Are woman mistreated in the Old Testament?

are women mistreated in the OT? Of course they are. It was the way of the world for much of human history. A large portion of the OT is history, and God records human history for us in sometimes gory and distasteful (to us), but truthful, fashion. Isn't always pretty, is it?

The NT is a close-up personal accounting of God's work FOR mankind in a short span of time. It is God dealing on an individual basis with us. The OT is a broad span, dealing in many more generalities, and covering a far greater time period. Much of the OT is just stating how things were, what was happening then...not necessarily what God had commanded.

I do not believe that GOD has ever or will ever mistreat women. If you ever come across someone stating this sentiment again perhaps you could point out that wherever the Bible is preached the status of women has been raised. You can also point out that God inspired two entire books of the OT on just the life and heroisms of two individual women.....both of them extremely positive books showing bravery of these women and their faithfulness to God despite their circumstances. There are no books of the OT dedicated to the failings of a woman (ie Jonah).
When Elijah was hungry TWICE God sent him to widows......not to poor men, but to poor women.

We women are not mistreated by God, we are sometimes mistreated by men, and God does not hold punches in regards to pointing that out. But on the other hand we women are not always innocent victims either. We do our share of mistreating.

 

Mistreated? sure thing!

When some look at our God-breathed Bible they see only God's words but the Scriptures are a very human book too. They show us man, sometimes at his worst.

Women were not given the same respect as they are now.
They were often treated as property.

Look at the life of David and see how his wives and porcupines were treated.
See how both he and Saul, (and particularly David’s son Absalom) treated the women in their lives…. deplorable by today’s standards. ….probably deplorable even back then for anyone else except the king.

Rob

 

What particular Deuteronomy law on rape are you talking about? The only one I can find (Deut. 22:25-27) is totally lenient with the woman, and commands death for the man. This is quite different from the vast majority of the world throughout the vast majority of history.

In Japan rape is almost never reported, and when it is reported the woman traditionally has had little recourse. It is only recently that molestation and sexual harrassment has been prosecuted here in Japan, but I still virtually never read in the paper or hear on the news about rape being prosecuted. By the way, it also often happens in the so-called "wonderful" Japanese school system, and is always covered up (as are many other crimes occurring in the school system). So much for the "high standards" of Buddhism and Shinto.

Concerning love for the wife in the OT, seems to me that "Love your neighbor" would cover that.

Concerning men taking as wives women taken as prisoners of war, what is wrong with that? Such an action is really merciful, because then the woman had the chance to hear about the true God of Israel. Have you ever studied the religions of Palestine in the time of the conquests? Absolutely vicious and wicked religions, including baby sacrifice in the worship of Molech, etc. The Jewish man would be doing the woman a favor to take her out of that.

God bless.

John

 

The problem here is trying to filter Scripture through a 21st century mindset. It helps to read a book about what life was like during OT times to bring things into perspective.

 

no, no, no, no..........

first of all, the girls were not to be "just set free" as boys were. As in she was not to just be set at liberty and put on her own! She had to be redeemed, as in "bought" back by her family. She was NOT to be sold to foreigners who might mistreat her. This passage that you cite here is actually showing God's special care and provision for the girls OVER the boys. The girls were to be shown special respect and caretaking.

Im short on time right now.......(if you sit down to check a thread right as you are walking out the door you MIGHT be addicted to the BB :laugh: )

I'll be back later!

 

Let me state from the beginning I do not believe God ever approves of rape or violence toward any one. Now, on to what I think and could well be misunderstood.

If we view the Bible as a continual, gradual revelation to the end then it may clear up some issues.

Sometimes new information must replace old laws because of a change in dispensation and a general growth in knowledge and standards. Sometimes new information adds to previous knowledge. I would stress that I do not believe it ever conflicts.

Sometimes it is better for something to be regulated before it can be condemned and banned. I think this may be the case with some of the society issues we percieve.

For example, I do not believe God or Moses condoned divorce under any circumstances. But, it was better for it to be regulated rather than simply ignored. By regulating divorce at least women had some recourse rather than being completely abandoned.

Give this Bible to someone 6000 years ago or someone who has never heard and the change necessary would be immense! So they would need to be instructed slowly and gradually.

Consider the missionary who goes to a society where polygamy is still a part of life. Firstly, you can't just have them toss all their wives except their favourite out the door. Secondly, the women's perception of the wrong done to them may not be as strong as we would percieve it in a post-women's rights movement society. I am not saying they are happy about it, but their perception may be considerably different. Thirdly, the missionary would have to start with the basics and it may take a generation or more before the practice of polygamy dies out.

As for perceptions, many western women feel Muslim women need to be liberated, but many Muslim women in various polls say they do not want the "freedoms" that western women have. Really, is the freedom to dress immodestly and promote promiscuous sexuality freedom for anyone?

Lastly (I think), some writers say that some women in ancient times would make themselves more attractive to their captors and so this could be a double-sided coin.

What are the benefits of the laws Israel had? Instead of being left destitute in a destroyed nation, homeless, husbandless and about to starve, they could be taken into a home, taught the laws of the God of Israel and have the opportunity to become a prosolyte.

When we consider the other laws of the Old Testament there was a degree of respect and honour giving to women. And I seem to remember any women joining the Tribe/Nation had to meet certain regulations. So perhaps there are truths assumed in this passage. Truths that were common place for National Israel but things that Christians would never imagine.

Taking the Bible as a whole leaves you in no doubt as to the proper treatment of men, women and children, whether they be friends, family, enemies or strangers or neighbours.

You don't chance a person over night, and it takes, very often, a generation to change a nation.

 

That must have been even more of a prickly situation :laugh:

 

Couldn't it be said that mankind in general was mistreated? Slavery was allowed and condoned...disobedience in many cases meant immediate death...hostile takeovers and pillaging...men being forced to marry their sister in law upon their brothers death (NOOOOOO).
It seems like a rough time to live for both men and women.

 

You have used some extremes found in Islam just as your trouser issue is something of an extreme within Christianity.

Besides, all I was passing on was what I had read in some polls. Some Muslim women do not want want what is sometimes seen as Western freedoms.

I just deleted a paragraphor so here. Due to the fact I feel very much insulted by, what I hope, is a misunderstanding on your part. No where did I state that "she's-asking-for-it." You imply that I think rape is okay if the woman somehow deserved it.

I said, "Lastly (I think), some writers say that some women in ancient times would make themselves more attractive to their captors and so this could be a double-sided coin."

Firstly, it is something I have read by some commentators but have been able to verify yet. Secondly, all I meant was that the women seemed to be making the best of a bad situation. I am not saying they deserved rape or brought it on themselves.

No one, man or women, ever deserves rape. Some perhaps are unwise and put themselves in bad situations, but they are not to blame and do not deserve rape.

You can't tell me something more is not going on. Where in the text does it say or imply that all the regulations to do with fornication, adultary, religious cleanliness etc were to be put aside for a one night stand after taking them into their home for one month.

Having said that, how many other nations do you think had the one month rule? Do you not think the one month could have acted as something of a cold shower?

I never meant to imply that they were. I used the example of missionaries having to utilise gradual teaching/revelation. And I do think there could have been cases where the "wife" was a prosolyte and not just some poor abused woman.

Seeing as this conflicts with other OT passages, and seeing as the Hebrew seems to give more light I cannot simply rest on your interpretation. ​

​

For me this does not fall into the "That's just the way it is" category. I applaud the stand you have taken because I know you feel strongly about some issues that are touched on here. It demonstrates a strong and mature faith and you I genuinly applaud that. ​

 

Christianity as a whole have given freedom to women that they enjoy today. I think Jesus' had the right attitude towards women, he protected the woman from being stoned for adultry and even commented that he had not seen such worship from anyone else (MARY MAGDELINE)........I think the 'love' in christianty has given women much more rights in today's society as compared to islamic and hindu countries.

 

But the fact remains that if she screams, she is not guilty and the man dies. Every girl knew that and screamed, I would think. This is a far, far better law than those of the heathens were.

All of them, of course!

Make no mistake, I believe God's original plan was one man and one woman becoming one. Noah and his wife were a great example of that. But God dealt with the culture as it existed in 1400 BC. Don't try to read your 21st century prejudices back into it.

Take two aspirin and read the passages again! :saint:

Every woman is beautiful to some man. You are not understanding men here. My wife is gorgeous to me and always has been. But some other man might not think so (can't imagine that). That's how God's plan of romantic love works.

At any rate, even being a slave of the Jews was far better for a young woman than the culture she had come from. Note the horrible religion of the region before the Jews came:

"The fire-god Molech was the tutelary deity of the children of Ammon, and essentially identical with the Moabitish Chemosh. Fire-gods appear to have been common to all the Canaanite, Syrian and Arab tribes, who worshipped the destructive element under an outward symbol, with the most inhuman rites. According to Jewish tradition, the image of Molech was of brass, hollow within, and was situated without Jerusalem. 'His face was (that) of a calf, and his hands stretched forth like a man who opens his hands to receive (something) of his neighbor. And they kindled it with fire, and the priests took the babe and put it into the hands of Molech, and the babe gave up the ghost.' Many instances of human sacrifices are found in ancient writers, which may be compared with the description of the Old Testament of the manner in which Molech was worshipped." (Smith's Bible Dictionary)

Now you are reading into the text something that is not there. The text does not say they had sex, it says he shamed her: shaved her hair, etc.

Agreed.


Now my lovely bride is wafting the smell of fried chicken up the stairs. She's not only beautiful but a great cook! (And no, I'm not being sexist. She barred me from the kitchen after I almost burned down the house heating water :BangHead: .)