• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

..and abused her all night until the morning

Lila

Lila

Member
Female
The story in Judges 19 reminds me on the story in Genesis 19. With the difference that when Lot was offering his two daughters, the rebellious men were not interested.
I even heard someone say regarding Genesis 19 that the intruding men were homosexual hence offering the women to them was not going to work anyway (which is probably an assumption but it would have still "worked" in my view).
In case of Judges 19, however, that poor woman even passed out as a consequence thereof.

It makes me quite uncomfortable to think that women had such little worth to be simply given away for abuse...

Any thoughts on that please?
 
Last edited:
Honest opinion: Her husband was a selfish, cowardly and heartless bastard... Remember she had already run away from him once, there would have been a reason for that. Then he went to find her and persuaded her to come back with him. Then on the way back home he abandons her to be gang-raped by a mob. I wonder what heroic lie he invented to explain to her father why she was dead...

At the very end of the consequences of this enormous mess we are reminded that at that time there was no king and everyone did what was right in their own eyes. So none of what they did says anything about whether it was right or wrong. We don't need to rationalise it, almost everyone involved on any side of the thing did wrong in some way. It's all an example of how humans can be idiots.
 
Yeah, that passage has always made me angry when I read it. Like FH the only reason I can think that it's included is to show how terrible people can be without moral direction.
 
One of the great proofs of the accuracy of scripture for me is how it never flinches from the hard stuff, the bad stuff or the hard to comprehend stuff.

If you were faking a book to control people or fabricate a glorious national history, that story doesn't make it in.

I fall back on this cop out a lot it seems but I wouldn't share my conclusions about this story in the open forum except to say that they are sobering on many levels.

This man is to be despised on every level but he was never condemned or punished. He disappears from the story with not so much as a disapproving frown. But he's not the point of the story. God is demonstrating things about wives, marriage and the high stakes for society that they entail.
 
Now, I'm far from approving of this guy's actions. But I will say, concerning Lot, he offered up his daughters in a nearly identical situation, and Lot is not condemned for it. Alarmingly, and in the teeth of every other sermon I've heard that mentions Lot; he is actually called a righteous man.

I have several thoughts on this, but the first is about the value of women. If it is true that men and women are a mystery pertaining to Christ and the Church; we know that the church has no intrinsic value, right? All our righteousness is as filthy rags? The entirety of our worth comes from the value that is given to us by Christ by estimation and by impartation.

I believe passages like this that portray the value of a woman so incredibly low in relationship to men display that truth, that without Christ our value is negligible, and we are fit for use in any abased thing.

At the moment, women do seem to be playing the part of 'the lesser', and the grinding thing is just how low that can be. The moment will pass, because in Christ there is neither male nor female. And even now the fullness of truth has come and we know that Christ would not treat His Church so, and He commands that His men value their women's lives more highly than their own.
 
That's kind of where I was scared to go for the most part. Because of what a husband and wife are a testament too, a husband's actions towards his wife are not up for anyone else's judgement or even interference to a large extent. It's a scary and chilling proposition and feeds into the worst stereotypes and accusations that the world throws at us but it seems to be true.
 
First and foremost I believe this is a prime example of a scripture that makes no sense if you do not believe in allegory.
That being said I'm going to leave that topic right there.

On a more direct analysis. I cannot ignore the fact that there are some very key points to this story.

The woman comes from Bethlehem.
The woman played the Harlot.

The chapters before and at least one chapter after stresses that there was no Sovereign in Israel at that time. He had been rejected back at Genesis 24.

The husband went after her to speak to her heart.

Father-in-law was glad and greeted him.

I cannot ignore that the detaining part. It very much reminds me of a story in Sodom and the trickery they did to Travelers. This is found in either Jasher or Jubilee's. I can't recall which.

The desire to turn into the town of the jebusites later known as Jerusalem.

The old man is the only one to take them in but then offers his daughter and the concubine.

At this point the similarity to lots story.

He says Get Up and there is no answer from the nameless concubine.

He took hold of the concubine body. Cut it up into 12 Parts with a knife.

The men of Israel assemble in an Army.

It is at this point I would like to point out this story has so many similarities to who we are today in Christendom. You're so full of ourselves that we are a Godly Nation. On the one hand we commit atrocities like abortion legally. But then on the other hand, have sexuality pouring out on TV and media.

Allowed politicians to engage in a never-ending war on terror. In which we believers can be made terrorists at any moment. But becoming agitated at the fact that they've made a license for homosexuals.

For some this post may seem an oversimplified reiteration of what everyone can read for themselves. I'm interested if there's any who can read in between the lines.
 
Last edited:
Too deep for me, bro.
I will just hang out in the peanut gallery.
 
ZecAustin said:
Because of what a husband and wife are a testament too, a husband's actions towards his wife are not up for anyone else's judgement or even interference to a large extent.
Click to expand...
Zec, I disagree with that assessment 100%, and would like to hear more about why you think that.

Our instructions are to love our wives as Christ loved the church, making allowance for their special status as 'weaker vessels', and knowing that 'the woman is the glory of the man' (in other words, I can tell more than you can imagine about your spiritual health from the spiritual and emotional demeanor of your wife (or wives, for the poly guys)). That's our standard.

The NT has much to say about restoring those overtaken in a fault, confronting sin, and the roles of elders and overseers in governing the body of Christ. In fact, the qualifications for elder, overseer, and deacon require a review of the quality of a man's leadership in his home before he can be appointed to those positions. Where scripturally do you get the idea that a man has some kind of diplomatic immunity from any kind of review or judgment about the way he treats his wife?
 
I wouldn't start speculating about a woman's "worth" from this. On the one hand, humans are worth so much Yeshua was willing to die for us. On the other hand, the enemies of Israel were worth so little that they were commanded to slaughter even their infants. Really, I think the concept of "worth" is inappropriate. If we start thinking that someone has little worth simply because it appeared to be acceptable for someone to treat them badly somewhere, we're going to hit all sorts of contradictions. We all have great worth. But sometimes bad things are allowed to happen to valuable people, for a myriad of reasons.

For me, the big thing that jumps out is the escalation of overreactions:
Intention to gang-rape a man -> rape & murder a woman -> all israel wants to kill the rapists -> all benjamin goes to war against israel -> thousands of men, women & children slaughtered -> still more people killed to free up wives for the survivors -> more women kidnapped as wives.
At any point in this sorry saga someone could have "turned the other cheek" and stopped it. Instead, each reaction was worse than the first and one sad situation turned into a genocide.

Which is exactly how modern wars tend to start too.
 
Slumberfreeze said:
I believe passages like this that portray the value of a woman so incredibly low in relationship to men display that truth, that without Christ our value is negligible, and we are fit for use in any abased thing..
Click to expand...

Slumberfreeze, THANK YOU for spitting this out. I can absolutely associate with this which would not have occurred to me by my own observation alone. That's a really deep thought taking away my concerns stated initially regarding this post.
 
There is a key difference or two in comparison to Lot, whose actions, by the way, I still wouldn't stand behind in that case.

The man in this case offered up the woman as a sacrificial lamb (if you will) to save his own skin. Lot on the other hand, offered up his daughters to save guests, and emissaries of the Lord.
 
Andrew, I don't disagree with anything you say. But I disagree that anyone should interfere in a man's marriage for anything short of a sin that the specified punishment for requires community involvement.

This ends up being a very short list.

The reasoning is simple. A wife is to be submitted to her husband as the church is to Christ. There is no other authority that would supercede that. The husband is commanded to love his wife as Christ loved the church and Christ was clear that no one could take away those His Father had given Him.

This living testament is not to be trifled with. And no where in scripture is it. I don't think that is accidental. I know its controversial but scripture doesn't address domestic violence. It simply says a man who is a bad husband risks having his prayers ignored.

Don't misunderstand me, I don't condone these things but God doesn't give us a mechanism to force a cessation. We can intervene. We can challenge. We can be confrontational and even violent towards certain behaviors but we can not take a wife from her husband.

God requires wives to submit to the treatment their husband subjects them to, not even making provision for divorce. This isa hard and disturbing belief but it is the only I can come up with that is consistent and fits with the other things the Bible teaches about marriage.
 
Suit yourself, Zec. Meanwhile, here's what this looks like in practice:

If there is evidence that a man associated with Biblical Families is beating his wife, then that man can expect a call or a visit from someone associated with the leadership here. We will with all the love in our hearts encourage that man to step up to his high calling and the scriptural instructions regarding how he's supposed to treat his wife (start with the "weaker vessel" passage and work outwards from there), and pray for his progress in being a better man. Should that process fail to produce positive results, or worse, should that man belligerently defend his right to continue to beat his wife with impunity, that man will find himself not welcome at Biblical Families. If we believe that the woman is so beat down emotionally that her safety is at risk and she is unable to defend herself or seek refuge (or if children are also subject to domestic violence), then intervention by law enforcement may be appropriate.

[Side note: I have to clarify because of the interesting times we live in that I am speaking of "domestic violence", a term you used that has a specific legal meaning. I am not speaking of consensual "domestic discipline". However eyebrow-raising that idea may be for some, what consenting adults do on their own time is not the subject of this post.]

I do not agree that because the Mosaic law does not include a remedy for what we would call domestic violence, the elders of churches and leaders of parachurch ministries are precluded from enforcing standards that they believe are appropriate for the organizations they shepherd. The descriptions and examples of the ministries of the leaders of the NT churches suggest otherwise.

We may need to go back and tie up a few loose ends. This part of the discussion started with your claim that a husband's actions toward his wife are not subject to the judgment or interference of others. But later you mention intervention and taking a wife away from her husband, as well as divorce, or a "cessation" (presumably also a divorce, or cessation of the marriage), so I'm not sure what all kinds of "interference" you had in mind originally. My first comments were directed at the idea that a man would think his actions are "not up for anyone else's judgment".

Manly men relate to each other as a meritocracy, as honorable men seeking the company of other honorable men. A man's actions are always subject to review and judgment by others—by all those around him, but particularly by the 'honor group' of other men that he primarily associates himself with. This particular group known as Biblical Families is here to promote healthy, vibrant, biblical marriages and family structures. We're not going to take any man's wife away from him, and we're not going to endorse divorce as the solution to marriage difficulties. But on the spectrum from judgment to interference to intervention to breaking up a marriage, you can expect that others others here will judge your reputation as a husband, and possibly even 'interfere', if that's what you call unasked-for advice about how you can be a better husband.

Final thought: The "Christian polygamy movement" is lousy with chest-thumping, knuckle-dragging "patriarchs" with a low view of women—all it takes is a couple of hours on facebook to figure that out. Those guys are mostly theorists, though, or guys with bad track records or with obviously miserable or belligerent wives. The families I know that are successful, though, put the emphasis on love. We as husbands put the emphasis on loving our wives, and we as brothers help each other to love our wives better. That's what we're about here, and it is important for any family considering this lifestyle to get that right from the get-go.
 
In other words, in practice:
  • A husband is to love his wife as Christ loves the church
  • The leaders in this ministry will watch to ensure men are following that, and won't hesitate to exhort & rebuke where necessary.
Husbands are stewards of our wives, who first and foremost belong to YHWH, and He is entrusting us with them to care for as He would wish us to care for them. Yes this involves authority - but there is a line somewhere where a man's rightful loving authority is overstepped and unloving abuse begins. We could spend a very long time trying to find that line in Torah and never quite agreeing. But in practice we all know unloving abuse when we see it, and we'll certainly take steps to ensure the safety of any women in those situations. As Andrew said, this obviously does NOT mean forcefully "taking a wife from her husband" - but in extreme circumstances where there is a very real danger of serious harm to a woman or her children it might mean assisting a wife in the event of her seeking an entirely scriptural temporary separation for reasons of safety, while a husband is encouraged to mend his ways.

We have to state this clearly simply because of the prevailing cultural presuppositions about polygyny. We must make it very clear that we are not in any way a cult of polygamous wife-beaters, we are a sensible Christian marriage ministry that simply accepts polygynous families as well as monogamous. It is unfortunate that certain individuals have given polygyny such a poor reputation and we have to be so clear about something that should go without saying. So when Andrew and I go into great detail on this, note that our statements are not really directed at you Zec (we know you, someone could knock on your door if we had any concerns about you personally!). This comment is mainly directed to anybody else reading this thread, to ensure they clearly understand what Biblical Families is about, and what it is not about.
 
What he said. 100%.
 
Well said Andrew and FH.

My own take:
No, we have no authority to say, force a woman to leave her husband. However, domestic abuse *is* illegal, so he can be hauled off to prison for it. If there was no law against it, and the diplomatic option didn't work, then we still would not have the ability to make him divorce her, but we *would* still have the ability to demonstrate what love is to him. If he insists that love is beating the crap out of the person you are "loving", then wouldn't it simply be cruel of me not to "love" him too? :mad:
 
And that's a policy I can agree with and adhere to and even be involved in. Period. Full stop. No arguing or quibbling. A woman can be an excellent wife to a jail inmate. A man can husband and father from a cell. Rough "justice" can be visited on any individual married or not.

Beating anyone is a crime and prosecuting and punishing a criminal has nothing to do with marital relations. We are all subject to the government.

Beating your wife is wrong. Hitting anyone usually runs counter to scripture. I don't hit my wife. I don't recommend anyone should.

Prudence tells me I should stop talking right there. I do not want to sound like I am debating this issue or arguing with you. I am not. I am on board 100% with the policy. It's a good one.

But, and so prudence dies an ignoble death, I feel compelled to point out one thing, as Christian men and aspiring patriarchs we have to do the right things for the right reasons. We can't wing it or act on intuition. We have to know what God wants us to do and then do it with the right attitude.

This means that being a theorist, of which I undoubtedly am, is not a bad thing. Just because we have taken the red pill on plural marriage doesn't mean we have exorcised all of our Romantic tendencies yet.

Lila asked a hard question about a hard passage. I should have been more clear that I was talking theoretically about how a wife should internalize this story. As far as crafting a Christian response to a complex issue, this passage shouldn't really be in the conversation.

There is a lot more I want to say but the truth is that I'm not the one to say it. I have struggled with violence of all kinds at times, some of it directed at women I was married to. It is not an easy topic to tackle. I do know that when well meaning Christian men tried tough love on me it back fired spectacularly in a number of ways.

It's an issue that a ministry focused on families will always tackle eventually and it's one that needs a thoroughly Biblical response as it involves so many vital topics and dire consequences.
 
ZecAustin said:
Lila asked a hard question about a hard passage. I should have been more clear that I was talking theoretically about how a wife should internalize this story.
Click to expand...
You lost me in there somewhere, but here's my theory about how a wife should internalize this story: Some men are pigs. The man in that story was "a selfish, heartless, cowardly bastard", and an accessory to murder. Full stop.

To theorize further about the "worth" of individual women or the limits of a woman's obedience to her husband is pure speculation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top