Puzzling Scriptures: Did a Woman Have to Marry Her Rapist?

 In both Old and New Testaments, we occasionally find puzzling verses that require much thought, study, and prayer to understand. Today, let’s examine one such passage in the Book of Deuteronomy.

The passage begins clearly enough. Deut. 22:25-27 plainly states that if a man rapes a woman who is betrothed to another man, the rapist must be put to death. Naturally, this would extend also to a fully married woman. The Bible deems raping another man’s wife to be just as terrible of a crime as murder: “For just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter” (Deut. 22:26).

But in vv. 28-29, we read something different: “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.”

Those who hate our Creator and deny belief in Him will sometimes reference this verse to try to undermine the Bible’s credibility. They’ll point to this verse and exclaim, “Can you believe that? The Bible required a rape victim to marry her rapist!”

So how about it? Did a virgin who got raped truly have to marry the man who raped her?

No. No, in fact, she did not. Let’s take a look at what this passage — and the Bible as a whole — is actually telling us.

Implications

First, let’s consider the implications if that interpretation was correct, and how such a conclusion would contradict the rest of Scripture. If any man lusted after a young virgin, but she didn’t want to marry him and her father refused, he could simply rape her and she would be forced to marry him. Any man could do that to any young virgin he wanted. No exceptions. Violence would be the deciding factor.

That takes us back to the pre-Flood world described in Genesis 6: “And it cometh to pass that mankind have begun to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters have been born to them, and sons of God see the daughters of men that they are fair, and they take to themselves women of all whom they have chosen” (Gen. 6:1-2; YLT). The powerful took every woman they wanted for themselves, and no one else had any say. And so we read, “The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth” (Gen. 6:11-12).

Was God pleased with this? Of course not! “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart” (Gen. 6:5-6). Because the earth was filled with violence and oppression, God destroyed it with a flood, as we all know.

So are we to believe that God flooded the earth and killed every human being except Noah and his family because of things such as this, yet later permitted these very same things in His own law? Of course not! Such a conclusion would be foolish and absurd.

The Purpose of God’s Law

Secondly, let’s note the true purpose of God’s law. God’s law exists to teach us how to love our Creator and how to love one another.

As our Savior taught us in Mat. 22:37-40, “‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” Again, regarding the second of these two great commandments, we read in Rom. 13:9, “For the commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ ‘You shall not covet,’ and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

God’s law exists to teach us justice, mercy, and faith. Jesus Christ lambasted the scribes and Pharisees because they neglected these: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone” (Mat. 23:23).

And finally, God’s law exists to punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To thwart the oppressor and deliver the oppressed. We can read this again and again throughout the Bible. In Exodus, we read, “Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked” (Ex. 23:7). Speaking through the prophet Isaiah, God said, “Learn to do good; seek justice, rebuke the oppressor; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow” (Isa. 1:17).

Again, the prophet Jeremiah declared, “Thus says the LORD: ‘Execute judgment and righteousness, and deliver the plundered out of the hand of the oppressor. Do no wrong and do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, or the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place’” (Jer. 22:3).

And again, the prophet Zechariah delivered this message: “Thus says the LORD of hosts: ‘Execute true justice, show mercy and compassion everyone to his brother. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. Let none of you plan evil in his heart against his brother’” (Zech. 7:9-10).

So, as we study God’s law, we must keep in mind what our Creator is teaching us. How does this law teach us to love one another as our own selves? How does it teach us justice, mercy, and faith? How does it punish the guilty and deliver the innocent from the oppressor? These are the questions we need to ask ourselves as we read through God’s law.

With these things in mind, let’s take a closer look at what we read here in Deuteronomy.

Examining the Text

It’s critical to remember that Deuteronomy doesn’t deliver new laws. Instead, it retells the laws already given and expounds on them. At the beginning of the book, we read, “Now it came to pass in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first day of the month, that Moses spoke to the children of Israel according to all that the LORD had given him as commandments to them… On this side of the Jordan in the land of Moab, Moses began to explain this law…” (Deut. 1:3, 5).

Both the NKJV and the YLT chose the word “explain” as a translation from the Hebrew baar (Strong’s # H874). The NASB used the word “expound” instead: “Across the Jordan in the land of Moab, Moses undertook to expound this law” (Deut. 1:5; NASB). But the meaning is the same: Moses repeats and explains or expounds on the laws which he’d already delivered from God to Israel. That’s what Deuteronomy is about.

Moses repeated the ten commandments (Deut. 5), the clean and unclean meats (Deut. 14), and many other laws. Unlike in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, we never find these words in Deuteronomy: “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Speak to the children of Israel….’” That’s simply because these were not fresh, new laws. They were the laws already given, but explained in more depth.

Now, let’s re-read Deut. 22:28-29, the subject of this post. “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.”

This passage expounds on a law given back in Exodus 22: “If a man entices a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall surely pay the bride-price for her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money according to the bride-price of virgins” (Ex. 22:16-17). This is a wonderful law! If enforced, it would prevent shacking up, sleeping around, one night stands, and many other evils of modern society. God intended for sex to be confined to marriage. No exceptions! “Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Heb. 13:4).

But notice that the woman’s father has a choice in the matter. If he doesn’t think the young man would be a suitable husband for his daughter, then he can veto the marriage. Either way, the man has to pay for his actions. Either he pays for the woman to be his wife, or he pays a fine equivalent to the bride price of a woman who was still a virgin.

Deuteronomy simply clarifies that this law extends also to cases of rape. But Exodus had already made it clear that the woman’s father had a choice in the matter. He could refuse to have his daughter marry that man.

And though it isn’t explicitly stated here, the woman herself could also consent or refuse. Traditionally, under rabbinic custom, an adult woman couldn’t be betrothed to anyone without her consent. Not only would any father who loved his daughter as himself (Lev. 19:18; Mat. 22:39) take her wishes into consideration, but we also have the example of Rebekah. When Abraham’s servant negotiated with Rebekah’s family for her to be betrothed to Isaac, this is how the negotiations concluded: “So they said, ‘We will call the young woman and ask her personally.’ Then they called Rebekah and said to her, ‘Will you go with this man?’ And she said, ‘I will go’” (Gen. 24:57-58).

So the law isn’t saying that a woman had to marry her rapist; it’s saying that she could if she and her father chose. The one who had no choice was the man. If the woman and her father chose for him to marry her, he would have to do so. Even if they refused marriage, he would still be fined.

Also, this fine is generally thought by the rabbis to be higher than the one for seduction. In Exodus, a man who seduced a virgin had to pay the bride price for her, but there was no fixed amount given. Here in Deuteronomy, the fine for rape is fixed at fifty silver pieces.

There’s another distinction, too. In Deuteronomy, should the woman choose to marry the man who violated her, he is prevented from ever divorcing her: “he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days” (v. 29). This restraint isn’t found in the original law regarding seduction back in Exodus.

And finally, the law doesn’t exclude additional punishment, depending on the circumstances of the crime. It merely establishes a required penalty. If deemed appropriate by the judges, certain crimes could be punishable not only by fines, but also by flogging:

1 "If there is a dispute between men, and they come to court, that the judges may judge them, and they justify the righteous and condemn the wicked,

2 "then it shall be, if the wicked man deserves to be beaten, that the judge will cause him to lie down and be beaten in his presence, according to his guilt, with a certain number of blows.

3 "Forty blows he may give him and no more, lest he should exceed this and beat him with many blows above these, and your brother be humiliated in your sight. (Deut. 25:1-3.)

As King Solomon also wrote in the Book of Proverbs: “Judgments are prepared for scoffers, and beatings for the backs of fools” (Prov. 19:29).

Examples

Several relevant examples in Scripture illustrate the social context and possible application of this law, as found in both Exodus and Deuteronomy.

The first is the example of Jacob’s daughter Dinah. After Jacob and his family had settled in the land of Canaan, “Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and violated her” (Gen. 34:1). Afterward, he decided he loved her and wanted to marry her (vv. 3-4; 6-12).

Now, as we saw, Shechem was a foreigner, a Hivite, and God’s laws could hardly be applied to the prince of a foreign city. But Jacob’s sons were enraged at his actions against their family: “And the sons of Jacob came in from the field when they heard it; and the men were grieved and very angry, because he had done a disgraceful thing in Israel by lying with Jacob's daughter, a thing which ought not to be done” (v. 7). So they tricked Shechem and his father into both circumcising themselves and persuading all the men of their city to get circumcised as well (vv. 13-24).

“Now it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain, that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brothers, each took his sword and came boldly upon the city and killed all the males. And they killed Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah from Shechem's house, and went out” (Gen. 34:25-26).

The second example involves Tamar, the daughter of King David. Her half-brother Amnon, a sick and disgusting human being, lusted after her so passionately that he really became sick (2 Sam. 13:2). So he tricked her into coming to his house, and then tried to seduce her. “But she answered him, ‘No, my brother, do not force me, for no such thing should be done in Israel. Do not do this disgraceful thing! And I, where could I take my shame? And as for you, you would be like one of the fools in Israel. Now therefore, please speak to the king; for he will not withhold me from you’” (2 Sam. 13:12-13).

But Amnon refused to listen to her, raped her, and then told her to leave his house. “So she said to him, ‘No, indeed! This evil of sending me away is worse than the other that you did to me.’ But he would not listen to her” (2 Sam. 13:16). Having been defiled, Tamar apparently thought it less humiliating to marry her half-brother than to be both raped and discarded.

Once again, this crime against an innocent young woman provoked a stern response. Her brother Absalom plotted to kill Amnon from that day forward, and two years later, he did (2 Sam. 13:22-29).

The final example isn’t one of rape per se, but it’s still relevant. It happened in the aftermath of a brutal war between the tribe of Benjamin and the rest of Israel, in which the tribe of Benjamin was nearly annihilated and only six hundred Benjamites — all men — remained alive (Judg. 20:46-48). At this point, the rest of the Israelites relented from destroying the survivors, and turned their attention to preserving the tribe of Benjamin. But the problem was, all the Benjamite women were now dead, and the other Israelites had sworn an oath not to give their daughters in marriage to a Benjamite (Judg. 21:1-3).

So, the Israelite elders decided that a solution was to let the Benjamites attend a dance, catch some of the dancing women, and run away with them back to their own inheritances (Judg. 21:19-21). They explained, “Then it shall be, when their fathers or their brothers come to us to complain, that we will say to them, ‘Be kind to them for our sakes, because we did not take a wife for any of them in the war; for it is not as though you have given the women to them at this time, making yourselves guilty of your oath’” (Judg. 21:22).

These examples illustrate several important points.

First, in Israelite culture, rapists faced the possibility of vengeance from the woman’s father and/or brothers, whose duty it was to protect her. Both Shechem and Amnon were killed for their crimes, and the Benjamites might have faced retribution had the Israelite elders not protected them. This was a family-oriented society where such things were simply not tolerated, so men preying upon women would be rare to begin with. This isn’t to say that personal vengeance or vigilante justice is proper under God’s law. It isn’t. This is simply to show the nature of Israelite society.

Secondly, women were expected to be virgins when they got married, so a woman who wasn’t one would have a harder time getting married. There were, of course, exceptions — such as Rahab the harlot and Ruth, a widow — but this was still the norm. Tamar felt it more humiliating to be raped and discarded than to be raped, as we saw. She would have preferred to marry her own half-brother than to be treated that way, even though such a marriage was also against God’s law (Lev. 18:9).

And finally, notice that Tamar warned Amnon that he would be like one of the fools in Israel, the very sort that Solomon described as fit for beatings. This adds to the likelihood that this was one of the crimes punishable by caning or flogging.

Why Not Death?

Now some might pose the question, as I myself also would, Why was the rapist not simply put to death? Why was he instead fined and possibly forced to marry the woman he raped, depending on what she and her father decided? Doesn’t this seem like too light of a penalty?

But there was a high risk of execution for such a crime. If the victim happened to be married or betrothed to someone else, then the rapist would indeed be put to death. God’s Word compares such an act to murder: “But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter” (Deut. 22:25-26).

So why not the death penalty if the rape victim was a virgin who wasn’t betrothed to anyone? Let’s consider the possibilities.

First, the circumstances of the crime might not be entirely clear. All we’re told in the law is this: “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out…” (Deut. 22:28). What was found out? The act itself. Who found it out? Were there credible witnesses who could testify whether the act was or wasn’t consensual? Maybe, maybe not.

In the old American South, it sometimes happened that a white woman would carry on an affair with a black man and, when found out, she would try to avoid the social stigma by falsely accusing him of rape. A lynch mob would then drag the poor fellow to the nearest tree and hang him, sometimes beating and torturing him in the process. Similar examples are not unheard of throughout human history.

Another word used here in Deut. 22:28 also implies some doubt about the circumstances. The word translated “seizes” is the Hebrew word tafas (Strong’s # H8610), which means “to lay hold of” or “wield.” It’s used in Gen. 4:21 to describe the act of playing a harp or flute. This word is less severe and more vague than the word used in Deut. 22:25, where a man is explicitly described as “forcing” a woman. That word is khazaq (Strong’s # H2388), which means to “be or grow firm, strong, strengthen” or even “to tie fast, to bind.”

Therefore, God’s law did not establish the death penalty in this case. It grants the benefit of the doubt; it presumes innocence until guilt is proven. “Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness” (Deut. 17:6).

But if a man had sexual relations with a woman who was married or betrothed to someone else, he would be put to death whether it could be proven that the act was consensual or not. He was guilty of adultery, and adultery is punishable by death. If it could be proven that she had consented, she would be put to death as well (Deut. 22:22-24). If it could not be proven that she had consented, then it would be presumed that she did not and she would be spared (Deut. 22:25-27).

Conclusion

God’s law is just and fair. It is a reflection of His character: “The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children to the third and the fourth generation" (Ex. 34:6-7).

But human beings are flawed and sinful by nature, and God’s law takes this into account. Therefore guilt must be conclusively proven, so that the innocent do not perish with the wicked. As Abraham reminded God when bargaining for Sodom and Gomorrah to be spared if as few as ten righteous men were found in it, “Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked; far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Gen. 18:25).

This law is no exception. Its purpose is to punish the guilty and protect the innocent. It provides security for the woman; it ensures that she is cared for. But there is no requirement for her to marry the man who raped her. She is simply given the option, if she and her father so choose.