"Rape" in the Bible

[POI]

The current definition of "rape" would <include> a lack of, or complete absence of, consent. The current definition of "consent" would involve permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.

Alternatively, where women are concerned (in the Bible), I do not recall a woman's consent to be deemed necessary or required? Biblical Hebrew did not have a single legal or technical term that exactly corresponds to the current understanding for the term "rape", which nowadays focuses more-so on a lack of consent in various forms. Such forms involving lack of consent would include: fear - (as a lack of a verbal "no" is not necessarily consent, especially if the person is afraid to resist verbally or physically due to a specific set of circumstances), age - (as it relates to an age of true accountability), slumber - (as it relates to advancement while their partner is asleep), unconsciousness, intoxication, etc... You get the gist... The Hebrew Bible uses several different verbs and descriptive phrases to refer to "forced sexual assault", but not the modern definition of "rape". The Biblical concept of sexual violation was viewed primarily through the lens of family honor, economic consequences, and/or social disgrace, but not the woman's violation of autonomy?

Today, it is mere common knowledge that if a woman does not grant consent to sex, (as explained above), it most certainly can be considered "rape".

I trust we can all reference the Biblical verse(s) which would be deemed (condoned 'rape') in the modern world? Such situational 'rape' would include 1) the spoils of war and/or 2) the bonds of "marriage" as it directly relates to the spoils of war and/or even maybe without. In essence, as stated above, commanded Biblical circumstances existed where a lack of a verbal 'no' does not necessarily grant consent.

For debate:

1. Why would an all-knowing god omit clear and specific instruction regarding a woman's consent? Meaning, did God purposefully omit this criterion because it is not necessary/required? If consent is necessary/required, why omit this instruction, as these commands instead suggest that the woman's consent is instead not required?
2. Does the Bible's lack of the modern term for 'rape' further demonstrate that a claimed all-knowing god had no part in this ancient collection of writings?
3. How do Christians today appeal to the statement, "rape is wrong", when the Bible itself does not directly express its direct abolition, but instead looks to (condone/permit) 'rape'?

[RBD]

FYI, it's really hard to sift through this response, as you misquoted a lot... I may have missed some stuff because of it?.?.? However, what we do know, is that the Bible is okay with 'rape', as common sense defines in the OP. Okay, let's continue...

No thanks. I'll be skipping your repeated personal ideologies about rape. They don't apply to law of Moses. I'll also be skipping your repeated false readings of the law of Moses, that I have already corrected from the law.

I'll only be responding to anything new that you may have to offer.

Not with rape, which is not the case. All married women, and men not married to them, are killed for laying down with one another.

Then please explain the following passage below, as it orders the death of the wife -- without any given exception(s):

22 If a man is caught lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman as well as the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel.

?? All married women, and men not married to them, are killed for laying down with one another.

The law's penalty for adultery is death for both. The penalty for rape is only for the man.

In essence, if a wife is raped by another, she still dies?

In any sense of the law, no. The case of adultery where both die, is both laying down with one another. Not the man forcing the married woman by rape. Under law of Moses, both engaged and married women are the same: Adultery is death for both, and rape is death for the man.

Your purposed effort to read rape into every case in Deut 22, is only so you can change the law into one of forced marriage by forced rape. The law of Moses does not allow a man to rape a woman, so the man could force the raped woman to marry him.

It's not possible to ever be married to any rapist by any woman, once the rapist is dead.

Yes, it is. Common sense RBD, common sense. The rapist gets to keep raping her, legal-style, for the rest of the rapist's life.

Your effort to change the law of Moses into a rape-marriage law, is an insult to standard grammar and grade school reading comprehension.

Conclusion:

Out of the 4 different examples of sex between men and women under the law of Moses, only the 3rd is of forced rape of a woman by the man. Only the man is put to death.

The other three are men and women laying down with one another to have sex together: Two newlyweds in marriage, two adulterers after marriage, and two before marriage.

No one by law can marry the rapist, since by law the rapist must be put to death. Only if the law of Moses is not enforced for the rapist, can the rapist live contrary to the law, and marry anyone. That would be violation of the law by having respect of persons, due to wealth, status, favoritism, etc...

Num 15:16
One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you…For there is no respect of persons with God.


A rape-marriage law is rare in history, and are only perversions of the Bible and Koran. I'm not sure about Buddhism, but I'm not thinking the Buddha favored rapists forcing rape victims to marry them, so that the man is not put to death...

[POI]

No thanks. I'll be skipping your repeated personal ideologies about rape. They don't apply to law of Moses. I'll also be skipping your repeated false readings of the law of Moses, that I have already corrected from the law.

Then you might as well also just admit that you are also skipping common sense altogether. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is a shining example of this. It would be ludicrous to think a rape victim would want to ever have anything to do with their rapist. And yet, the rape victim, the women, has no say in the matter. After 'marriage', sex with her is no longer 'rape'. Remember what was expressed in the OP. Fear - (as a lack of a verbal "no" is not necessarily consent, especially if the person is afraid to resist verbally or physically due to a specific set of circumstances). She has no choice in the matter. She also knows no other man would likely want her anymore, as her vagina is now deemed unclean. She is stuck between a rock and hard place. And she is stuck because of this asinine law in which these superstitious and misogynistic ancients created and passed off as 'authority.'

Again, it all falls back to common sense, which is what the believer has to completely avoid in retaining belief in many of these clearly man-made laws. Since we know the woman is now deemed damaged goods, instead order the rapist to pay her for life, but not also to 'legally' grant a lifetime subscription to her loins as well. I'm sure she would just rather roll the dice, and maybe some other dude might still want her anyways. Or, the alternative is to live with her parents. At least she gets money to live either way.

I'm going to stop here, as you will likely just continue to "poo poo" the common sense being offered here, as this is a pre-requisite to retain belief in these ancient's deemed 'authoritative' laws.

And let's not even get started about 'god's' nod of approval to take virgin war brides.

[RBD]

I'm going to stop here, as you will likely just continue to "poo poo" the common sense being offered here, as this is a pre-requisite to retain belief in these ancient's deemed 'authoritative' laws.

Agreed. Continuing to insert your own version of a rape-marriage law into the Bible, got tiresome a couple of posts ago...A common reading of Deut 22 shows otherwise.

[Difflugia]

Your purposed effort to read rape into every case in Deut 22, is only so you can change the law into one of forced marriage by forced rape. The law of Moses does not allow a man to rape a woman, so the man could force the raped woman to marry him.

Your effort to change the law of Moses into a rape-marriage law, is an insult to standard grammar and grade school reading comprehension.

You might need to improve your own reading comprehension from grade school to at least middle school. Deuteronomy 22:28 explicitly says that the man seized the virgin girl. Every time that word (תפשׂ) is used of a human being, it means that the person is taken by force against their will. It's used of militaries taking cities or prisoners and of authorities taking criminals to be punished. The translators of the Septuagint agreed, rendering the sentiment as βιασάμενος κοιμηθῇ μετ᾿ αὐτῆς, "forced her to sleep with him." The interesting thing about the Greek is that it further emphasizes her lack of agency. The word translated "sleep" there is actually in the passive voice. Literally, he "forced her to be slept with him." In Hebrew, the man does the seizing and lying. In Greek, he does the forcing and "sleeping" with. The young woman or girl has no say in the matter, but is just raped and married off to the rapist.

[POI]

Agreed. Continuing to insert your own version of a rape-marriage law into the Bible, got tiresome a couple of posts ago...A common reading of Deut 22 shows otherwise.

Speaking of tiresome, it must also get tiresome (avoiding/ignoring) the obvious, in that the Bible god condones "rape" practices.

[Face to face]

.


I do not understand the confusion of the subject of rape in the Bible or why anyone would promote the untruthful idea that " RAPE " is unmentioned or condoned in the Bible.

Deu 22:25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:

Deu 22:26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

the punishment for RAPE - is the DEATH penalty, According to the Bible..

If there was no proof of rape, then the man who had sex with the woman who accused Him of rape was that the man was to PROVIDE FINANTUAL SUPPORT to the woman for the rest of His life - just for seducing her.

If, a woman is sexually assaulted in the Bible - the BIBLICAL LAW DEMANDS that the Rapist financially supports the woman He rapes - even if she does not want to marry Him.

And if she is truly raped and unwilling of her own free will, - then obviously, she will never marry the man and the Bible suggests that He work for the rest of His life to support the victim or be put to death.

As similar to a marriage contract - He SUPPORTS and PROVIDES SUPPORT for the rest of His life.

A mandatory lawsuit / full automatic death penalty --- or fanatical retribution

In the Bible - The rapists and the slave traders, kidnappers and pedophiles are to be - put to death. Mandatory death,

And If a woman is forced into sexual intercourse and not completely complicit but slightly resisted at the start - but gave in and encouraged and proceeded to participate and REFUSED TO HAVE THE WILL TO SAY NO - AND --- FAILED TO RESIST - and - it is not a violent rape- the woman STILL MUST be supported and the father can decide if His daughter was forced and has to get married.

In the Bible days, The Jews following their God did not intend for things to be any more barbaric, wild or evil or insane than honorable American citizens do today.

Please do not pretend that the Bible is not able to be rationalized and understood by people who actually take the time to study and examine it in full details.

when we are making legal judgment upon men who are to receive a full automatic death penalty for rape - AS THE BIBLE DEMANDS CAPITAL PUNISHMNENT FOR RAPE

how is it truthful or honest to take what the rest of the bible says about rape and punishment and pretend that rape is condoned or not dealt with - the punishment for rape is death, there are other degrees of rape that do not involve coercion or force of overpowering someone or using physical violence

all of these other forms of rape that are not inflicted upon women where rape or sex ensues with no using of coercion or force of overpowering them by physical violence - - these cases are to be judged with a mandatory fanatical lawsuit that the Bible demands the man must pay the woman

the passages are explaining that - outside of brute force rape which demands a death penalty
all other instances where sex occurs by consent or partial consent -

THE MAN IS STILL RESPONSIBLE AND OWES THE WOMAN FINANTUAL COMPENSATION OR MARRIAGE ARANGMENTS MUST BE MADE -

[POI]

[Replying to Face to face in post #26]

There exists a reason I placed the word "rape" in quotes. And yes, the Bible condones this/these form(s) of "rape". And yes, it is kind of considered "low-hanging-fruit' for the skeptic to have to bring logical light to these observations. But hey, it's fun. See post 13, and then skip forward to post 20, for further details.

[Face to face]

thanks for taking time to reply, i will go back and read the posts " 13 & 20 "

If you had time please read my last post because i really believe it answers many questions about " rape " in the Bible.

Today, in modern times there is no death penalty for the crime of rape here in the United States

In the Old Testament the punishment for participating in the Slave Trade and for Adultery and Rape was a full automatic death penalty

with this death sentence for rape comes levels and degrees of seduction and takes into account how much force was used by the offender in rape cases - even if the man has sex with a woman and he did not rape her, he is still fanatically responsible....

if there are no witnesses and no evidence whatsoever can prove a woman was raped by force, the man is still responsible and must marry the woman or pay a costly amount of money.

[POI]

thanks for taking time to reply, i will go back and read the posts " 13 & 20 "

If you had time please read my last post because i really believe it answers many questions about " rape " in the Bible.

Tell me what post 13, and beyond, does not directly address and we can go from there...

Today, in modern times there is no death penalty for the crime of rape here in the United States

And in "ancient times", the Bible completely endorses certain types of 'rape.' And now, the concept of 'rape' is much more fully realized, and in the U.S, it's all now deemed illegal and none of it is instead endorsed. What is your point?

In the Old Testament the punishment for participating in the Slave Trade

In the Bible, there was little punishment for participating in the slave trade. See Leviticus 25:44-46, just for starters.

Rape was a full automatic death penalty

Only for some "rape"... Other "rape" was instead quite okay. Such as 1) taking war brides or 2) if a man rapes a an unpromised virgin.

if there are no witnesses and no evidence whatsoever can prove a woman was raped by force, the man is still responsible and must marry the woman or pay a costly amount of money.

Right. Please answer an honest question. Do you think any rape victim would CHOOSE to MARRY their rapist? God could not come up with better instruction? Since we know the women completely lost their worth in society when they were pre-maritally penetrated, because both the Bible, as well as men emphasized virginity, how about ordering for the rapist to make payments to the victim, or victim's father for the rest of his life, or other? Why instead grant permission for the rapist to have legal tender to her loins for life as well? Sounds like a made-up low-level human law.

[Face to face]

thank you so very much " " for taking time to reply, it is an honor to discuss this with you.
I will start with your post " # 13 = viewtopic.php?p=1178592#p1178592
" I read the post = " # 13 ............ here is my reply based on the Original Hebrew Manuscripts.

Please pay notice to the Hebrew Manuscript Message

Deu 22: 1 - 26 - THESE PASSAGES HAVE JUST ALREADY CLEARLY EXPLAINED ALL OF THE PREVIOUS INSTANCES CONCERNING

The man is put to death for rape - the woman was innocent
The woman is put to death for adultery - if guilty
there was none to save her, she was not guilty – the man is guilty - - - -

ok.. LETS FOCUS ON THE TWO PASSAGES THAT ARE MISTRANSLATED
as these passage go on to explain more

Deu 22:19
  וענשׁו AND PUNISH - אתו HIM - מאה ONE HUNDRED - כסף IN SILVER - ונתנו AND GIVE - לאבי TO THE FATHER - הנערה OF THE WOMAN - כי BECAUSE - הוציא HE BROUGHT FORTH - שׁם A NAME - רע OF EVIL - על UPON - בתולת A VIRGIN - ישׂראל OF ISRAEL - ולו תהיה AND IF SHE BECOMES - לאשׁה HIS WIFE - לא NEITHER - יוכל CAN - לשׁלחה HE PUT HER AWAY - כל ALL - ימיו׃ OF HIS DAYS

Meaning =
AND PUNISH HIM ONE HUNDRED IN SILVER AND GIVE TO THE FATHER OF THE WOMAN,
BECAUSE HE BROUGHT FORTH A NAME OF EVIL UPON A VIRGIN OF ISRAEL
AND IF SHE BECOMES HIS WIFE NEITHER CAN HE PUT HER AWAY ALL OF HIS DAYS

The key word here that the Roman Catholic Translators have left out and excluded from the passage is the Hebrew word “ ולו “ = meaning - lû - loo
meaning = IF; by implication ( interjectionally as a wish ) IF that!: - “ IF happy with “
(haply), peradventure, I pray thee, though, I IF, IF God (that).
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/3863.htm - = “ ולו “ =
ISRAEL - ולו תהיה IF SHE BECOMES -
this totally changes everything about the situation, - - the passage is simply saying that after all of the false accusations and punishments upon the false accuser the woman still has a choice to stay with the man and “ IF “: perhaps : “ she becomes his wIFe he cannot put her away all of his days.

ולו תהיה - AND IF SHE BECOMES / PERADVENTURE - IF / SHE BECOMES HIS WIFE




There really is no severe punishment for any man having casual sex with an unmarried woman in the bible –

either it was rape or not - and IF not, they both are to be held responsible for being honest and not lying and deceiving the other man “””” another man “”” or family who WOULD later marry the woman –

while she lies and claims to be a virgin and is lying about whom she has shared bodily fluids with.

THE SHEET FILLED WITH CONTAMINATION AND NASTY BODILY FLUIDS WOULD SHOW DURRING INTERCOURSE - IF THE WOMAN WAS INFECTED WITH A DISEASE, SYMPTON OR FOUL OROR

OR LYING ABOUT HER SEXUAL PAST

Blood Crimes Are Real………………………………………………



Another mistranslated passage you mention is found in - - Deu 22:29 


Please pay notice to the Hebrew Manuscript Message

:29 

:28  that a man lay hold on a woman and lie with her and they be found having sex.

Deu 22:29  ונתן  THEN GIVE  - האישׁ  THE MAN  - השׁכב  WHO LAY DOWN  - עמה  WITH H ER, - לאבי  THE FATHER  - הנער  OF THE YOUNG WOMAN  - חמשׁים  FIFTY  - כסף  SILVER  - ולו תהיה   IF HE HAD  - לאשׁה A WOMAN  - תחת UNDER HIM  - אשׁר WHO  - ענה  ANSWERED, -
לא NOT  - יוכל  CAN HE  - שׁלחה  PUT HER AWAY  - כל  ALL  - ימיו׃  HIS DAYS

The passage is referring to a man who takes hold of a woman and the woman had ANSWERED or RESPONDED / REPLIED to his sexual advances.

- ולו תהיה   IF HE HAD  - לאשׁה A WOMAN  - תחת UNDER HIM  - אשׁר WHO  - ענה  ANSWERED, -

The Hebrew word that the Translators changed in the ranslation is

LU / LUH - ולו means = IF - “ IF “ or WOULD, could, may, what may be, peradventure

Gen 17:18 O that Ishmael “ WOULD - לו “ live before thee!
Gen 23:13 But WOULD “ לו “ thou will give it
Gen 30:34 Laban said, I “ WOULD THAT - לו “
Gen 50:15 Joseph's brethren said, Joseph “ WOULD - לו “ hate us.
Num 14:2 “ WOULD - לו “ that we had died in Egypt! or ……….in this wilderness!
Num 20:3 “ WOULD - ולו “ that we had died
Jos 7:7 “ WOULD - ולו “ to God we had been content…… on the other side Jordan!
Jdg 8:19 I “ WOULD - לו “ not slay you.
Jdg 13:23 The Lord “ WOULD - לו “ not have received a burnt offering
Job 16:4 I also “ could - לו “ speak as ye do
Eze 14:15 “ IF - לו “ I cause a beasts to pass through the land
Mic 2:11 “ IF - לו “ a man walking in the spirit

לוGen 2:19 God brought animals unto Adam to see what he “ WOULD - לו “ call them


Num 22:29 for now “ WOULD - לו “ I kill thee
Jos 15:16 “ IF - לו “ I give Achsah my daughter to wIFe.
Jos 17:18 iron chariots, “ IF - לו “ they be strong.
Gen 16:2 IF = לו “ ~ that I may obtain children
Gen 18:24 “ IF = לו “ ~ fIFty in Sodom
Gen 18:28 IF = לו “ ~ lacking five in Sodom
Gen 18:29 IF = לו “ ~ fourty in Sodom
Gen 18:30 IF = לו “ ~ thirty in Sodom
Gen 24:5 + Gen 24:39 IF = לו “ ~ the woman
Gen 32:20 IF = לו “ ~ he will accept
Gen 43:12 IF = לו “ ~ it was an oversight
Num 22:6 IF = לו “ ~ I shall prevail,
Num 22:11 IF = לו “ ~ I shall be able
Num 23:3 IF = לו “ ~ the LORD will come
Num 23:27 IF = לו “ ~ it will please God
Jos 9:7 IF = לו “ ~ you dwell among us;
Jos 14:12 IF = לו “ ~ so be the LORD
1Sa 6:5 IF = לו “ ~ he will lighten his hand
1Sa 9:6 IF = לו “ ~ he can shew
1Sa 14:6 + 2Sa 16:12 IF = לו “ ~ may be that the LORD
2Sa 14:15 IF = לו “ ~ may be that the king
1Ki 18:27 peradventure = לו “ ~ he sleepeth
1Ki 20:31 peradventure = לו “ ~ he will save thy lIFe.
2Ki 19:4 IF = לו “ ~ the LORD………..will hear


Job 1:5 It may be = אול “ ~ that my sons sinned,
Isa 37:4 It may be = אול “ ~ the LORD…… will hear
Isa 47:12 IF so be = אול “ ~ …… IF so be = אול “ ~
Jer 51:8 IF so be = אול “ ~ she may be healed.
Lam 3:29 IF so be = אול “ ~ there may be hope.
Eze 12:3 it may be = אול “ ~ they will consider
Hos 8:7 IF so be = אול “ ~ that it yield
Amo 5:15 it may be = אול “ ~ that the LORD
Jon 1:6 IF so be = אול “ ~ that God
Zep 2:3 it may be = אול “ ~ ye will be hidden

The second Hebrew word that the translators deleted, is the word - עֲנָה - ‛ănâh
עֲנָה - ‛ănâh / Anna / An-aw' - Meaning = To give an ANSWER; - to respond, reply to

So again …. reading Deu 22:28  from the original Hebrew manuscripts



:28  that a man laying hold on a woman and lie with her and they be found having sex.

Deu 22:29  ונתן THEN GIVE - האישׁ THE MAN - השׁכב WHO LAY DOWN - עמה WITH HER, - לאבי THE FATHER - הנער OF THE YOUNG WOMAN - חמשׁים FIFTY - כסף SILVER - ולו תהיה - IF HE HAD לאשׁה A WOMAN - תחת UNDER HIM - אשׁר WHO - ענה ANSWERED,

- לא NOT - יוכל CAN HE - שׁלחה PUT HER AWAY - כל ALL - ימיו׃ HIS DAYS

The passage is referring to a man who takes hold of a woman and the woman had ANSWERED or RESPONDED / REPLIED to his sexual advances.
ולו תהיה - IF HE HAD - לאשׁה A WOMAN - תחת UNDER HIM - אשׁר WHO - ענה ANSWERED,

Deu 19:18  He ANSWERED - עֲנָה
Jdg 19:28  But none ANSWERED - עֲנָה
1Sa 9:17  Saul, ANSWERED - עֲנָה
1Sa 14:37  But he did not ANSWER - עֲנָה
1Sa 28:6  The LORD did not ANSWER - עֲנָה
1Ki 18:26  there was no voice, nor any that ANSWERED - עֲנָה
1Ki 18:29  was neither voice, nor any to ANSWER ANSWER - עֲנָה
Job 11:2  Should not the multitude of words be ANSWERED - עֲנָה
Job 15:2  Should a wise man ANSWER - עֲנָה. 
Job 33:13  for he giveth no ANSWER - עֲנָה
Job 35:12  but none giveth ANSWER - עֲנָה
Pro 18:23  the rich roughly ANSWER - עֲנָה
Pro 26:5  ANSWER - עֲנָה a fool according to his folly
Ecc 10:19  money ANSWERETH - עֲנָה all things. 
Isa 14:32  What shall one then ANSWER - עֲנָה
Isa 58:9  + 23:35  + 42:4  The LORD shall ANSWER - עֲנָה
Dan 2:15  + 3:25  He ANSWERED
Dan 3:14  + 3:14  + 3:28  + 3:19  Then Nebuchadnezzar ANSWER - עֲנָה
Dan 2:8  + 2:26  + 5:13  And the king ANSWERED - עֲנָה
Dan 2:27  + 7:2  + 5:17  Then Daniel ANSWERED – עֲנָה
Dan 6:13 + 3:24    Then they ANSWERED - עֲנָה

When we go to the original manuscripts we find nothing but a scattered perversion of altered, deleted, and a changing of words in a scattered confusing, and jumbled mess - that the translators purposefully and deliberately altered and changed the Old Testament.

It WOULD take pages upon pages to unravel and explain this fact in full detail - I have the proof it is all in the manuscripts - but unfortunately, there is a lack of honesty and space. it WOULD only lead to self-inflicted confusion upon the majority.

THEN GIVE THE MAN WHO LAY DOWN WITH HER, THE FATHER OF THE YOUNG WOMAN FIFTY SILVER IF HE HAD A WOMAN UNDER HIM WHO ANSWERED, who responded and agreed to have sex - / / AGREEMENT.

NOT CAN HE PUT HER AWAY ALL HIS DAYS .

This word - ×¢× ×” - ANSWER is a word in the manuscripts that has many, many multiple meanings - meaning to many, many situations - it is like a universal word in nature that takes on many forms of explaining a response or impulse.

×¢× ×” - is almost identical to the Hebrew word meaning to vex or humble and afflict but the translators change it when it comes to sex and marriage - but the manuscripts are referring to conditions where a woman ANSWERING or the complicit and in agreement and ANSWERING and complying in agreement with a sexual advance.

not saying she was humbled or afflicted - this is not in the manuscripts.

Blood Crimes Are Real.


עָנָה - ‛ânâh - aw-naw'
properly to eye or (generally) to heed, that is, pay attention; by implication to respond; by extension to begin to speak; specifically to sing, shout, testify, announce:
- give account, (cause to, give) answer, speak, testify, utter, (bear) witness


28  that a man laying hold on a woman and lie with her and they be found having sex.

:29  THEN GIVE THE MAN WHO LAY DOWN WITH HER THE FATHER  OF THE YOUNG WOMAN FIFTY -  SILVER
  IF HE HAD A  WOMAN UNDER HIM WHO   ANSWERED, - agreed - replied - consented - responded
 NOT CAN HE  PUT HER AWAY ALL  HIS DAYS

Deu 22: verses 19 & 29 - are simply mistranslated

Roman Catholics, Muslims and Atheists simply have no manuscripts for their faith or claims