Open Letter Response to “Lessons from the Brett Kavanaugh hearings.”
NOTE: To review the email excerpt on which this response is based, please scroll to the bottom of this page.
As a woman that has been harassed and assaulted, typically our predators attack us when there are NO witnesses. It almost always is the victim’s word against the attacker’s word as no one witnessed the assault. As potential prey, we are told as children, “Don’t take candy from strangers” and as adults, “Don’t leave your beverage unattended. If it is ever out of sight, toss it!” since there may not be witnesses to the course of events that unfold after a seemingly innocent piece of candy or tampered beverage. We are educated about creative, preemptive, defense gadgets like pepper spray and Undercover Colors (a handy coined-sized key fob test to see if your beverage has been contaminated with a “date-rape” drug) all because it is our word against the attacker’s word.
Biblically speaking, sexual assault was not covered up, ignored, nor did God enforce 2–3 witnesses (via rendering judgment on single-accuser retaliation) due to the secretive nature of such crimes (c.f. Gen. 34, Judges 19–20, 2 Sam. 13). Furthermore, one of the Old Testament references for your email’s intended citation of 2 Corinthians 13:1 (where Paul asserted that his third time coming counted as his third witness, which in itself speaks to one witness repeating his stance three times) comes from Deuteronomy 19:15–21. Verses 16–19 speak to instances when there are no witnesses and the careful investigation that must be made for lone accusers and the punishment, particularly in the case of a false accuser. Upon closer examination of the citation references, we see that context indeed matters (e.g. 1 Tim. 5:19, 20 — Is this a case among elders? Paul did not refer to politicians/the government/“Ceasar” as elders). To rightly divide the Word, we must refrain from arbitrarily using Scriptures without examining the supporting context.
In my own case, I stood in a courtroom as I heard my harasser try to discredit me and dispute my recollection. There were no witnesses — just my word against his. I believe a main reason the judge sided with me in granting my hard-fought restraining order was that I saved the text message records of the harassing exchange. But prior to this century, both adults and children have been violated and left to suffer in silence with likely no text messages nor iPhone camera recordings to vindicate them all because the attacker was cunning enough to do it without witnesses or a paper trail. C.f. The Golden State Killer and 2 Samuel 13:9–14.
I don’t know if Kavanaugh or Ford is being deceptive. The bigger issue with the sentiments of this email and the reason for my response is that sexual assault is typically a witness-less crime and it is irresponsible, predator-empowering and frankly, not reflective of the full counsel of God (see above references and the full context of citations) to say that having witnesses is the burden of proof for sexual assault. Thankfully, there are many other ways to prove assault and harassment in 2018 that do not malign biblical teachings. Unfortunately, the truthful, living victims of last century are often left to cope without earthly vindication but thankfully God is the ultimate Judge.
Dr. Lee Davenport
Below is an excerpt of the original email that garnered this response:
