Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Zenaphobe · 12-21-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beforHim

Go here for a good explanation of slavery in the Bible.

I do agree, that even though the Christian God is not supposed to be a "God of confusion", your statement about "The average sixth grader..." can be sympathized with.

I admit I jumped to the part of the article concerning this passage

Quote:

Lev 25.44f):
Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. 43 Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God. 44 "`Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life

and what I got from the explanation was, since the Jews were to be nicer to their slaves and had to buy them rather than "take" them from surrounding nations, the whole arrangement was not like the slavery of the old South.

If the Southern slave owners were following the rules, was it right to deny them their ownership of slaves?

So, would it be o.k. for us today to buy slaves from third world countries as long as we adhere to the rules Yahweh set up in the Bible?

Why do we have such negative views of human slavery today? All we need to do is follow the rules the Yahweh gave us and it should be fine. :huh:

sugarhitman · 12-21-2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Net2004

Quote:

That was because they were looking for plunder.

why don't you admit that the opposition force, the amalekite, was merciful than the ruthless "chosen ones" ?

the "chosen ones" weren't look for plunder?

Quote:

"But all the girls F442 who have not known man intimately, F443 spare F444 for yourselves. 19

32 Now the booty that remained from the spoil which the men F449 of war had plundered was 675,000 sheep, 33 and 72,000 cattle, 34 and 61,000 donkeys, 35 and of human beings, of the women who had not known man intimately, F450 all the persons were 32,000.

saving 32 thousand virgin girls is no problem.
saving innocent infants and children "who do not yet know good from bad" (Deut 1:39) is a big problem.

you find for us a verse in your ot that says the opposition forces stole 32 thousand jewish women.

FTill wrote:

Deuteronomy 6:10 When Yahweh your God brings you into the land he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to give you--a land with large, flourishing cities you did not build, 11 houses filled with all kinds of good things you did not provide, wells you did not dig, and vineyards and olive groves you did not plant--then when you eat and are satisfied, 12 be careful that you do not forget Yahweh, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

What we have here is exactly what I described above. The cities, fields, vineyards, wells, etc. were spared as much as possible so that the Israelites could move in to occupy and use them. It was a purely selfish tactic, which didn't involve even a shred of compassion for the people who had built the cities and planted the crops and vineyards. The people were massacred and their property and posessions spared as much as possible. This is somewhat like military plans in recent years to build neutron bombs, which could be exploded above cities to kill the populations by radiation and leave the factories and buildings intact to be used after they were safe to be occupied. If Mr. Miller sees this as mitigating "limitations" on the Israelites, he must be looking hard for some way to justify the Yahwistic massacres.

This almakite band were robbers not an army inotherwords they were looking for plunder thus this "merciful" taking of the women and children who would no doubt have been sold into slavery or forced into slavery.

Also the midianites were punished for their attempts to destroy Israel the medianites were not targets of Israel nor was their land to be given to Israel. Israel were on their way to displace the Anakim and other remnants of the Giants and those nations who had mingled with them.

Stop your false visualization the Hebrews like other Adamic peoples were displacing the Anakims and the Midianites wrongly sought to ndestroy Israel that resulted in that nation being judged.

Johnny Skeptic · 12-21-2008, 12:39 PM

If a Hebrew killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if a Hebrew slaveowner killed a slave, he was not put to death. That was wrong.

If a slaveowner beat his slave and the slave recovered within a few days, he was not punished at all. That was wrong too.

Hebrew slaves were guaranteed their freedom, but in some cases, non-Hebrew slaves were not guaranteed their freedom, and were considered to be property that could be put in a slaveowners will. That was wrong too.

If there are any texts that guarantee freedom to all non-Hebrew slaves, what are they?

sschlichter · 12-21-2008, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

I am about to open a thread on why God sought to destroy certain nations.

Good, the best place to do that will be at the General Religious Discussions Forum. If you start a new thread there, I will ask you why God does lots of other things, including killing babies, forcing innocent animals to kill each other, withholding evidence that some skeptics would accept if they were aware of it, sending skeptics to hell for eternity without parole, refusing to tell anyone about the Gospel message himself, and never inspiring a prophecy of the quality of a prophecy regarding when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year. Since the Bible is not the word of God, it is quite natural that it does not contain any prophecies of that quality.

Please be advised that people need a God of the present, not a God of the past. A real God would not need questionable ancient texts in order to reasonably prove his existence. If ancient native American Indians got along fine without the Bible, so can everyone else.

I did not know the text was there to prove God's existence.

btw, he only allowed the killing of the most guilty of animals - never innocent ones.

sschlichter · 12-21-2008, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

If a Hebrew killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if a Hebrew slaveowner killed a slave, he was not put to death. That was wrong.

If a slaveowner beat his slave and the slave recovered within a few days, he was not punished at all. That was wrong too.

if this is wrong, tell me the right punishment for an ANE servant. Why don't you tell us what it should have been?

~Steve

Johnny Skeptic · 12-22-2008, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

If a Hebrew killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if a Hebrew slaveowner killed a slave, he was not put to death. That was wrong.

If a slaveowner beat his slave and the slave recovered within a few days, he was not punished at all. That was wrong too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlicter

If this is wrong, tell me the right punishment for an ANE servant. Why don't you tell us what it should have been?

Certainly a punishment other than death would have been more moral. If a Hebrew slaveowner killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if he killed a slave, he was only punished. That was wrong.

As far as I know, Hebrew slaves were always guaranteed their freedom if they wanted to be free, but the same right was not always guaranteed to non-Hebrew slaves. Is that correct?

Johnny Skeptic · 12-22-2008, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

I did not know the text was there to prove God's existence.

I am willing to consider any evidence that you have that the God of the Bible exists. If you wish, you can start a new thread at the General Religious Discussions Forum, or at the Existence of God Forum. If you start a new thread, one issue that I would like to discuss with you is the global flood.

Johnny Skeptic · 12-22-2008, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Any slaves who incurred injury as the result of beatings were by law to be set free.

Please quote the pertinent Scriptures.

sschlichter · 12-22-2008, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

I did not know the text was there to prove God's existence.

I am willing to consider any evidence that you have that the God of the Bible exists. If you wish, you can start a new thread at the General Religious Discussions Forum, or at the Existence of God Forum. If you start a new thread, one issue that I would like to discuss with you is the global flood.

My point is not to provide you with evidence, but instead to point out that the Scriptures were not provided for those that do not beleive. They were written to the people of God - which by definition are those that do beleive. I.e. without God's help, you will not find God in them.

I tentatively think the flood was local (geographically speaking - still global in its judgment).

~Steve

sschlichter · 12-22-2008, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

If a Hebrew killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if a Hebrew slaveowner killed a slave, he was not put to death. That was wrong.

If a slaveowner beat his slave and the slave recovered within a few days, he was not punished at all. That was wrong too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlicter

If this is wrong, tell me the right punishment for an ANE servant. Why don't you tell us what it should have been?

Certainly a punishment other than death would have been more moral. If a Hebrew slaveowner killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if he killed a slave, he was only punished. That was wrong.

As far as I know, Hebrew slaves were always guaranteed their freedom if they wanted to be free, but the same right was not always guaranteed to non-Hebrew slaves. Is that correct?

yes, yes, but for you to be able to say what is wrong, you should not have a problem telling me what you were looking for as right. There are no prisons, no mental hospitals, no institutional means of support. Tell me what would have been right.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-21-2008, 12:39 PM	#293
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	If a Hebrew killed a free Hebrew, he was put to death, but if a Hebrew slaveowner killed a slave, he was not put to death. That was wrong. If a slaveowner beat his slave and the slave recovered within a few days, he was not punished at all. That was wrong too. Hebrew slaves were guaranteed their freedom, but in some cases, non-Hebrew slaves were not guaranteed their freedom, and were considered to be property that could be put in a slaveowners will. That was wrong too. If there are any texts that guarantee freedom to all non-Hebrew slaves, what are they?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.