Debate: The bible is... illogical
Side: No! Completely Logical!

For the first answer, you sound like a slaver for some reason, but your answer does have some truth on some levels, like a psychotic criminal per say, because some must be confined for the safety of others. So that is one thing to agree on.I suppose you hear only what you want to hear.For the second, you have to understand what I mean by "Having power over someone.I could already tell from a mile away you meant something stupid. I could already tell that you equate power over someone to something as idiotic as slavery, even though 'power over someone' has far more meanings then to enslave someone. I talked from the standpoint of 'power over someone' being the general term that it was supposed to be in an effort to correct you. But I guess I failed, because for an entire comment you'd have rather have me read your mind instead of correct yourself.Okay, now that's just silly, since when was I a "Whiny Feminist" Now you're just taking it too far. I never even mentioned calling you a misogynist.Sure you didn't call me one, but you treated me like one.Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)What's illogical about defiling the things your enemies were trying so desperately to protect? Your enemies back then were always evil after all. It's totally logical to insult their loss after they threatened to harm your existence.I don't like it, but that's how they did things back then."When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion." (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NABThis verse says nothing of rape. The fact that you think it mentions rape makes you look like the feminist you likely are.Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded. "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves. (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)This doesn't mention rape either.If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.This isn't about rape either. Both of them were stoned to death because they were both adulterous. 'The girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city' means that she consented to sex with a man that was not her husband.This verse is about the punishment for adultery for both man and woman. It's pretty fair treatment since they both were punished the same way.Today I would not stand for stoning for adultery... but that's today. Society couldn't afford children out of wedlock in ancient times. Adulterers had to be made examples of to keep order. I don't like it, but that's how they did things.It is clear that God doesn't give a damn about the rape victim. He is only concerned about the violation of another mans "property"No, what's clear is that you don't give a damn about trying to see this all from the views of an ancient culture. You are only concerned about hating the Bible for what it isn't.Do you take matters of rape lightly? And is it wrong to stand up against rape?I take rape very seriously, but I can't do anything about what was paraphrased in a book for the guidance of ancient peoples. It's not wrong to stand up against rape, but it's silly to stand up against rape that may or may not have been paraphrased in a book as guidance for ancient peoples.After all, two of those verses you sighted had nothing to do with rape.I don't bear a grudge at men because well, I am a man- well, a boy. Do you just automatically assume that my sympathy towards women makes me a woman?Why do you just automatically assume that you have to be a woman to bear a grudge against men and/or be a feminist? Men can bear a grudge against their own gender and they can also be feminists. Thank you for demonstrating how much the genders are separate from each other in your male mind.