Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshonq · 12-26-2008, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lógos Sokratikós

Similar to the way the Christian God was against the God of Israel, Christians and their scripture holding Jews in contempt and blame.

The OT prophets blah blah blah

Aren't going to help you here. Neither will whining about Muslims.

Distractions don't help you. There is a question on the table that you keep running from. Shall I ask it again? What font size would you like? Any particular color?

Sheshbazzar · 12-26-2008, 03:30 PM

Returning from the attempted derailments;

Quote:

If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

Ex 21:4

Something our pro-slavery advocates have thus far failed to address is the subject of the slaves "wife and children" whom which, whether that slave ever obtains his own freedom or not, are by law to remain the permanent property of their Hebrew master.
These innocents did not "sell" themselves, nor ever willingly enter into slavery, yet by law, from birth to death, were condemned to lifelong slavery, the Law specifically stating that the slave "shall go out by himself"

Of course the setup here being that a slave that desired to retain his wife and children was required to take the pledge "I love my master...I will not go out free" and so submit to becoming a slave to that master forever. Ex 21:5-6
How long is "forever"?
Anyway, it indicates that the wives and children of slaves belong to the master regardless of what decision the man-servant should make, permanent slaves if he leaves, and permanent slaves if he remains.
No provision for them to redeem themselves under any circumstance.

Johnny Skeptic · 12-26-2008, 03:41 PM

I request that readers stay on topic. The main issue is whether or not Old Testament slavery was moral. It wasn't. Consider the following Scriptures:

Leviticus 45:26

KJV - And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

NASB - You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.

NIV - You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

The Amplified Bible - And you shall make them an inheritance for your children after you, to hold for a possession; of them shall you take your bondmen always, but over your brethren the Israelites you shall not rule one over another with harshness (severity, oppression).

Those texts obviously do not make any mention of a jubilee. The proof is "they shall be your bondmen forvever," KJV, "you can use them as permanent slaves," NASB, "You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life," NIV, and ".......you shall make them an inheritance for your children after you, to hold for a possession; of them shall you take your bondmen always," The Amplified Bible.

The texts clearly show that there were two standards of treatment, one standard for Hebrew slaves, and another standard for non-Hebrew slaves. There is no doubt that the writer of the verse considered forcing Hebrews to be slaves for life to be unacceptable, and that he considered forcing non-Hebrews to be slaves for life to be acceptable. The writer obviously considered involuntarily forcing a Hebrew slave to serve for life was rigour, KJV, severe, NASB, ruthless, NIV, and harsh, The Amplified Bible. On the other hand, he obviously approved of involuntarily forcing non-Hebrew slaves to be slaves for life.

Hebrew slaves WERE guaranteed their freedom it they wanted it. Non-Hebrew slave WERE NOT always guaranteed their freedom if they wanted it.

It was not required that runaway slaves be returned to their owners, but non-Hebrew slaves should not have had to try to run away. They should have been granted their freedom after six years without paying anything just like Hebrew slaves. In addition, what happened when their escape attempts were unsuccessful and they got caught by their owners? Surely they were punished for their escape attempts. If they weren't punished, why call them them slaves at all if they could just walk right out of the door without being stopped? Didn't slaveowners have the right to try to prevent their slaves from escaping, and to try to recapture slaves that they had paid for?

Considering that Old Testament Jews thought nothing of killing women and children of other tribes on some occasions, and that anyone who did not worship their God was an evil heathen, it makes sense that forcing Hebrew slaves to serve for life was prohibited, and considered to be harsh,

One passage says that Moses told his soldiers to conduct a raid on a neighboring tribe, to kill all of the men and the boys, and to keep any women who had not slept with men for themselves. That was involuntary servitude.

It is interesting to note that the God of the Bible does not mind killing women and children either, even fundamentalist Christian women and children, not to mention innocent animals.

Demophon · 12-26-2008, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Shall I ask it again?

If I may.

I think we (you, I and everyone else) know that certain questions can't be answered by Christians. This being one of many.

If he says that slavery is Gods will, he will looks like an ass.
If he denies what the bibles says, he won't look like a Christian.

So the only conclusion is to ignore the question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

The main issue is whether or not Old Testament slavery was moral. It wasn't. Consider the following Scriptures:...

I agree.

Johnny Skeptic · 12-26-2008, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The Mosaic law permitted divorce in much the same way slavery was also permitted.

If anything, the God of the Old Testament was quite strict. It would have been out of character for him to require the death penalty for anyone who practiced the freedom of religion, or worked on the Sabbath Day, or cursed at their parents, but allow people to destroy marriage, which was the basis for the family. Jesus said that Moses allowed divorce because the people's heart were hard, but the strict God of the Old Testament would not likely have given in to stubborn believers who wanted to get divorced.

Your obvious point is that God did not approve of divorce and slavery, but allowed those practices. However, how do you account for God directly telling Moses to free Hebrew slaves after six years without paying anything, that is was acceptable to involuntarily force non-Hebrew slaves to serve for life, that it would be harsh to force Hebrew slaves to be slaves for life, and that it would not be harsh to force non-Hebrew slaves to serve for life?

The obvious answer is that a God did not inspire the Bible.

Sheshbazzar · 12-26-2008, 04:10 PM

It should be pointed out that Exodus 21:4-6 applies most specifically to Hebrew slaves;

Quote:

1.Now these [are] the judgments which thou shalt set before them.

2. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

3. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

4. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

5. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

6. Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

Thus the legal blackmail involved the keeping of -Hebrew- wives and children in permanent ("forever" "alway") slavery, right along with the lower class goyim slaves.

These nonsense contradictory "Laws", "statutes" and "commandments" were fabricated by an imaginative priesthood long after the fairy-tale alleged events took place.
Israel never did submit to, or actually practice the foolishness that their priesthoods silly "holy books" attempt to foist off on the gullible as being factual accounts, but are all only the product of distorting history and willfully lying to the population to wrest power.

arnoldo · 12-26-2008, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

There is a parallel between the initial rejection of Moses as the liberator of the Jews and their latter initial rejection of Yeshua,

No, there is not, for multiple reasons:

1. The Jews did not initially reject Moses; the Jews followed Moses;
2. The Jews did reject Jesus and do not follow him

About as busted of a "parallel" as you can get.

Quote:

note Exodus 2:14

Which does not demonstrate that the Jews rejected Moses. That verse only quotes a single person among the Jews. Here is the entire passage in context:

EXO 2:11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
EXO 2:12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
EXO 2:13 And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?
EXO 2:14 And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known.

You can't just make up stuff and expect us to swallow it, arnoldo. :rolling:

Your interpretation of Moses and his rejection at times from the Jews seems to differ from Stephen's which is documented in Acts 7:26-43

Quote:

The next day Moses saw two Israelites fighting, and he tried to make peace between them. He said to them, 'Men, you are brothers. Why are you treating each other unfairly?' 27 "But one of the men pushed Moses aside. He asked Moses, 'Who made you our ruler and judge? 28 Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?' 29 After he said that, Moses quickly left Egypt and lived in Midian as a foreigner. In Midian he fathered two sons.

30 "Forty years later, a messenger appeared to him in the flames of a burning bush in the desert of Mount Sinai. 31 Moses was surprised when he saw this. As he went closer to look at the bush, the voice of the Lord said to him, 32 'I am the God of your ancestors-the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.' Moses began to tremble and didn't dare to look at the bush. 33 The Lord told him, 'Take off your sandals. The place where you're standing is holy ground. 34 I've seen how my people are mistreated in Egypt. I've heard their groaning and have come to rescue them. So now I'm sending you to Egypt.'. . .
35 "This is the Moses whom the Israelites rejected by saying, 'Who made you our ruler and judge?' This is the one God sent to free them and to rule them with the help of the messenger who appeared to him in the bush. 36 This is the man who led our ancestors out of Egypt. He is the person who did amazing things and worked miracles in Egypt, at the Red Sea, and in the desert for 40 years. 37 This is the same Moses who told the Israelites, 'God will send you a prophet, an Israelite like me.' 38 This is the Moses who was in the assembly in the desert. Our ancestors and the messenger who spoke to him on Mount Sinai were there with him. Moses received life-giving messages to give to us, 39 but our ancestors were not willing to obey him. Instead, they pushed him aside, and in their hearts they turned back to Egypt. 40 They told Aaron, 'We don't know what has happened to this Moses, who led us out of Egypt. So make gods who will lead us.' 41 That was the time they made a calf.. .

Toto · 12-26-2008, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...Your interpretation of Moses and his rejection at times from the Jews seems to differ from Stephen's which is documented in Acts 7:26-43

...

Early Christians are not a good source for the meaning of the Hebrew Scriptures. They deliberately read the scriptures in an idiosyncratic way, quite different from the way the Jews read their own scriptures.

Besides, Stephen is probably a largely fictional character or one who just mouths the words of the author of Luke-Acts.

Sheshonq · 12-26-2008, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Which does not demonstrate that the Jews rejected Moses. That verse only quotes a single person among the Jews. Here is the entire passage in context:

EXO 2:11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
EXO 2:12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
EXO 2:13 And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?
EXO 2:14 And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known.

You can't just make up stuff and expect us to swallow it, arnoldo. :rolling:

Your interpretation of Moses and his rejection at times from the Jews seems to differ from Stephen's which is documented in Acts 7:26-43

1. In the first place, you based your "Moses was rejected" claim on the reaction of one single person. That's obviously a nonsense conclusion, whether you can admit it to yourself or not.

2. Your citation of Stephen merely repeats this tale of one person rejecting Moses. It does not support your claim that the all the Jews rejected Moses.

3. Finally, citing the NT to try and prove your claim about the OT doesn't work, because you haven't proven that the NT citation is accurate. It's circular. And since we know that there are numerous places in the NT that use text from the OT in an out-of-context manner, that's a problem. You can't just plug the text in and claim that it's accurate.

Sheshbazzar · 12-26-2008, 05:08 PM

1. The Jews did not initially accept Moses; they didn't even know of him until the priests fabricated the lies,
and forged their books about him; hundreds of years after his imaginary life.
Everything written about, or "by" Moses is wholly fabricated, cleverly (or sometimes crudely) contrived latter fiction.

2. The Jews did not reject "Jesus"; There is no contemporary evidence that they ever even so much as heard of him.
The fake New Testement books are all forgeries produced by gentiles hundreds of years after his imaginary life.

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

12-26-2008, 03:41 PM	#483
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	I request that readers stay on topic. The main issue is whether or not Old Testament slavery was moral. It wasn't. Consider the following Scriptures: Leviticus 45:26 KJV - And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour. NASB - You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another. NIV - You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. The Amplified Bible - And you shall make them an inheritance for your children after you, to hold for a possession; of them shall you take your bondmen always, but over your brethren the Israelites you shall not rule one over another with harshness (severity, oppression). Those texts obviously do not make any mention of a jubilee. The proof is "they shall be your bondmen forvever," KJV, "you can use them as permanent slaves," NASB, "You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life," NIV, and ".......you shall make them an inheritance for your children after you, to hold for a possession; of them shall you take your bondmen always," The Amplified Bible. The texts clearly show that there were two standards of treatment, one standard for Hebrew slaves, and another standard for non-Hebrew slaves. There is no doubt that the writer of the verse considered forcing Hebrews to be slaves for life to be unacceptable, and that he considered forcing non-Hebrews to be slaves for life to be acceptable. The writer obviously considered involuntarily forcing a Hebrew slave to serve for life was rigour, KJV, severe, NASB, ruthless, NIV, and harsh, The Amplified Bible. On the other hand, he obviously approved of involuntarily forcing non-Hebrew slaves to be slaves for life. Hebrew slaves WERE guaranteed their freedom it they wanted it. Non-Hebrew slave WERE NOT always guaranteed their freedom if they wanted it. It was not required that runaway slaves be returned to their owners, but non-Hebrew slaves should not have had to try to run away. They should have been granted their freedom after six years without paying anything just like Hebrew slaves. In addition, what happened when their escape attempts were unsuccessful and they got caught by their owners? Surely they were punished for their escape attempts. If they weren't punished, why call them them slaves at all if they could just walk right out of the door without being stopped? Didn't slaveowners have the right to try to prevent their slaves from escaping, and to try to recapture slaves that they had paid for? Considering that Old Testament Jews thought nothing of killing women and children of other tribes on some occasions, and that anyone who did not worship their God was an evil heathen, it makes sense that forcing Hebrew slaves to serve for life was prohibited, and considered to be harsh, One passage says that Moses told his soldiers to conduct a raid on a neighboring tribe, to kill all of the men and the boys, and to keep any women who had not slept with men for themselves. That was involuntary servitude. It is interesting to note that the God of the Bible does not mind killing women and children either, even fundamentalist Christian women and children, not to mention innocent animals.

12-26-2008, 05:08 PM	#490
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	1. The Jews did not initially accept Moses; they didn't even know of him until the priests fabricated the lies, and forged their books about him; hundreds of years after his imaginary life. Everything written about, or "by" Moses is wholly fabricated, cleverly (or sometimes crudely) contrived latter fiction. 2. The Jews did not reject "Jesus"; There is no contemporary evidence that they ever even so much as heard of him. The fake New Testement books are all forgeries produced by gentiles hundreds of years after his imaginary life.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.