Vaginas Can't Keep Promises
February 1, 2015 at 7:33 pm
(This post was last modified: February 1, 2015 at 7:44 pm by Nope.)
Numbers 30
So, men have to keep their words but a woman's vow can be broken if her dad doesn't want her to keep it. For the Christians on this site, why don't you still follow this law? This particular rule isn't dependent on the presence of a temple so there should be no problem with a father saying that his adult daughter can't make promises, right? If you believe that because of the New Testament such laws need no longer be followed, what was the purpose of this law in the first place? In an ideal Christian theocracy do you believe that unmarried, adult women would need their father's permission to enter into contracts?
Why can't modern Christian husbands annul their wives's vows?
I can't remember which thread I saw this but one of the theists argued that biblical rape laws did not mean that the ancient Hebrews viewed women as merely property. I would like to know how the verses in Numbers don't prove that women were viewed as belonging to their husbands and fathers
Quote:…2"If a man makes a vow to the LORD, or takes an oath to bind himself with a binding obligation, he shall not violate his word; he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth. 3"Also if a woman makes a vow to the LORD, and binds herself by an obligation in her father's house in her youth, 4and her father hears her vow and her obligation by which she has bound herself, and her father says nothing to her, then all her vows shall stand and every obligation by which she has bound herself shall stand 5 But if her father should forbid her on the day he hears of it, none of her vows or her obligations by which she has bound herself shall stand; and the LORD will forgive her because her father had forbidden her.…
.…
So, men have to keep their words but a woman's vow can be broken if her dad doesn't want her to keep it. For the Christians on this site, why don't you still follow this law? This particular rule isn't dependent on the presence of a temple so there should be no problem with a father saying that his adult daughter can't make promises, right? If you believe that because of the New Testament such laws need no longer be followed, what was the purpose of this law in the first place? In an ideal Christian theocracy do you believe that unmarried, adult women would need their father's permission to enter into contracts?
Quote:"However, if she should marry while under her vows or the rash statement of her lips by which she has bound herself, 7and her husband hears of it and says nothing to her on the day he hears it, then her vows shall stand and her obligations by which she has bound herself shall stand 8"But if on the day her husband hears of it, he forbids her, then he shall annul her vow which she is under and the rash statement of her lips by which she has bound herself; and the LORD will forgive her.
Why can't modern Christian husbands annul their wives's vows?
I can't remember which thread I saw this but one of the theists argued that biblical rape laws did not mean that the ancient Hebrews viewed women as merely property. I would like to know how the verses in Numbers don't prove that women were viewed as belonging to their husbands and fathers
