Our passage has to do with certain cases of sexual immorality in marriage and in betrothal contracts. Yesterday we studied penalties for violations of marriage. Today we'll look at cases regarding engagements.
We've talked before about how a betrothal contract was considered almost as binding as the marriage covenant in ancient Israel. Unfaithfulness could be treated as harshly as adultery. As we discussed yesterday, since things like paternity tests didn't exist in ancient times, a man who married a promiscuous woman was in danger of leaving his estate to a child that was not actually his. Aside from the fact that God says it is morally and spiritually wrong to engage in fornication or adultery, it was also a violation of the law because a man could be defrauded by an unfaithful woman into raising, providing for, and leaving his worldly goods to some other man's offspring. That's why violations of the betrothal contract and the marriage covenant were handled by the law and that's why the penalties could be very steep.
Now let's look at the first example Moses gives us. "If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death---the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you." (Deuteronomy 22:23-24)
It is not clear whether or not the man knew she was already engaged but I believe it's indicated by the text because it says "he violated another man's wife". Though she is not yet married to her betrothed, she is referred to as a "wife" because she has already entered into a binding contract to be married. If the man who sleeps with her did not know she was promised to another, I don't think he would be penalized as an adulterer, so I feel we can safely assume he did know. This is why he is judged guilty. The woman is judged guilty of willingly cheating on her betrothed because she did not cry for help. Evidently the towns were so well-populated that someone would definitely have heard and come to the rescue if she had raised an outcry. Crying for help means she's being taken against her will and she will be judged innocent of any wrongdoing.
In cases like this that occur in the countryside, the woman is not judged guilty because it cannot be proven whether or not she cried out for help. It is presumed that she is innocent of wrongdoing and that the man slept with her against her will. "But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die." (Deuteronomy 22:25)
It looks as if a legal loophole exists in which it could be possible for the woman to willingly sleep with the man and then claim she screamed for help but there was no one around to hear her. I doubt this happened often---if at all---because if she were a willing partner then there was no reason for her to later accuse the man of anything. Both he and she would keep silent about the matter. The only way I can see her willingly sleeping with him and then getting away with accusing him of rape is if someone came by and caught them in the act and she began screaming as if she were being attacked. In that case I imagine questions would arise as to why she wasn't already screaming when the traveler came within earshot. The judges would want to know why she didn't start screaming until after she saw the person. I don't believe a woman could claim she was raped if she didn't report the incident as soon as possible, for if she found herself to be with child later on and decided to claim a man forced himself upon her (in order to keep herself from being accused of unfaithfulness), the judges would want to know why she didn't say anything right away. In a case like that I feel she would be judged guilty of sexual immorality.
Suppose a woman is walking home from the market along an empty stretch of road and is sexually assaulted by a man. Nothing is to be legally done to her even though is cannot be known beyond a shadow of a doubt whether she screamed for help or not. The man is to be treated as harshly as one who has attacked and murdered a neighbor. "Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her." (Deuteronomy 22:26-27)
The next case involves a man sleeping with a woman who is not engaged. "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29) This is a substantial amount of silver and in addition to paying it to her father he must marry the woman and provide for her for the rest of her life. He cannot divorce her under any circumstances. However, the woman's father does not have to allow the two of them to marry; he can take the money and keep his daughter according to Exodus 22:17.
Who would want his daughter marrying a rapist? I think the word "rape" may be an unfortunate choice of translation because what is probably going on here is what is described in Exodus 22:16 when it is said that the man "seduced her" and "slept with her". Exodus 22:16-17 corresponds with Deuteronomy 22:28-29; our text is a restating of what was already said in Exodus about such situations. The man who must pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver and then marry her is probably a man who already knew the young lady and who may even have already been courting her but was not engaged to her. Or perhaps he was a friend of the young lady's brothers and was at the family home regularly. Or he perhaps he was a hired hand who worked on the family property. I don't think verses 28-29 are speaking of a stranger who jumps out from behind the bushes, grabs a woman, and sexually assaults her. No father in his right mind would let his daughter marry a man like that. It's likely that the father already knows the man in question.
The man, carried away by his intense attraction for the young lady, used smooth talk to entice her into sleeping with him. Many a young woman (and older woman too!) has fallen for that. Upon finding out his daughter and the man have slept together, the father may say to himself, "This young man talked my daughter into doing a foolish thing. But he's just a young person too and he let his attraction for her cause him to make inappropriate suggestions to her. He's a hard worker and comes from a good family. I think he will make a good provider for her so I'll let him marry her." Or the father may say, "This young man is a scoundrel. He parties all the time. He's not a good worker. He's not respectful to his parents. I don't want him as a husband for my daughter. He still must pay the price but I will keep my daughter in hopes that I can add the silver to her dowry and still find her a husband---a husband who is more suitable."
Our text concludes with an instruction we've seen before. "A man is not to marry his father's wife; he must not dishonor his father's bed." (Deuteronomy 22:30) If a man's father died, he could not marry his step-mother or any other type of secondary wife of his father's (a concubine). This was still considered a type of incest even though they were not related by blood.
Tomorrow we'll move on to causes for excommunication.
No comments:
Post a Comment