by Edward Ridenour
–
Someone may ask the question, “what about when a man forces himself upon a woman raping her?” It is very clear in Scripture, if a female is violated in an act of rape, this act would never be construed or regarded as a marital bond by the Lord. This is an act of violence toward the victim physically and the victims will. The victim should never believe, in the slightest, that they are bound to the perpetrator. The victim would be free, for God is a God of peace. Even though a fleshly joining did occur, the victim is not bound to the perpetrator, however, the perpetrator will be bound all their life to the victim and must always stay celibate or they will be living in fornication.
–
If the rape involved incest, the consequence would be the same as above. Since it is a forced act, it cannot be construed or regarded as a valid marital relationship by God, but a sinful act. Again, the victim should in no way think they are married to the perpetrator, but free, as well. However, as previously stated, the family perpetrator will be guilty of, and living in fornication (adultery), if not celibate for the rest of their life.
–
The Bible (KJV) never uses the word rape in any context where this act is identified. There is one instance, which describes an act of rape in 2 Samuel chapter 13 where Amnon, King David’s eldest son, had a lustful desire for his brother Absolom’s sister Tamar. Because of her being a virgin and his inability to come near her, his crafty and subtle cousin Jonadab advised him how to deceptively lure Tamar alone to himself, making it possible for him to rape her. His advice was for Amnon to pretend to be sick in bed and while being visited by his father King David, he should request from David that he would allow Tamar to come and prepare a pastry for him in his presence and she should be the one to give to him to eat. All the children of King David lived in separate houses.
–
Amnon deceptively succeeded in convincing David, according to the plan. David immediately summoned Tamar to do as Amnon had requested. Tamar, then, came to Amnon’s residence and carried out the process of making the cakes before him and presented them to him to eat. Amnon, still acting a though he was sick, refused to eat the cake and requested all the men in his chamber to leave them alone. In their solitude, as Tamar was handing the food to Amnon, he quickly laid hold of Tamar’s arm pulling her into his bed, bidding her to volunteer in having sexual relations with him. She, however, vehemently struggled against him, refusing his request. He, therewith, “forced her, and lay with her” (2 Samuel 13:14). Tamar did her best to say whatsoever she could, to dissuade him from his attempted rape and make an escape. In her desperation to escape from him, she went so far as to say, although by the Mosaic Law it was forbidden, that if he were to ask David for her as a wife, David would “not withhold me from thee” (2 Samuel 13:13), but to no avail.
–
Amnon had committed, as Tamar indicated, a “folly” (a phrase used to indicate an evil, sinful, criminal act) in Israel. Leviticus describes the punishment and marital unlawfulness of a brother taking “his sister…and seeing her nakedness and she his nakedness; it is a wicked thing and they shall be cut off from among their people…” (Leviticus 20:17). See also Leviticus 18:9,11.
–
The Bible says that Amnon, after raping Tamar, “hated her exceedingly” (2 Samuel 13:15). Once his sexual lust had been played out, his love-lust turned into hate-lust. He immediately added to his folly after humbling her by sending her away in shame. Her shame was depicted by her putting ashes on her head and renting her garment of diver’s colors (a special robe worn by the King’s virgin daughters) that she wore, and laid her hand on her head, and went out crying (2 Samuel 13:19). Amnon had married her, taking away her virginity and sent her away as a prostitute in a desolate manner. She would never likely be married after this, because no man would want her, as long as Amnon was alive. His life after this, however, was in the balance. Tamar did, then, as was the proper role of women who were without a husband – she placed herself under a male relative; “Tamar remained desolate in her brother Absalom’s house” (2 Samuel 13:20). About two years later, Absalom eventually killed Amnon, which set Tamar free from him.
–
There is another instance found in Genesis chapter 34, where many in Christendom believe, Dinah, Jacob and Leah’s daughter, was raped by a Hivite prince. I personally do not believe that this was a rape situation. As I continue on, I will attempt to explain, through the description of the event and the next example, my reasons for my conclusion.
–
During Jacob’s stay in Shalem, a city of a Hivite prince named Shechem, Jacob purchased a parcel of land for him and all his tribe and their animals, to establish themselves temporarily. While abiding in this land surrounded by Hivite clans, Dinah, as a virgin female, ventured out beyond what should have been her boundary. “Dinah…went out to see the daughters of the land” (Genesis 34:1). As I have pointed out elsewhere (see my article “God Told Hosea To Do What?), when Scripture speaks of the “daughter of,” it is speaking a virgin girl. In this account “daughters of the land,” is referring to virgin girls of their country, where having come to maturity of age, displayed themselves openly by dancing together during certain festive occasions to attract male suitors for marriage. Possibly/probably, Tamar, as many young and venturous girls are, was very outgoing, and had viewed an assembly of young Hivite girls of her age outside of the confines of her territory and curiously went to make an acquaintance with them. By doing this alone, she had removed herself from any male protection and became susceptible of being taken by any man that chose to do so, as undoubtedly happened. Tamar was not ignorant to the culture and new what she was doing.
–
She was discovered by Shechem the prince of the land and, as the Bible notes, “took her, and lay with her, and defiled her” (Genesis 34:2). It is also noted in the same chapter that Shechem sincerely loved Dinah and was very kind to her, seducing her with promises of a joyous life together (verse 3). In my view, Shechem only did what was common among men of that time and culture when a young virgin was outside of the protection of another man. She became fair game and should not have been there. I will try to defend this opinion more in the subsequent illustration.
–
The Bible notes in verses 11 & 12 that Shechem sought covenant acceptance from Jacob to continue to have Dinah as his wife. Although he had already married her by lying with her sexually, he was willing to give Jacob’s family whatever they asked of him, for her. It also states that Shechem “had delight in Jacob’s daughter and he was more honorable than all the house of his father” (Genesis 34:19).
–
Shechem, is not described as an evil man of “Belial” as the Bible has described other wicked men to be, and as many in Christendom depict him to be as well. The Holy Spirit says he was an honorable man, above men. So, I think it is misconstrued to believe that the term “defiled,” used by the brothers of Dinah, referred to the act of Shechem as an act of raping Dinah. Rather, it is to denote he, being “uncircumcised,” had physically polluted her, a Jewess, making her unclean when he married (sexual intimacy) Dinah.
–
To her brothers, it was a crime against Israel. This crime is noted in verse 7 by the use of the term “folly,” similar to Tamar describing the folly wrought by Amnon. Amnon’s act of folly (crime) was, primarily, through the forceful unlawful marriage between brother and sister. Shechem lying with Dinah in an uncircumcised state was, by the brothers account, an act of “folly” (crime). Do you suppose Shechem new this?
–
Once taken, Dinah abode in the house of Shechem.
–
Let’s consider some ideas, which, interestingly, many Christian preachers, in their condemnation of the honorable man Shechem never entertain: Maybe she wanted to be there? Maybe she liked him and all the things he promised her? Scripture, in no way, ever indicates a forced encounter. Not only does Chrstendom not entertain these ideas, nor do they recognize the honorable heart of Shechem in that he offered more than the 50 shekels of silver that later in the Mosaic Law demanded when a man lie with an unbetrothed virgin. He was ready to go over and above in fulfilling a law that hadn’t yet even been written for the Hebrew Jews.
–
However, she was there, because of the marriage now between them. In order for Dinah to be set free from Shechem, his death was the only alternative, which her good and honorable brothers set out to accomplish. But if they were to kill Shechem, they would need to kill all the men for their security afterward, which is what Jacob’s sons conspired in and executed. Obviously, Jacob and all that were with him, including Dinah, were not ignorant to but knew the customs of the land they dwelt in. It wasn’t different than what the Israelites did, as you will see in a minute. Dinah, for whatever reason, was where she should not have been, especially without a male chaperone. Was this young woman rebellious, like her brothers, and carelessly, as some teenage girls can do, threw caution to the wind? Who knows. Whatever her mindset, she created a mess, and a lot of innocent men were deceived and slaughtered because of it.
–
To illustrate more of how this was not a rape case, but more of a young virgin girl alone in an unapproved place, void of male protection, let’s look at Judges chapter 19 thru 21. Let’s observe how customs were in those days, among Israel, and how she either disregarded them, or she wanted what happened to happen. I personally don’t believe she was that ignorant.
–
The story in these passages is about a man, a Levite, who had retrieved for himself his unfaithful runaway concubine. Once he found her at her father’s house, he began his journey home with her. As they were journeying, it became late and he decided that instead of lodging the night in a city of foreigners (Jebusites), he chose to enter Gibeah, a city of the Benjaminites, a tribe of Israel. As they entered the town and was abiding in the marketplace, no one received them into their house for the night, until and old man came from a field. He was of the mountains of Ephraim and dwelt as a stranger himself in Gibeah. He invited the Levite and his group of people to abide the night in his dwelling. It was here, after eating, washing feet, and drinking that some worthless lewd men of the city surrounded the dwelling and began to beat on the door demanding the master of the house (the old man) to “bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know [sexual intimacy] him” (Judges 19:22).
–
It’s very obvious that the desired interest these men conveyed in demanding to be acquainted with the male stranger was deviant homosexual desires. This is evident from the old man’s condemnation and rebuke of their evil intentions, and the offering of two females, his virgin daughter along with the man’s concubine, in the place of the man. It is similar to Lot’s situation, as he confronted the wicked men of Sodom. The deviant men finally ceased in their wicked pursuit of the man once the visitor brought them his concubine, whom they ended up taking and abusing her physically and sexually all night long. The abuse was so bad after being turned loose she died at the door of the old man’s dwelling the next morning.
–
The concubine’s husband, angry concerning what these Benjaminite men had done, cut the concubine’s corpse into twelve pieces, according to the number of the tribes of Israel, and sent a dissected piece to each tribe to protest the dastardly deed, and demand justice against the men responsible. Outraged by the deed, the congregation of Israel assembled at Mizpeh to pass sentence against Gibeah and demanded the men responsible for this crime be delivered up to them to be tried and punished. But when the Benjaminites refused to deliver them to the counsel of the other tribes, defiantly resisting, siding with the evildoers, the other tribes set out to make war upon Gibeah and the Benjaminites.
–
After a number of battles had been fought with the burning of all Benjaminite cities and killing the men, women, children, and animals, the other tribes eventually conquered and destroyed all the Benjaminites, except for six hundred men who had escaped. Now, after the war was over and a tribe of Israel almost decimated, the other tribes began to regret a decision they had made. Although there were still six hundred Benjaminite men remaining, they had no wives to repopulate their lineage and retain their tribal inheritance. All their females had been killed. With concern, the other tribal leaders proposed to resolve this difficulty and get the remaining Benjaminite men wives. However, there was one problem. The other eleven tribes, when gathered in Mizpeh, “swore to the Lord” that they would not give their daughters to any Benjaminite after this horrible deed and their defiance to it saying, “Cursed be he that giveth a wife to Benjamin.“
–
In the tribal leaders attempt to resolve this, there was a declaration made regarding a subdivision of a tribe, the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead, who had not attended the meeting of the assembly in Mizpeh when congregating in their conquest against the Benjaminites. According to a bond of oath by the tribes, whenever a meeting of the congregation convened, all members were to appear. If they did not attend, their disobedience carried with it the threat of death. Jabesh-gilead did not attend the meeting. Therefore, the Israelite assembly, all approving as a way to deal with the Jabesh’s disobedience and provide virgins for the six hundred remaining Benjaminites, sent an army to utterly destroy the city of Jabesh-gilead and all its inhabitants, except for virgin girls “who had known no man by lying with any male.”
–
Once the city had been destroyed, there remained four hundred virgins preserved alive, fitting the prescribed description, who were removed from the city and given in marriage to the Benjaminites. However, there were still two hundred Benjaminites, who, yet, remained without a wife. To remedy this, there was to be a feast of Jehovah in Shiloh, where the elders of the congregation permitted the Benjaminites to take virgin wives, of the eleven tribes by force while “the daughters of Shiloh” danced during the feast. The dances of the virgins would take place outside of the town in the open. The agreement was for the Benjaminites to lie in wait under cover in the vineyards and when the virgins began to dance, they were to seize upon one, each capturing one for to be his wife, and steal her away to his house. After accomplishing this, the assembly, then, would deal with the fathers peaceably. Supposedly, this stealing away by force would not be considered a breach to the vow made by the other eleven tribes at Mizpeh, of not giving their daughters to the Benjaminites to marry. No, they weren’t given in marriage, but they were taken and forced in marriage. Was this rape? I use the word “force,” Scripture does not. Scripture uses the words “took them wives.”
–
It is in this story that gives me reason to conclude that Dinah was not raped by Shechem, but rather, by venturing out on her own to acquaint herself with the “daughters of the land,” without adequate male protection, she had placed herself in a position where she was open game for any man to take and lay claim on her. The virgins in Judges dancing outside of the town of Shilo near the vineyards, in my understanding, was the way for virgin girls to pronounce that they were come of age and available for marriage, for any eligible man seeking a wife for marriage. Israelites from every tribe attended the feast, to which there had to be a large number of virgin girls dancing for 200 men to be provided for. Under normal conditions, suitors would observe them and go through the normal protocol in covenanting the girl’s father to marry her. I’m not sure how much male protection would have been present normally, because had not the situation been as it was, the Benjaminites would have been at the feast also. As such, it was probably not so harrowing for the virgins within their own territory to be exposed compared to Dinah’s case, her being outside her territory on her own, knowing the chance of this happening to her. Once the Benjaminites had captured and stolen away the girl of their choice to the land of Benjamin, the elders would speak to the fathers of the girls, who complained of the deed, and encourage them, for the sake of the situation, to “be favorable” (Judges 21:22).
–
Notice, also, for the Benjaminites and their brides, there were no covenants procured, no wedding feasts or ceremonies, no vows made, and obviously no civil documents issued for their marriage. It all revolved around the concept that once they were taken and were sexually intimate, they were married. The children of Israel knew it to be so and so did God.
–
Let me take a moment and address an issue that disturbs me in my spirit, since we are on the subject of rape. The adopted attire of our culture among some females in the church is blasphemous. Blasphemy means, the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for things sacred. The readiness to reveal and expose their figures, cleavage, and as much skin as possible, to both young and old men alike, is nothing more than unbecoming of a godly woman professing holiness. Yes, men have their faults, but women who are allowed to dress seductively and whorishly, as they will, especially within the congregation of believers assembled for worship, is the epitome of blasphemy to Christ, the Holy Spirit, God’s word, and the body of Christ. It is not Scriptural for women, young and old, to immodestly parade scantily and seductively dressed before men with such disregard and ignorance to the natural order of things.
–
If God, in the beginning, found it necessary to shed the blood of an animal for Adam and Eve to be clothed, then it is still valid for Christian females to be clothed appropriately. Undoubtedly, provocative sexuality is a damning feature of the ungodly culture we live in today. The last thing needed is for certain females attending assemblies of worship to promote that culture within.
–
Jesus said, “...whoso looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery already with her in his heart” Matthew 5:28). Trust me, when men are lusting, it is not in an artistic sense. One senses that the attitude of most of these females is “I can’t help it if men can’t control their lusts.” What about not offending, but supporting your brother that is weak? Some males are more mature and stronger than others. Some females, although they wouldn’t likely admit it, want men to look at them and carnally desire them. If this is the case, I am reminded of what was once said, “men sin, but devils tempt to sin.”
–
Ladies, your requirement of the Lord is to dress modestly having the “...ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the of God of great price” (1 Peter 3:4).
–
It is absolutely critical, going forward, for the church to have a Biblical understanding of marriage and adopt clear standards to teach present believers and new converts the concepts and violations of marriage. The problem with Christian marriage today is the lack of knowledge to these concepts and standards, “...therefore the people that doth not understand shall fall” (Hosea 4:14). What is glaringly observed today in many congregations, as it has been for some time, is that Christian’s are far to assimilated into the culture.
–
Through the ungodliness of the culture, we have been desensitized to the sinfulness of the viewing of peoples nakedness, accepting divorce for any cause, being married numerous times, being very lax concerning sexual touching, and many other unholy connections to what I have outlined in this book. Is it any wonder, many main-line denominations are accepting homosexuality as acceptable to God, as long as they think they are a Christian and , supposedly, love one another. And at the pace we see, it won’t just be the main-line denomination who are apostate.
–
All of this is evidence of a spiritual deadness to the quickening of the Holy Spirit and God’s word. Conscience’s having been “seared with a hot iron.” Many are reprobate to the truth. God help the church! Although, the Apostle Paul said it best, “Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And let everyone that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Timothy 2:19).
–
One can understand how or why the world would engage in such unholy lifestyles that disregard the Divine law of marriage, but how can those who claim to be believers in Christ be so complicit in their disregard by adopting the world’s mind-set? According to the corrupt marital practices evidenced within the church body, the idea that marriage is sacrosanct is increasingly insignificant. We see the majority of heterosexuals, both Christian and secular, clamor about to protect the sanctity of the institution from those who wish to employ it outside of one man and one woman involvement (in God’s law, it can be no other way), while many of the same display hypocrisy and contempt for the institution in their own lives.
–
How can anyone ever believe their sincerity while they violate and discomfit its value with regularity? The ungodly also observe church leadership turn a blind eye to this contempt or display it as well. I pray to God my writings and teaching on Biblical marriage will provide a better understanding regarding marriage, divorce, and fornication and be a catalyst for the church of Jesus Christ to purify itself from its disobedient polluted state. It is time for the church to take an adamant stand in defending Biblical marriage, being a much better example to the world. If we ever expect God’s help and power to work on our behalf for success, the truth of Biblical marriage concepts must be understood and an adherence to its precepts must be implemented in the body of Christ.