“If you were perhaps not previously involved as soon as the rape occurred, you and your rapist happened to be necessary to get married 1, without the probability of breakup.” –Rachel Held Evans, writer of per year of Biblical Womanhood
“The laws and regulations [in Deut 22:23-29] do not actually forbid violation; they institutionalize they…” –Harold Washington, St. Paul University of Theology
“Your unprejudiced divinely influenced Bible is loaded with approved violation.” –Official Twitter account of ceremony of Satan.
It’s a regular accusation about Scripture’s therapy of girls.
It is it certainly just what the scripture claims?
Like most biblical laws, Deuteronomy 22:28-29 displays God’s identity; as soon as we understand purpose of what the law states, we come across one’s heart with the Lawgiver. This laws portrays how area of Israel reacted any time an unbetrothed pure ended up being broken through premarital sex. 
The verb regularly describe how it happened into the wife are ??????? (tapas). Tapas ways to “lay hold [of],”  or “wield.”  Like ????? (?azaq, the term for “force) made use of in vv. 25-27, tapas can certainly be render as “seize.”  Unlike ?azaq, but tapas will not bring similar meaning of power. As one Hebrew scholar clarifies, tapas doesn’t, in as well as by itself, infer attack; this means she was actually “held,” however always “attacked.’ 
There’s a delicate difference between both these verbs, it makes all the difference. Tapas is commonly utilized to illustrate a capture.  Tapas also looks in Genesis 39:12; once Potiphar’s wife attempted to entice Joseph, she appropriated (tapas) him or her to put on out their resolve. However this is different from ?azaq, which explains a forcible overpowering. Daniel prevent records that, unlike the law in verses 25-27, this legislation possesses not a cry for assistance, nor an account of male violence.  It’s probably the girl in passages 28-29 skilled frustrating marketing, maybe an erosion of the lady resolve, although not fundamentally a sexual strike.
This does not reduce the severity associated with operate. This woman ended up being certainly broken; she was actually dishonored and humiliated.  but verses 28-29 don’t necessarily signify she had been raped. Had the author of Deuteronomy, Moses, (and so the Holy character which stimulated him)  meant to show this as a sexual harm, it appears improbable which he could have picked tapas instead of ?azaq – the verb made use of right before it. Considering the lexical differences between ?azaq and tapas, as well as how closely they are available in both these consecutive regulations, this indicates very likely why these two different verbs are supposed to convey two unique problems.
Additionally, tapas cannot are available in either of biblical reports explaining erotic harm which published after the regulation.  Once later on biblical writers shown a rape, these people used the ?azaq (which made an appearance vv. 25-27) as opposed to tapas. It is possible to reasonably deduce your biblical narrators (and again, the Holy feel) believed the real difference in which means between ?azaq and tapas around the setting of erotic brutality, therefore employed these verbs with the meanings in your thoughts. 
An additional detail: Unlike the earlier two regulations in vv. 23-29, this points out about the people plus the girl had been captured when you look at the operate.  Whereas verses 25-27 reference the guy in addition to the wife as separate persons, passages 28-29 refer to these people as a product.  One Hebrew scholar considers this depth as another purpose to trust vv. 28-29 couldn’t detail a rape, but rather common agree. 
Considering all proof, we are able to surmise your unbetrothed pure in passages 28-29 had not been necessarily the victim of an assault. For that reason, to claim that the Bible required a female to get married the woman rapist was a misinterpretation – and a misrepresentation – of this rule. Again, this may not to say that she wasn’t abused or cheated; she definitely got. However, this legislation will not carry alike meaning of power while the previous circumstances in verses 25-27.
For that young woman in Israel, this rules ascertained that this bimbo wouldn’t be objectified and discarded. Their seducer had been required to render restitution along with her pops, was actually compelled to marry the woman, and ended up being forbidden to divorce this model. In a culture in which a woman’s relationships associated to the lady financial arrangement, this rule guaranteed the woman protection. Further, the girl encountered no corrective problems for being lured. Assuming the function is, in reality, consensual, she was not shamed and ostracized.
Under Hebrew legislation, a guy was prohibited to use a lady as an item of enjoyment. He was arranged answerable openly for his own indiscretion and held responsible to be with her foreseeable health and wellbeing.  Put another way, this individual couldn’t need the lady and reduce this model. Hardly exploiting or oppressing female, this passing indicates that biblical guidelines conducted males responsible for their particular intimate habits.
 Deut 22:28-29 is different from the two guidelines before they, in that it won’t list a particular location to identify the woman’s permission.
 Koehler and Baumgartner, HALOT, vol. 4, ed. and trans. M. E. J. Richardson (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994), s.v. “???????”.
 Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and so the Deuteronomic University (Winona body of water, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992), 286.
 Koehler and Baumgartner, HALOT, vol. 4, s.v. “???????”. This verb looks in 1 Kings 18:40, once Elijah commanded individuals to grab (tapas) the prophets of Baal, as well as in 2 nobleman 14:13, if King Joash seized Amaziah.
 Lyn M. Bechtel, “What Happens If Dinah Is Absolutely Not Raped?” JSOT (Summer 1, 1994): 26.
 Cf. the topic regarding Destruction of an Unbetrothed Virgin (Deut 22:28-29) and its particular using ???????.
 This thinks that after biblical writers had been thoroughly acquainted with and frequently interacted with earlier biblical texts—what some scholars involve as intertextuality, outlined in this article as “the interrelationships between your various e-books with the OT.” John M. Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach (large Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 156.
 Daniel I. Block, The Gospel as outlined by Moses: Theological and moral insights regarding e-book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, OR: Cascade Reference Books, 2012), 163.
 Koehler and Baumgartner, HALOT, vol. 2, s.v. “?????.” Making use of ????? “to pick” in this particular guidelines underscores this point. Based on HALOT, this example of ????? must always be performed “to be found,” or “caught when you look at the function.” Here, ????? carries the exact same meaning as its aesthetics in verse 22, which defines a consensual operate.
 Weinfeld, Deuteronomy while the Deuteronomic University, 286.
 Ibid., 164. As Block clarifies, “the husband must satisfy all other marital duties that include the legal rights to sexual activities, plus in therefore undertaking warranty the security associated with wife.” Block, The Gospel According to Moses, 163.
You, too, will support the ministry of CBMW. The audience is a charity company which is fully-funded by personal items and ministry partnerships. Your contribution is certainly going directly toward the creation of way more gospel-centered, church-equipping tools.