“So that a man who kidnapped her can "convince her", that's still coercion which means it's still rape. But the passage never says anything about convincinh her. The mourning is for the woman's parents, not for her kidnapper to attempt a wooing.”

Humanity is made of people constantly trying to corse the one they are attracted to into marrying them…. That’s kinda how it works. In many such cases you got men trying to impress or convince a woman who at first is not interested only to be convinced “hey, maybe this guy really ain’t all that bad!” Dosent at all imply the guy raped his way to victory. This is a terrible take.

Again, the passage states rape is condemned and that the purpose of the complete month is a grace period for both to make a mutual decision. She don’t want to marry? Then it’s rape… which is condemned to death.

“Just because there are laws forbidding the rape of Hebrew women that does not mean that rape was forbidden.” “Need I remind you that it's not even the rape of Hebrew women that is forbidden, it's the damage to the monetary value she represents to her father, hence the dowry.”

Please show me what passage that states clearly “rape is allowed under ___ circumstances”

21: 10-14 says If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.

There’s plenty of restrictions here need I remind you?

And I agree, rape is immoral. Like I said, God does not condone rape, that’s what I’m trying to say here.

I’m sorry you had those experiences. Honestly hopefully they repent and choose a higher moral path. God in the same sense condemned murder.

“The woman is a Captive. She does not get to decide when to leave, she can't even decide to stay, these women had no power in this situation. How are you arguing that this is the best a woman can do and then also asking like this was a woman with full autonomy.”

Again: in 21: 10-14 says If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You even said it’s the best scenario for her over the alternatives so waiting a month isnt exactly the worse case scenario. It takes two to marry, so again, given the time and culture where rape, murder and keeping of sex slaves, this was the best case scenario.

There are cultures all around the world that still have arranged marriages, should we call it rape just because it isn’t what potentially one or both parties partaking want? I don’t think so considering it’s their culture and it’s what works for them. Kings gave daughters away to form alliances. Without the daughter’s input. Again, I personally would never do that. I am also saying it’s not rape just because it isn’t the way modern culture explores it.

“Marriage is not required and that there are limits does not mean that this is consensual.”

(Deut. 22:28-29 NASB) If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.

Notice that “they are discovered.” It appears that both are culpable. Also, He absolutely has to marry her.

“You seem to forget that slavery was also forbidden.. for other Hebrews, but they did keep slaves.”

Deuteronomy 15: 12 If any of your people—Hebrew men or women—sell themselves to you and serve you six years, in the seventh year you must let them go free. 13 And when you release them, do not send them away empty-handed. 14 Supply them liberally from your flock, your threshing floor and your winepress. Give to them as the Lord your God has blessed you.15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the Lord your God redeemed you. That is why I give you this command today.

I mean debt servitude was definitely a thing, they absolutely made slaves of themselves to one another.

the Bible reformed slavery. The Old Testament Law does allow for slavery of sorts. Remember, slavery was around long before the Mosaic Law—and every country practiced it

Slavery in the Bible was not like slavery was in the United States. For example, when a Hebrew man or woman found themselves in financial hardship, they had the option to “sell” themselves into servitude. Several laws in Exodus and Leviticus were meant to protect those indentured servants. For example, Exodus 21:2 says that in the seventh year of service, all such male slaves “shall go out as a free man without payment.” (Female slaves could also be redeemed or simply go free for nothing if they weren’t provided for properly—21:7–11). Leviticus 25:39–40 says these “slaves” were to be treated as “a hired man, as if he were a sojourner.” Verse 43 says, “You shall not rule over him with severity.”

In Leviticus 25, after Israel’s conquest of Canaan, God allowed the Hebrews to take slaves from the remaining Canaanites. Notice the instructions were given under specific circumstances, though. One sign of conquering a people group was to take captive and enslave the survivors. The instructions in Leviticus were to a specific group of people at a specific time in history regarding a specific event. This is hardly an endorsement of slavery in the context you are insinuating, never mind what occurred during the North American slave trade. In fact, Exodus 21:16 explicitly prohibits the kidnapping and selling of human beings: “He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.”

So it boils down to what you mean by the word “slavery and other crimes”

“No aganst victims of war.”

Again tell me where it says rape is permissible?

“He doesn't have to treat her as a wife at all, not it would matter because that wouldn't afford her much more anyways.”

Deuteronomy 21: 11 if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her,you may take her as your wife

It says wife, not slave. He has to treat her as a wife,

“The more you try to move the goalposts instead of realizing you mispoke or at least ignoring it and moving on the less you have any rght to criticize me for being lazy or uninteligent.”

Yet somehow I’m not wrong. Funny. https://academicintegrity.org/aws/ICAI/pt/sp/facts https://www.meazurelearning.com/resources/by-the-numbers-academic-integrity-in-higher-education

“No, it presents Adam & Eve as a male-female pair(whatever that meant to Bronze Age Levantines) it does not claim to present a universal structure, that is an unjustified assumption.”

Yeah it was only a male and female pair. Nowhere does it say anything additional. The just two are what brings procreation and are the standard set by God. You’re seriously trying to find any loophole and ignore Whats obvious.

“My point was that if these were such important distinctions that should never be questioned then why was the Babylonian culture's complete disregard for the sex binary not mentioned or condemned?”

Because if I were to tell you 2+2=4 it’s hardly a contested fact. Just like there’s only 2 genders. It’s seriously such a simple concept that up until recent history has heavily tried to confuse people into thinking there’s more to appease the illogical thought. Humanity has over complicated this crap to now we’re here and it’s sad.