If you don’t scream during a rape you are consenting to it : Jehovahs Witnesses rape

1 Dec

According to the Bible’s (and presumably, God’s) infinite wisdom, in Deuteronomy 22:23-27 a woman who does not scream for help during a Rape has committed fornication and somehow consented /enjoyed the rape and should be executed.

I don’t know how many other modern Christian or Judaic faiths still hold this to be true, at least the part about not screaming = enjoying.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses apparently still hold this true.
They say the following:

“But suppose the man had a weapon and threatened to kill the girl if she failed to lie down with him? These scriptures do not weaken the argument or alter the situation by citing any circumstance that would justify her in not screaming. It plainly says she should scream…..Such Scriptural precedents are applicable to Christians, who are under command, “Flee from fornication.” (1 Cor. 6:18) Thus if a Christian woman does not cry out and does not put forth every effort to flee, she would be viewed as consenting to the violation. …. if she should submit to the man’s passionate wishes, she would be consenting to fornication or adultery

So when this was written in 1964, a Jehovah’s Witness woman who did not scream would be disfellowshiped from the faith..meaning all her JW friends couldn’t even say hi to her and she would be considered rejected by god and worthy of death.

At least they don’t actually stone her to death as the old testament commanded..jeez..the bible old testament is filled with some of the most despicable, heinous, and purely evil acts ever recorded on paper..and it’s talking about God’s commands and deeds! Ancient Jews sure dreamed up a evil, tyrannical and blood-thirsty god..well..so did most of humanity.

Advertisements

12 Responses to “If you don’t scream during a rape you are consenting to it : Jehovahs Witnesses rape”

  1. Anonymous December 1, 2003 at 10:20 am #

    ummm
    Perhaps you are unfamiliar with rape, but women do not particularly enjoy it. It is only logical that they would scream if they did not want to be raped. If they did not scream, or made little effort to resist, then its obvious they want the sex, which is fornication. Deut. 22:24 makes perfect sense, what is so difficult to grasp? How does God become a “evil, tyrannical and blood-thirsty god?”
    Conclusion: Your reasoning leaves something to be desired.

    • bboyneko December 1, 2003 at 10:51 am #

      Re: ummm
      ..rape, but women do not particularly enjoy it. It is only logical that they would scream if they did not want to be raped.
      No, logic dictates that simply because a woman dosen’t scream (terrified, hand held over mouth, knife held to throat) that dosen’t automatically mean she is enjoying it.
      If you were robbed at gunpoint, but didn’t scream, does that mean you “enjoyed” or somehow ‘approved” of the robbery? no. You simply didn’t want to die.
      If they did not scream, or made little effort to resist, then its obvious they want the sex, which is fornication. Deut. 22:24 makes perfect sense
      I’ll let you be judged by your own words here, and let that statement lay untouched. Cus remember, “by your words you will be condemned.” Matthew 12:37
      How does God become a “evil, tyrannical and blood-thirsty god?
      Blood-thirsty: He needed the spilt blood of his own soon before he could allow himself to forgive humans for being sinful, a trait they are born with because he punished adam and eve and in turn punished their children. Punishing children for the sins of their parents is something god loves to do.
      Look at 1 Samuel 15, where God orders the slaughter of not just men women and children, but specifically babies. If thats not blood-thirsty and tyranical, I don’t know what is. But Christian apologetics always find a way to defend baby-killing and raped woman stoning.
      Conclusion: Your reasoning leaves something to be desired.
      Sorry I can’t stone raped women, I guess I’m just flawed. Must be something wrong with my logic if I dont find women who dont scream during rape deserving of death. My bad.

    • shanmonster December 1, 2003 at 1:31 pm #

      Re: ummm
      If someone is in shock (like, perchance, a man or woman being raped), that person may very well be incapable of screaming.

  2. prprincess82 December 1, 2003 at 10:33 am #

    those jehova people…heh they suck. i couldn’t go to my own cousin’s wedding this weekend cuz i’m “wordly” >=[

  3. 9103 December 1, 2003 at 3:25 pm #

    thank you

  4. Anonymous December 1, 2003 at 3:33 pm #

    Are you kidding me, anonymous?
    “It is only logical that they would scream if they did not want to be raped. If they did not scream, or made little effort to resist, then its obvious they want the sex, which is fornication. ”
    That’s ridiculous. So, if the rapist tells you that if you scream, you’re dead, then go ahead and scream, so your throat can be cut and God will be happy? That’s a pretty sick God.
    When a woman is being raped, some may resist to the last, and others may be so scared that they do nothing. By your logic, there’s a lot of victimized women that want to be raped, because they want sex. That’s abhorrent.
    Don’t marry anyone, or have any daughters, please.

  5. Anonymous December 1, 2003 at 3:40 pm #

    this is sad
    Your entire reasoning for criticizing the Deut. verse is that they might be incapable of screaming?
    ARE YOU KIDDING? Do think God is THAT dumb? The Bible does make room for COMMON SENSE.
    Wow.
    Also, Neko, what don’t you understand about “attack Israel and get pwned?”* The Amalekytes were UTTERLY DESTROYED because that is how severe the punishment is, like it or not.
    *refers to OT times only, mind you
    One more thing…. why are you afraid to post r4zz3nd4hcub3n’s entire debate?

    • bboyneko December 1, 2003 at 5:14 pm #

      Re: this is sad
      Your entire reasoning for criticizing the Deut. verse is that they might be incapable of screaming?
      No, it’s the reasoning saying that: ‘If a woman dosen’t scream when raped, she approves of it’ that i am critisizing.
      Also, Neko, what don’t you understand about “attack Israel and get pwned?”* The Amalekytes were UTTERLY DESTROYED because that is how severe the punishment is, like it or not.
      The babies din’t attack Israel, yet they were slaughtered. Killing a completley innocent person for the sins of their parents is wrong. (even the bible says so, but the bible often goes against i’s own laws)
      “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins.”
      2 Chronicles 25
      It’s about as logical as killing the brother or son of a serial killer simply because they are related to the killer.
      I don’t like the severe punishment you’re right, it sounds like something hitler or stalin would have thought up, not an all-powerful god.
      As for 4zz3nd4hcub3n’s post, if I don’t feel like helping someone who has an opposite agenda as me that’s my perogative, it is my journal. He is free to post whatever he wants in his journal.

  6. Anonymous December 1, 2003 at 6:14 pm #

    Critique of Nekolian logic.
    BboyNeko, nicely written post, but taking such a narrow-minded view of the diction in Deuteronomy 22:23-24 is ridiculous. The point of the verse is not to condemn women who do not scream during rape, but rather condemn women who take pleasure in their rape. A screaming woman is a perfect example of a woman who resists rape.
    Also, if the woman is physically incapable of screaming or her life is threatened then an exception not occur? One would trust common sense to reveal the obvious.
    Propounding 1 Samuel 15:3 and 2 Chronicles 25:4 as contradictory is interesting, but wrong. The Mosaic law kept by Amaziah in 2 Chronicles comes from Deuteronomy 24:16. The entire book of Deuteronomy was written for the Jewish people to keep, not God. In His sovereign wisdom, God made an exception to Deuteronomy 24:16, probably reinforcing the seriousness of His covenant with Abraham (Genesis 12:3). Other exceptions include the death of Saul’s seven grandsons (2 Samuel 21:5-9) and the death of David and Bathsheba’s first son (2 Samuel 12:14).
    As a final comment, it is interesting that you alluded to Stalin and Hitler, since both were ardent evolutionists and sought to stamp out Christianity. Gotta love irony.
    –razzendahcuben

  7. muse_of_tragedy December 1, 2003 at 8:23 pm #

    Hovah idiocy
    “So when this was written in 1964, a Jehovah’s Witness woman who did not scream would be disfellowshiped from the faith..meaning all her JW friends couldn’t even say hi to her and she would be considered rejected by god and worthy of death.”
    Typical dubism. Makes me sick.

  8. naebliss December 12, 2003 at 12:53 pm #

    “Also, if the woman is physically incapable of screaming or her life is threatened then an exception not occur? One would trust common sense to reveal the obvious.”
    Would an exception occur? I don’t know. The bible does not spell that out. The danger here is allowing the reader to look at a very black and white scripture and be left to his own devices to discover the nuances of what the author meant by himself. As we have seen with fundamentalist religions like the Jehovah’s Witnesses who take scripture at face value, this is not something that is desirable.
    A second point, what do you consider “physically incapable” A severed tongue? It is not uncommon, regardless of what our cro-magnon friend UMMMMM thinks, for women (and men) to go into shock during extreme trauma. To insist that a lack of physical resistance equates to acceptance is absurd to the extreme. Do all children physically resist their molestors? Why? Are children responsible for their own rapes because they did not scream or fight? Of course not. There are emotional and mental reasons for this, so is it so implausible that a woman may be emotionally muted?

  9. Stewart July 30, 2011 at 3:43 am #

    Here is something to consider, back then it was A LOT different and was not talking ABOUT THE WHOLE WORLD, nor was it talking about THE GRAPHICAL RAPE THAT INVOLVES TERROR, PANIC, SHOCK, VIOLENCE that comes to YOUR MODERN MIND.

    Israel was a son SET APART from the rest of humankind.

    In these references we are talking about Gods chosen people, a people called out to be Holy and called out to be morally pure. I think looking at the state of the world now, I can understand why GOD would make it so evidently plain what the requirements were.

    This whole nation was different to any other, to be a women in this sense would have placed responsibilty on both man and women in different ways. There was only 10 commandments, and the remaining statues were an interpretation and a more detailed follow up.

    This type of excercise i.e. keeping purity within and seperating sin from the camp is the very thing that seperated Israel from the rest of mankind. I do believe showing women the clear demarcation back then would have been a non issue, if a man wants to have sex with you and you are a maiden of Israel YOU MUST SCREAM.

    I doubt very much they would have been under a deep psychological shock as described. Most of these physicological experiences are based on fear and that is based on the images and imaginations of the mind based on what it receives via the news, radio, TV and from what they hear.

    I think that is more than a million miles away from the Holy nation of Israel.

    I do believe things have since changed, it would be incorrect to say a women who does not scream whilst getting raped in todays sense is a sign she enjoyed it. This is an obvious point, God knows each of our heats and man should not therefore judge. Ultimately God will be the judge of your individual life and the intentions of your heart will be a key factor. The problem with most folk, their heart is above all things decietful and satan the god of this world deceives many by blinding them from truth.

    The scripture did not use the word rape, it used the word ‘lay’ or ‘lie’ as in if a man lies with a women. Hardly a concrete argument for todays ‘brutal rape’ scenario which btw is caused by sin and uncontrolled lusts of sinful desire in the heart of a depraved soul.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: