It’s always tiresome when a biblical illiterate tries making commentary.

Let’s take it from the top:

1)Marriages were usually arranged— but were not required by law, they were a cultural habit (one known to every culture on EARTH) , and forbidding “interfaith marriages”(which took place anyway) might have had something to do with the fact that other “faiths” in the region engaged in human sacrifice and other depravities. Brides were not stoned “if they could not prove their virginity…” they were stoned if it were proven that, during their engagement, they had cheated (a little technique involving being able to count to nine months.) Coincidentally, the man who she cheated with was executed too…

2)Man+brother’s widow. This, dullards, was done to protect the WOMAN— as in that culture and that time, a woman depended upon her eldest son to care for her in her old age. Having her brother in law required to marry her and provide her with a son was to protect her from destitution.

3)woman+rapist: completely incorrect. The law referenced basically stated that an unmarried man who lay with an unmarried woman was to take responsibility and marry her or, if her father did not approve of him, was to pay 50 shekels… the typical cost of her DOWRY, as it was going to be a mite harder to get someone to marry her. It was clarified further in later passages that rapists were to be stoned, as their crime was “akin to murder”— but if the woman did not resist or cry out, she didn’t get to shout “date rape” later (sound familiar guys?)

4)Man+wives+concubines: yes, people in the OT did this. First, most of the examples noted were BEFORE the passing down of the law, and second, while they did occur that did not mean they were approved of.

5)man+wife+wife’s property: completely incorrect. The law expressly forbade slave owners to lie with their slaves*.

6)Male slave*+Female slave*. Yes, a slave owner could give his slaves to one another in marriage…. that, however, does not automatically imply coercion.

7)Male soldier+Prisoner of war: yes, welcome to planet earth, B.C. A common practice of every civilization on earth— brides as prizes of war. The key difference? Under Hebrew Law, It guaranteed the women thus captured the rights and protections of Hebrew law….they were taken as brides, or were to be untouched….. in a time when the usual practice of invading armies was to pass the captured women around from soldier to soldier and then leave their corpses in a ditch.

*Slaves in the Old Testament would be more accurately termed indentured servants. While some were captured in war, most were people who sold themselves to pay off a debt. Furthermore they had a specific sunset provision on their servitude, (x number of years or freed on the Year of Jubilee, whichever came first), they were protected from both neglect and abuse by the law, and if they were abused, molested, or even if they just fled their master they were NOT to be returned. Once freed, they even had the option to remain a permanent bondservant in their master’s household. A guaranteed job contract with full room,board, and medical, full legal protection, forfeiture clauses and option to renew for life. Feel free to try and get a job TODAY with those provisions.