Interpretation of Texts (General)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Sunday, September 26, 2010, 00:17 (4980 days ago) @ xeno6696

I read that too, and didn't ignore it :) However, the context here is pretty clear given by the supporting sentence. In the passage you just quoted it is clearly a case of unwilling 'rape' by the modern definition. Even if you changed the translation of the word rape to "lies with' or 'has sexual relations with' the sentence still clearly implies rape by "the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her", where as the second one, when taken in context with all being said in this chapter, clearly implies mutual consent. -I also agree that a slight shift in translations causes problems, and I certainly agree that it would be MUCH better to have the original transcripts, but that is not a possibility, so we are stuck playing the role of historical detective. That is why I stated the original premise that I am using in my research of the text. -Basically, the Bible claims to be the word of God, and therefore without error. That would lead to certain testable conclusions:-A) If it is without error, then there can be no conflicts within itself. 
B) If God created everything, then his word can not conflict with reality.-Proving A or B wrong ultimately would mean that it is not the word of God, and is nothing more than a good read. -Point C that I use is mainly for my own benefit, but still holds true. Nearly all the biblical profits use certain keywords that can be cross-referenced against each other for verification of authenticity.