Deuteronomy 22:28-29?

Does this verse force a a raped girl to marry her attacker?

28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

this makes a little more sense to me

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, who is not espoused, and taking her, lie with her, and the matter come to judgment: 29 He that lay with her shall give to the father of the maid fifty sides of silver, and shall have her to wife, because he hath humbled her: he may not put her away all the days of his life.

From the Haydock Bible Commentary

Ver. 29. Life. A law nearly similar occurs, Exodus xxii. 16, (Haydock) only there Moses speaks of seduction. (Menochius) — If the father or the woman refused their consent to the marriage, the person had only to pay 50 sicles; which the woman received, if her father was not alive. But if they consented, the person who had been condemned by the judge, was bound to marry the woman, how deformed soever. (Selden, Uxor. i. 16.) (Calmet)

No this doesn’t force a raped woman to marry her attacker

Sounds more the other way around, the man Has To marry the woman he raped. Perhaps this was established so a man would not rape a woman he doesn’t really, really love - in which case, it wouldn’t be rape, but fornication.

By the way, it does seem that the law allows the woman’s father to turn his daughter into a Prostitute by preventing the marriage in favor of the man paying for the sexual encounter!!! So not cool!

As Tobinatorstark pointed out, depending upon the translation, it is ambiguous at best as to whether these verses refer to rape or not.

I think this is all besides the point anyway. Take a look at the next few verses from the beginning of Deuteronomy 23 [NAB]:

2 "No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose
penis has been cut off may be admitted into the community of
the LORD.
3 No child of an incestuous union may be admitted into
the community of the LORD, nor any descendant of his even to
the tenth generation.
4 No Ammonite or Moabite may ever be admitted into the
community of the LORD, nor any descendants of theirs even to
the tenth generation,

We’re talking about the deuteronomic law here. These are not moral laws but are prescriptions that were added because of the transgressions of the Israelites (see this article for more info). There is a difference between these rules and the moral laws, such as the Ten Commandments. These expired with the coming of the New Covenant.

So very very true. This verse also sounds like, If a Man and a woman who arent married have , (As in what happens alot now adays with sleeping around) and they are found out, The man has to pay and then he has to marry the , Could be protection for the if she get pregnant, because back then a woman to get pregnant out side of Marriage, they got Outcast or stoned, or Mocked. I would see it as God writing a law for the protection of people, if they choose to do what is right after a mistake. That could just be me though…

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit