As stated previously the main issue with this passage is that woman only is being punished for this crime, however, that issue is not the only one as are scholar are discussing. Scholars are also discussing the violence behind the passage. Scott writes, “As Gail O’Day describes it: ‘[the adulterer] is an object on display, given no name, no violence, no identity apart form that for which she stands accused’.” By not giving the adulterer any control or even a name, the woman becomes an object of display. This claim is used by people who only view woman, as property or as a prize to be won. When a person makes a woman property or a prize that person tends to define her role in life. Because of this claim, when those in charge of the law
…show more content…
… That she corrupted the land through adultery, God forbid. We ask the Lord, may His name be praised, that this punishment should be an atonement for her crime in this world and that it should purify her so she is able to meet God in a way that He is satisfied with her and that He will forgive her … We swear in the name of [God] that it hurts us very much when the honor of one [religious] woman is violated.
Through this man’s words, he told the woman that she brought dishonor to her whole land and religion. However, the man that she had adultery with was never tried and was let off the hook. This woman’s children may only now know that their mom brought curses to their land and begin to hate her, when in reality that is not case at all. While this scripture has been used for several acts of violence still going on, there are people who know that the Biblical Hatred message from this passage is wrong and speak against Biblical Hatred in the passage. Scholars who tend to go against Biblical Hatred tend to interpret this scripture in this way. Jesus, a man, is against the patriarchal system. Scott states, “Here it is healing from justice and the oppression of a patriarchal system which would condemn her without a word with no substantial evidenced of guilt.” By not condemning her, Jesus says he is more than a patriarch. Jesus shows that he
… That she corrupted the land through adultery, God forbid. We ask the Lord, may His name be praised, that this punishment should be an atonement for her crime in this world and that it should purify her so she is able to meet God in a way that He is satisfied with her and that He will forgive her … We swear in the name of [God] that it hurts us very much when the honor of one [religious] woman is violated.
Through this man’s words, he told the woman that she brought dishonor to her whole land and religion. However, the man that she had adultery with was never tried and was let off the hook. This woman’s children may only now know that their mom brought curses to their land and begin to hate her, when in reality that is not case at all. While this scripture has been used for several acts of violence still going on, there are people who know that the Biblical Hatred message from this passage is wrong and speak against Biblical Hatred in the passage. Scholars who tend to go against Biblical Hatred tend to interpret this scripture in this way. Jesus, a man, is against the patriarchal system. Scott states, “Here it is healing from justice and the oppression of a patriarchal system which would condemn her without a word with no substantial evidenced of guilt.” By not condemning her, Jesus says he is more than a patriarch. Jesus shows that he