Charges Of Misogyny (Part 2)

I though it time to continue my series on false accusations of misogyny in the Bible.  In the same format as the previous entry in this series, I will examine four passages pointed to by critics who claim the Bible dishonors and belittles women.


--Genesis 19:4-7--"Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house.  They called out to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight?  Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.'  Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him and said, 'No, my friends.  Don't do this wicked thing.  Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man.  Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them.  But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.'"

Now, this is one of the more disturbing narratives in the entire Bible along with its parallel in Judges 19, but I'm frustrated that new atheists (unless I'm mistaken, Richard Dawkins uses this passage to "prove" that the Bible advocates evil in his hilarious failed attempt at philosophy in The God Delusion) continue to propose that God approved of or was morally neutral of Lot's heinous offer.  Genesis 19 is a narrative; it is not a source of moral commands.  Mosaic Law condemns rape, as the Law is the location where one will find the most important moral considerations and instructions in the entire Bible.  Other passages in the Bible chronicle events like blasphemy, perjury, murder, adultery, assault, and several other accounts of rape.  The presence of these documentations of history in the text doesn't indicate anything about the intrinsic rightness or wrongness of them.  To discover that, one must search elsewhere in the Bible, where it becomes apparent that God abhors many of the behaviors mentioned in Scripture.  Lot almost committed a grievous sin and other parts of the Bible make it undeniably clear that God despises rape of anyone.


--Exodus 21:2-4--"If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years.  But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything.  If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him.  If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free."

I have seen atheist websites that accuse the final verse of being anti-woman, but no misogyny is present.  The passage simply states that if a slave receives a spouse from his or her master, if the slave's six year service elapses (Exodus 21:2, Deuteronomy 15:12) but the spouse's hasn't, only the first slave goes free at that time.


--Exodus 21:10--"If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing, and marital rights."

I suppose the atheist objection to this hinges on the fact that polygamy was allowed here, but there is nothing inherently misogynistic about this.  Exodus 21:10 and the following verse actually prove that the first wife could not be neglected and that if she did not receive adequate food, necessary clothing, and marital rights (which many people think means sexual fulfillment), she could divorce her husband.  After all, "If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money" (Exodus 21:11).  It's pretty idiotic to think that a law mandating certain rights for a wife belittles women in any way, especially when it grants her the right to divorce if her husband withholds these things and if it prioritizes women's sexual needs (which Christians and American society still struggle to acknowledge).


--Deuteronomy 22:23-24--"If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death--the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife.  You must purge the evil from among you."

The charge here is that Deuteronomy supports killing rape victims who don't scream for assistance.  This fails for a variety of reasons.  First, it does not say the man raped her, it clearly says "he sleeps with her".  Second, the context further confirms that rape is not the subject here.  Verse 22 focuses on consensual adultery, verses 23-24 concentrate on consensual sex with an engaged person, and verses 25-27 condemn rapists to death.  Third, when Deuteronomy 22:25-27 addresses rape of a woman, it ensures she is exempted from guilt were she engaged to be married.  Forced sex is not sinful for the victim, nor is any other forced sin.