Mildly Infuriating

Here are the verses I could find with some quick searching: Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "28 If 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; 29 Then 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." Exodus 22:16-17 "16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. 17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins." Both of these require the rapist/seducer to marry the woman and to pay the standard dowry amount to the woman's father. The exodus verse gives the father the option to reject the marriage, which is a good addition! (IMO since the Deuteronomy version was written later, the rejection clause might have been left out in later versions of the law.) Both of these verses are from the Old Testament, which Christians mostly use for cultural context, as Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses during his ministry. Most Christians take laws that only appear in the Old Testament as historical, but no longer consider them doctrine. Also, the culture of Old Testament believers was significantly different and so applying these laws to todays Christians doesn't account for then assive cultural differences. (For example, Exodus 22:18, right after the passage above says "18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Which has been used out of its cultural context to justify actual witch hunts!) In conclusion, both versions of this historical law are considered superceded by most modern Christians.