Ex Christians

[Alceste]

Yes that's one method that was used, but there must've been another as well.

If there was a better method, why didn't Good choose to include it in his instructions on how to deal with accusations of premarital sex? Not important enough? Or he just expected us to use a little common sense and not take his explicit instructions seriously?

 

[Rakhel]

Nope and nope, everyon'e assuming some girl must've been unfairly killed.

None have. EVER.

The passage says if the girl had no proof of virginity then she'd be stoned.

It's a little more complicated than that.You need a full court, two witnesses who have both warned the accused before they committed the crime was committed and further, the witnesses had to have seen each other as the crime was being committed.

To make matters even more insane, if the full court(all 72 judges) come to a unanimous vote, the accused is set free.

 

[Rakhel]

instead of refuting it she claims there MUST be another test...not realizing that the "infallible" word of god didn't mention the other test...
wow.

actually, there was a "test" to check for virginity, but it is so stupid, it makes me wonder what they were thinking.

 

[Alceste]

actually, there was a "test" to check for virginity, but it is so stupid, it makes me wonder what they were thinking.

What was it? Was it stupider than a bloody sheet? Because that's just about the stupidest test I ever heard of, and that's the one that made the cut in Deuteronomy.

 

[Rakhel]

The rabbi would take two women, one a known virgin and the other not. He would place them on top of barrels of wine, then sniff their breath.
The non-virgin's breath, because of the missing hymen(I truly don't know what they were thinking), would, by his logic, smell like wine. While the virgin's breath, because of the intact hymen, would not.

Then he would take the accused and place her on a barrel of wine and sniff her breath.

This test is, supposedly, attributed to Raban Gamliel, one of our greatest sages.

Personally, I think the man was drunk himself. Either that or very horny. If not both.

 

[Vadergirl123]

what you so conveniently leave out in this entire discussion is that this test is contingent upon this:
he potentially has a way out...
what if she doesn't like him? oh that's right, she doesn't have a say in the matter as she is treated like chattel.

A way out?? He has to pay up for being wrong.

the method was the absence of blood.

That's one, yes, but as I've said before there could've been another one.(and you have no way to prove I'm incorrect about that just as I can't prove that I'm right.)

 

[Vadergirl123]

and how does a virgin prove she is?

The Bible says her parents present proof and display a cloth before the elders.

 

[Vadergirl123]

so you are not even remotely curious as to why god would prefer virgins to marry men vs. non virgins?

Yep I'm curious, but I'm NOT going to form assumptions about the matter and then claim they're true. The Bible doesn't say why, so I can't know for sure.

 

[Vadergirl123]

How is it my opinion?

You didn't watch an instance of this punishment being performed, so you can't know any girl was unjustly accused. You're just assuming she was.
Now if you had evidence of the girl being unfairly killed then it wouldn't be your opinion but would instead be a fact However none of us have any evidence a girl who was a virgin was killed.

 

[fantome profane]

I don't think it's unfair. If someone asked me to prove something I'd only think it was "unfair" if I was guilty and didn't have any proof.

Yep, because if the husband was wrong he had to pay up for his mistake(literally haha) What's unfair about presenting proof to show your innconet?? Would you want court systems to release a person because they SAID they were innocent(and don't provide any proof)

I am sure you are missing the point and I am beginning to suspect you are deliberately missing the point.

The question is what if the women was innocent but could not prove her innocence. In many cases it is very difficult or impossible for innocent people to prove their innocence. And as has been discussed it would be exceedingly difficult or impossible for a women to prove she was a virgin before being "deflowered" on her honeymoon. And you would have the women killed just because she cannot prove her innocence.

And yes I would absolutely want and demand that a court of law release a person who cannot prove their innocence. In every court of law in civilized nations it is up to the prosecution to prove guilt. It is never required that the accused prove their innocence. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

If your hymen's intact is one way, but it's not sure-proof.

Of course he thought it through the guy could accuse yes, but if he was proven wrong he had to pay up.

but in this case an intact hymen would never be proof of the woman's innocence. Remember this is not about proving that the woman is a virgin, it is about proving she was a virgin before her husband

 

[Vadergirl123]

Why do you think she had sex?

She was being punished for not being a virgin, which means she had sex...

The only test was seeing if she bleed or not when had sex

The test was to prove her virginity.

This means that a lot of women that didn´t bleed were killed because God made a falible test.

No they would've had a method used for those women, or God would've done something. God didn't want to punish girls who were virgins, he was punishing girls who weren't. The virgins wouldn't have been killed.

 

[Vadergirl123]

If she's not being tortured to death because her parents failed to produce a bloody sheet, why does the Bible say the bloody sheet is the only evidence needed to establish her guilt or innocence?

Actually the Bible says proof is needed. It doesn't say a bloody sheet is needed. It just tells of how the parents produced a cloth to the elders

Fun fact: Did you know that even a modern doctor can not say with absolute certainty whether or not a girl has ever had sexual intercourse?

I do now haha and it's a good thing God knows more about the human body then a human doctor

 

[Vadergirl123]

fine. then god talks for you..or the other way around since....

No he doesn't. My voice is my own, it's NOt God's and just to let you know I'm actually typing myself God isn't doing it

so then why try if no one can understand him completely...

It's fun, and I do want to know as mucch about God as I can

killing someone on the basis of not being a virgin, as fallible as the method was,

The method wasn't fallible, and you can't accurately keep telling me it is. You're just speculating, you have no idea if a single virgin girl was killed unfairly.

 

[Vadergirl123]

But the bible says that if she doesn´t bleed then she most be stoned to death.

No it doesn't, it says if no proof can be found she'll be stoned. And she's being stoned for "doing an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous in her father's house."

So the incorrect test of the bible made a lot of women die unjustly.

You don't know that at all, you're also just speculating. And the test isn't incorrect. God was in complete control, and he wouldn't have allowed an innocent girl to be unfairly killed.

 

[Vadergirl123]

You do in fact use God to justify the theoretical murder of a bride if she fails to pass a notoriously unreliable virginity test.

No I say that God wasn't being immoral by having a girl who had been promiscuous be killed. Also you have no wy to know if teh test was unreliable.

Since I, personally, didn't bleed on my first time, I can only assume you would have been comfortable with my execution despite my innocence, and your only excuse is that you think God wants it that way.

If you were a virgin you wouldn't have been killed. And again God wouldn't ahev allowed you to be.

Maybe you'd have been the first to start throwing stones! That's a frankly terrifying picture of your "Biblical morality".

This "Biblical morality" you're talking about, is one you have made up by twisting what I've said. God isn't unjust and no inoccent girl would've died.

I am of course gleaning all this from your own posts. What else would I be using?

Your own mind

Where have you EVER indicated a shred of doubt that the "bloody sheet" might actually be an unfair test, and that execution would be a drastic and uncalled for response for failing to produce one?

Okay I'll say it now then...killing a girl who was a virgin would be wrong(and against God's law anyway). And this DIDN'T happen, God designed the law to punish girls who weren't virgins NOT to punish girls who were.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Women are still murdered by their families on suspicion of sexual impropriety. I guess that's OK with Vadergirl, since their families' Gods require it of them.

Of course it's not okay with me. God didn't have girls killed on orders of suspicion. They were killed because they weren't virgins. Also there's no reason to use that law today. It was adressed to the Israelites.

 

[Alceste]

The rabbi would take two women, one a known virgin and the other not. He would place them on top of barrels of wine, then sniff their breath.
The non-virgin's breath, because of the missing hymen(I truly don't know what they were thinking), would, by his logic, smell like wine. While the virgin's breath, because of the intact hymen, would not.

Then he would take the accused and place her on a barrel of wine and sniff her breath.

This test is, supposedly, attributed to Raban Gamliel, one of our greatest sages.

Personally, I think the man was drunk himself. Either that or very horny. If not both.

Behold! We have finally discovered the "other method" of establishing virginity that Vadergirl was insisting on all along!

Well, Vadergirl, now that you know what it was, how reliable do you think it was?

 

[fantome profane]

The rabbi would take two women, one a known virgin and the other not. He would place them on top of barrels of wine, then sniff their breath.
The non-virgin's breath, because of the missing hymen(I truly don't know what they were thinking), would, by his logic, smell like wine. While the virgin's breath, because of the intact hymen, would not.

Then he would take the accused and place her on a barrel of wine and sniff her breath.

This test is, supposedly, attributed to Raban Gamliel, one of our greatest sages.

Personally, I think the man was drunk himself. Either that or very horny. If not both.

Behold! We have finally discovered the "other method" of establishing virginity that Vadergirl was insisting on all along!

Well, Vadergirl, now that you know what it was, how reliable do you think it was?

I would love to test it out. It would make a heck of a mythbusters episode.

 

[Bob Dixon]

How do you guys spend, like, 50 pages going around in circles?

 

[Sunstone]

I'm glad to know that screwing around before marriage is worthy of death. For a moment there, I was thinking we humans might be lacking absolute, eternal values.