying that the Bible says some bad things and therefore that 'God's word' isn't perfectly moral.

[@koseighty8579]

How was "seduce" defined 130 years ago? I'm guessing the common definition back when these sources were written included "rape."

[@benjaminlesue1372]

The original creator would do well to read the book The Sin of Certainty by Peter Enns.

[@jithel7948]

I honestly don't understand how you have the energy for this. I'm in awe

[@pansepot1490]

Finally biblical scholarship has a practical everyday use. 😁 As the saying goes “if you don’t use it you lose it”.

[@AurorXZ]

Thankfully these types of videos can actually be super satisfying to debunk for content creation _because it's so damn easy._ Their own references go against them lol.

[@toniacollinske2518]

"I'll pray for you because your soul is damned." Aww, isn't that special?

[@rainbowkrampus]

Quote mining and an emotionally charged plea for Dan's soul? This guy is cooked and he knows it. It's only a matter of time before his ego catches up with the rest of his brain.

[@BriannaWeldon]

Oh he refuses to “know” it. Many Christians are highly skilled at cognitive dissonance.

[@boboak9168]

‘If you are wrong you’ll have to answer for it’ applies equally to our apologist if his God exists. You can bet he thinks he’ll be fine because his God will judge his intent, but he clearly thinks the same provision doesn’t apply to Dan and everyone else. It’s such a ‘nothing’ statement to make, apart from perhaps try-hard intimidation.

[@wheezer324na3]

Amazing to even think you could argue with someone an expert in their field. Reading a book called...The Death of Expertise . Very good in todays world

[@BradyPostma]

That sounds like a compelling book

[@naysneedle5707]

Sounds depressing 😅

[@piesho]

@@BradyPostma Yes, it is. I can recommend two more books "Unscientific America" by Chris Mooney, and "The Age of American Unreason" by Susan Jacoby.

[@BradyPostma]

@@naysneedle5707 - Reality usually is. But the best way to make reality less depressing is to learn what makes it that way and stand against those causes.

[@wheezer324na3]

@@BradyPostma good point and thanks for tip on more reading

[@LoveAllAnimals101]

When one's holy book is full of holes, filling the holes becomes a life long chore! Holy Slip!!

[@squiddwizzard8850]

"I don't do debates, because it devolves into phallus measuring contests" (Has literally done 3 videos debating)

[@AurorXZ]

Recently? I don't have TikTok.

[@FernLovebond]

@@AurorXZ I believe yes, as Dan has replied to two or three of them in the last few days, unless I'm mistaken.

[@benjaminlesue1372]

Told to him by a MSG. LOL Obviously, he wants to stop now before he comes up short.

[@NYCFenrir]

I hope his next video is an apology and a correction but I doubt it.

[@zoebirss9944]

This is so good. The last twenty seconds are the best. Well done.

[@jon4574]

The vast analytical distance between Dan and this apologist can only be measured in light years!

[@janetmilan4698]

And in English 100s of years ago "abduction" of a woman was also synominous with rape.

[@Tmanaz480]

Dang. Those are some rotten, shriveled cherries he picked.

[@naysneedle5707]

Just old dirty pits off the ground 😂

[@TheZinmo]

All the quotes are at least 100 years old... Shows how far back these fundamentalists want to bring all of us.

[@basedgamerguy818]

The end of the other creators video sure felt like "i just dont want you to burn in hell for eternity"

[@timandmonica]

Looks like to burn hell for eternity all you need to do is be a Bible scholar who has a clear understanding of how things have changed in the last 150 years in scholarship. Quoting from Josh McDowell and two 150 year old commentaries somehow just doesn't convince us.

[@DoloresLehmann]

That's because it's exactly what he meant.

[@mmcbride1]

I don't know when evangelicals created this silly "If you don't believe like I do you are going to hell". Totally opposite of what Christ taught.

[@DoloresLehmann]

@@mmcbride1 Not only that, but also the whole concept of substitutionary atonement is contrary to Jesus' own teachings.

[@jks612]

I LOVE THIS CHANNEL!!!!!

[@MetaphorUB]

People don’t think they can just randomly fly jets. They don’t think they’re qualified to perform surgery. So why do they think they can “gotcha” scholars on the LITERAL TOPIC OF THEIR YEARS OF STUDY and not get just smacked down?

[@paulastorga228]

"Becuase God gave us the bible and therefore anyone should be able to understand it. Doesn't matter if you are an expert or not, you can get the meaning if you want it badly enough."

[@johnmcgimpsey1825]

I think you'd be surprised how many people think they can fly a jet... "Out of 20,063 adults surveyed in the United States, nearly a third said they were “somewhat confident” or “very confident” that they could safely land a passenger airplane in an emergency, relying only on the assistance of air traffic control. Almost half of the men who responded were confident they could do it, compared with 20 percent of the women." (Washington Post, March 22, 2023)

[@MetaphorUB]

@@johnmcgimpsey1825 Lol I’m not sure if that helps or hurts my case…

[@naysneedle5707]

I hope this guy actually opens his mind and learns from all this.

[@pherble]

Someone trying to argue outdated beliefs may indicate they'd prefer those to be the social norms, again.

[@starrynight6817]

The ending--spot on! Thank you! 💙

[@ramblingracheltrailtales]

Dan, you’re a breath of fresh air! Finally, an actual academic putting the wanna ‘scholars’ back in their box. 📦

[@ChrisHeardPhD]

I’m a little late to this party, but I think I’ve now seen all of your Deut 22 reactions. I agree that you’re representing the critical consensus, but there is one interesting peer-reviewed article on the “non-rape” side: Lyn Bechtel, “What if Dinah is not Raped? (Genesis 34),” JSOT 62 (1994): 19-36. Bechtel's focus is on Gen 34 (obvious from the title) but she does comment on Deut 22 and has a different perspective on תפש. Bechtel’s argument does have some significant problems, like equating תפש ושכב in Deut 22:28 with לקח ושכב in Gen 34:2. Still might not hurt to be aware of this article if you’re not already. I don’t think it should change your conclusion, but might add some nuance.

[@PIA-tj5hc]

Dan has such patience for the unlearned……It’s amusing 🙄🙄

[@minaguta4147]

Dan, you have the patience of Job.

[@Javaman21011]

The more and more I watch Dan's content the more and more I become utterly disgusted with the Bible and of the edgelords throughout history who try to squeeze it's text into an abhorrent world view.

[@PIA-tj5hc]

Dan you have to stand before the Lawd….i literally lol 😂😂😂

[@probablynotmyname8521]

I find utterly pathetic when someone appeals to “im just thinking about your wellbeing”. Saying that youll have to stand before the lord and answer for being wrong is not an argument and, if true, shows a god that is weak and unable to withstand criticism. How anyone thinks that this should be persuasive is beyond me.

[@Brandon_SoMD]

Of course, those of us on the receiving end of such comments are also quite persuaded that we have a better grasp on the situation, and are reasonably confident in our own place with God. The difference for me is that I don't think they're in danger of hell... because I don't think the evangelical doctrine of hell is even remotely correct. If anything, I'm confident they'll also be with the Lord in eternity... but one of us or the other will be chastened and perhaps have to endure some refining fire on the way. And it's up to God to sort that out, not me.

[@probablynotmyname8521]

@@Brandon_SoMD spending eternity with anyone sounds like hell to me.

[@cobuck4007]

Hey, Dan, do you have a video that explains the meaning/function of “critical scholarship” versus other types (such as the old encyclopedia referenced in this video)? What makes it more trustworthy than other types?

[@Thoughtful_Theologian]

The use of scholarly resources requires training. You can’t pick up any old book or paper and claim to be engaging in scholarship.

[@dragonhawkeclouse2264]

I love your work.....but it should be noted....this time, the video you are responding to, the volume is super low.....I could still gather what he was saying, based upon your response Great work.....keep it up

[@tnypxl]

It’s wild to suggest that Dan’s soul is condemned for not conceding that he is wrong when the data clearly shows he is 100% right.

[@nates9029]

I think it would be wise for that content creator to stop while he is really far behind. Relying on commentaries from over a century or more ago is pretty embarrassing. I wonder if that person has read a book from the last century.

[@basedgamerguy818]

I'm sure they have but in order to push a certain narrative he has to dig up the oldies

[@johnboden8430]

That's why it is embarrassing to be relying on a book that is literally from two millennia ago.

[@nates9029]

@@johnboden8430 - Amen!

[@hrvatskinoahid1048]

Rashi's commentary is timeless. He drew on his amazing command of traditional rabbinic literature. This included Aramaic translations, classical homiletics and details of Torah law, and the entire Talmud.

[@nates9029]

@@hrvatskinoahid1048 - So you think there haven't been advances in our understanding since then? This is kind of the problem with venerating ancient texts.

[@avishevin3353]

Jewish commentators going back to at least the 11th century have explained these passages as referring to rape. For all the differences in opinion between Christians and Jews, I find it incredible to even posit the notion that the founders of Christianity would have understood them differently.

[@Darisiabgal7573]

Oh, Dan, you're special you have been prayed for. The prayer of the triggered man. "oh Lord wontcha buy me a mercedes benz, my friends all have porsches I must make amens" whoops thats the wrong prayer. "Oh, Lord, please go back in time and change the text of the bible so that it reflects my point of view"

[@masterbulgokov]

When you're just determined to have it your way . . . go to Burger King.

[@goldenalt3166]

If your apologetics is that biblical translators accidently used the word "rape" when a less offensive word was in the text, you got quite the uphill battle.

[@geneshifter]

These apologists are literally insane.

[@captionhere19]

I love when we reach reaction inception

[@bipolarrambling242]

Oh to be a fly on the wall when these creators see your response videos...

[@crystaldottir]

Wow, that guy would have improved his scholarship by watching Downton Abbey. As the Dowager Countess explains, "A young woman of good family who finds herself in the bed of a man who is not her husband has invariably been seduced". If the writer of a soapy TV drama understands your source material better than you, you need to stop calling yourself an expert.

[@DeepDrinks]

Dan, you are doing the lords work!

[@mikewriterson3829]

You know you’re winning an argument when you have to cite a text from the 1800s that kinda agrees with you a little bit if you squint

[@SicMundus7]

So weaselly, evasive, desperate are these apologists.. I find them insufferable. Face up to what your "word of God" says and stop trying to whitewash it all. I admire anyone who can engage them and show much patience.

[@jonathansmith8962]

Dan, I aint thinking op cares here. He just needs something for his audience to feel better. Sounds edgy, but if he is this far in, he knows better.

[@Goodbrod]

It's so easy for anyone to believe whatever they want to believe. It's a free for all.

[@hrvatskinoahid1048]

The Jewish and Noahide commandments are not open to interpretations that are divorced from the traditional understanding of the text.

[@Goodbrod]

They shouldn't be, but they definitely are. @@hrvatskinoahid1048

[@Alexeimakarov248]

Dan I have a question on the serpent of the garden of Eden, If it’s not Satan, then whose head does the Messiah crush (Genesis 3:15)? Was it not Satan who, through Judas and Christ’s accusers was responsible for the crucifixion (bruising of the heel)? And is it not Jesus, who, by his resurrection removes the power of Satan (crushing of the head) over the elect and defeats him physically at the end of the thousand years (Rev. 20)?

[@hrvatskinoahid1048]

"Satan" is the name of a prosecuting angel in the Heavenly Court. Yet some say that he became an independent ruler over a realm of eternal damnation, and that he acts in opposition to God's will - i.e., that he is a separate god. This idolatrous concept is not even a belief in an intermediary, since it claims that Satan is not under God's control.

[@Alexeimakarov248]

If Satan is not a seraph what is he then

[@boboak9168]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@Alexeimakarov248 in the Old Testament, ‘satan’ is applied to humans many more times than to divine beings. There are many books and videos about the usage of satan and ha-satan (not a proper noun as I understand it) in the OT if you wish to check them out.

[@justinboyett8843]

8:46 This is the only point that matters.

[@DaveyDDial1]

@maklelan please invite this guy onto your podcast and get him to live respond to your rebuttals, otherwise he's going to continue to intentionally misinterpret your words.

[@naysneedle5707]

Being live won't stop him, it will just make him harder to rebut.

[@Brandon_SoMD]

As much as I would love to watch this, it wouldn't go well. I've been in plenty of such discussions in the last few years, and people like that creator get extremely angry and defensive and cannot hold a calm conversation for more than a few minutes. They can't keep up, they require hours of time to research rebuttal points that they feel would keep their claims alive, and they simply cannot admit they're wrong. It quickly devolves into name calling and ad hominem attacks, and nothing of substance would result.

[@scienceexplains302]

*Read the Bible Better* The apologist is filtering the text thru his religion and “how can I feel better about the Bible?” So he probably thinks that is a perfect reading.

[@sammysamlovescats]

Hey Dan, if you have a moment (Or someone else knowledgeable does) could you clarify something for me please? You mentioned that the writings are not concerned with the consent of the woman, but also that it connects to sexual assault/rape. That confuses me a little on both being true. Is it just that the language implies force/violence, regardless of any consent? Does it automatically assume violence? Thanks!

[@maninalift]

I am not someone knowledgeable but my understanding is that the passage is describing a situation that appears to be what we would regard as rape, but the crime is not the violation of the consent of the woman, since that was not a consideration of the audience, but the consent of the father and practice of marriage. The consent of the woman is not mentioned in the proposed remedy either.

[@cedarwaxwing3509]

@@maninalift And Dan made the point in his earlier response to this apologist that consent had nothing to do with it. A virgin daughter was worth money to the father; a husband had to pay a “bride price” to the father for her. Once she had been seduced/raped, she was no longer a source of income for the father. In other words, the “transgression” here is not the sexual violation of the woman, it’s property theft from the father, with the property being the potential income that the father may no longer collect. The “law” stated here ensured that the father was paid for the loss of his property. It never even considered the issue of consent or suggested that rape was a crime against a human being.

[@rahrahrobbbieee]

Well done again Dan.

[@OldMotherLogo]

God save us all from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[@corlissmedia2.0]

LOVE the ending lines!

[@Darisiabgal7573]

No need to guess "Vergewaltigung (in Deutschland bis 1973 Notzucht) ist als Form sexueller Gewalt eine schwerwiegende Sexualstraftat". Explained😂

[@stevebeary4988]

Nailed it.

[@namzarf]

Wasn't Polygamy practiced during this time, and how does that complicate the argument?

[@OldManBrodie]

Big oof. That's embarrassing. Relying on texts that are generations out of date is not the flex this creator thinks it is.

[@basilkearsley2657]

Dan is like the Borg he will educated you

[@MichaelWalker-de8nf]

Dan, that was metal 🤟❤️

[@disraelidemon]

If the dude doesn't think seduction can mean SA he needs to read him some Tess of the d'Urbervilles

[@TW-fs3fj]

Did you read the early Church writings on the subject or speak with an Orthodox theologian?

[@timothymulholland7905]

So your eternal salvation depends on your position about a 2500 year old text written in a dead language, probably taken from Hammurabi of a thousand years before! I wonder what the fellow would offer as a bride price today.

[@davidoliver9551]

🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

[@googolplex1]

Bro you need to fix the volume levels between videos ASAP.

[@VJacquette]

I have excellent hearing (most people say it's too good), and I have everything turned up to full volume on my computer and on KZbin, but I can't follow what's going on here (also on some of your other videos). When it's just you talking, I can hear okay it as long as I stay very close to the computer and don't have any other sounds competing. When you're playing a clip of the other person, I can't make out a thing they say. And when you play a clip of what you've said in the past, you speed it up so I can't make it out. What's the point of putting out videos that I can't hear and follow?

[@Aldrnari956]

I think you either have something wrong with your speakers or you may have missed that there are parts of the video showing Dan that are clipped into the other content creator’s post. The creator is splicing in sped up statements from Dan and trying to reply to them. That or your speakers are bunged up because the audio is pretty clear otherwise.

[@naysneedle5707]

No issues with the audio for me...

[@VJacquette]

@@Aldrnari956 Nope, I listen to most KZbin videos at around 60-80 because they're just so loud for my sensitive ears. I strain to hear parts of this on even at 100.

[@Aldrnari956]

@@VJacquette while I don’t know what kind of computer you’re listening on, if you’re having difficulty making out the audio with your speakers maxed out then it seems like your speakers may not be very good. If your hearing is excellent but you can’t hear what’s on the videos, then how about trying to listen on a different device just to see if there is any better clarity in the audio? Obviously I can’t know what’s going on with your specific setup, but I’m not seeing any other complaints about the audio in Dan’s videos, and for perspective in a quiet room my phone only needs to be turned up to about 20% to be clearly heard. My desktop speakers only need around 10-15 to be clearly heard, but then I don’t watch these videos on a laptop so there may be a difference there.

[@VJacquette]

@@Aldrnari956 While I won't even try to compare my system to any other, I will just say that I've never had trouble hearing ANY videos except Dan McClellan's. The ones where it's just him talking are okay-ish, but he is pretty soft spoken so they could be better. The ones where he goes back and forth with someone else's videos are usually okay, but not always. But these last couple where it's him, the other person, and him from the past -- those just don't come through. I use videos constantly in my work, so I'm watching them (almost) all day every day for years, so I'm just trying to give some feedback to him to let him know. I've never had any trouble with any other video besides his ever! Most other videos hurt my ears they're so loud, which is why I have to turn them down so much. For my system, 60 is about the max that I can listen to most videos at, but I prefer it lower. I realize those numbers only apply to my system here, but there's something about his videos that are different from all others and I just wanted him to know.

[@oceanside13]

Why is he so obsessed about the meaning of rape in Biblical Law?

[@TheBackyardProfessor]

An absolute Maklelan massassassacre.......

[@stephenlitten1789]

Great video, but the sound balance was shocking

[@robertwynne4636]

Yes! I thought maybe it was just me!

[@munirone]

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍❤👍

[@duncansonoryan]

🎤 drop

[@DarkBlood666]

this guy is a boss....

[@Sveccha93]

Wow, that’s rough

[@metjetfan23]

Prof, you gonna that creator into an atheist. 😉😂

[@redstick4722]

Mic drop

[@victordelarosa4599]

That dude's passive aggressive attitude at the end was so cringe

[@georgemode3694]

do people have some kind of set rules in their mind from birth, or do you all have the 10 commandments in your minds from birth, this is a real question? I am not joking do people have God's words preprogram from birth and I am missing it?

[@evangelicalsnever-lie9792]

No they do not show that.

[@SciPunk215]

schooled

[@JimmyTuxTv]

Believe full faithfully in your lies, if Jesus wrote this himself with clarity instead of the lying storyteller wrote “take my word for it bro” style maybe I worry about my stand before god some day.

[@hrvatskinoahid1048]

Deuteronomy 22:29 is definitely about rape. It obligates the Jewish rapist to marry the maiden. The compensation goes to the father so long as the victim is a minor. Once she reaches the age of maturity, the compensation goes directly to her.

[@bagamer13]

I don’t see anything in that chapter or verse that suggests the payment would go to the women if she was of a mature age. All it states is that the woman’s father would be paid. Can you elaborate or source your claim?

[@hrvatskinoahid1048]

@@bagamer13 The Talmud deduces that the fifty-shekel fine is merely a portion of his obligation; it is the portion he pays for the pleasure he took from his act. But this doesn’t compensate her for her pain, indignity and loss. The Talmud thus infers from this verse that in addition to the fine, the rapist is required to indemnify her for three forms of damage: the indignity she suffered, the pain she endured and the loss she incurred. In all, this amounts to a hefty fine.

[@lizzard13666]

No, it's definitely not. Deut 22:25-27 is about non-consensual sex. Verses 28-29 are about consensual sex.

[@monte116mm]

I'm pretty sure it's not.

[@Kharmazov]

Is it just me or is this on the same levels as discussing cretards??

[@ballin3230]

You lied at 4:24. 23 and 24 was NOT talking about forced assault read it again. ““If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her,” “then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor’s wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you.” ‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭22‬:‭23‬-24 NKJV‬‬. It was both CONSENSUAL they were caught having sex. She CHEATED on her husband. Nothing in this verse said the man forced the woman. It states she did not cry out, if it was forced why wouldn’t she cry out? So your claim that 23-27 is about assault is false because the verses included CONSENSUAL sex also. And that goes for 28-29 also how the man SEDUCED the woman, you can seduce someone without assaulting them. Seducing meaning to attract or entice NOT FORCE. So 28-29 was consensual since the man just seduced her which made her WANT to have relations with him.

[@robertgillespie6890]

"that's not a good look." 😆🩷😆