Freethought & Rationalism Archive

IamJoseph · 07-15-2009, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

The world and humanity changed after the laws in the Hebrew bible.

At one time all humanity engaged in slavery, and deeming a non-white human was inferior.

Well, that answers my question. You have *not* even read the book you worship. If you ever decide to do so, I recommend starting at Exodus 21. It should be quite an eye opener for you. :wave:

It opens with the first negation of slavery and deems it as a contracted worker with rights. Even where one sold himself or his child to pay for debts or borrowings. This is where the law of retaining basic rights of a bankrupt person comes from.

Quote:

Exodus Chapter 21
1 Now these are the ordinances which thou shalt set before them. 2 If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

spamandham · 07-15-2009, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

It opens with the first negation of slavery

No it doesn't. It *condones* the peculiar institution. Else, it would simply have said, "Slavery is an abomination", rather than regulating it in great detail.

We do not regulate slavery today (except to completly prohibit it), because we recognize it as inherently immoral. The authors of the ancient Hebrew texts *obviously* condoned slavery. Such acceptance is implicit in regulating it.

Quote:

If thou buy a Hebrew servant....

....what does it say about non-Hebrew slaves? Surely these sages who believed all people should be treated equal, and were the first to promot efreedom of thought, had the same laws for Hebrew and for non-Hebrew slaves, right? :wave:

IamJoseph · 07-15-2009, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

It opens with the first negation of slavery

No it doesn't. It *condones* the peculiar institution. Else, it would simply have said, "Slavery is an abomination", rather than regulating it in great detail.

It does better than that. It gives laws which make slavery impossible. Slavery was abolished by implementing the Hebrew laws - no other source is responsible for this. One cannot claim to abolish what was cnducted for 1000s of years unless there are laws which make that wrong. When a slave is guaranteed freedom, with rights, one day a week rest with pay, severence pay, compensation for injury, payment to have a wife and family, and equal justice in a court of laws for a slave or king - it reverses it to a contracted worker.

Quote:

....what does it say about non-Hebrew slaves? Surely these sages who believed all people should be treated equal, and were the first to promot efreedom of thought, had the same laws for Hebrew and for non-Hebrew slaves, right? :wave:

The laws guarantee equal rights to all - stranger or inhabitant.

Anat · 07-15-2009, 11:55 PM

Quote:

If the Jews had the power, they would have happily wiped out everyone who disagreed with their beliefs.

Indeed, when the Jews had the power they forcibly converted the Edomites (and ended up with Herod).

IamJoseph · 07-16-2009, 03:29 AM

Jews dont convert others. It is forbidden to even induce. Entering is made very difficult and leaving very easy. This has been the factual, historical tradition seen from the Jews from the first days in Canaan to wherever the Jews have been - in direct contrast of two religions which make enforced conversion their first and most sacred doctrine.

Also, Jews remain the only peoples who did not seccumb to enforced conversion decrees in Europe and the Middle-east. Even the Prophetess Ruth had to undergo stringest tests, as well as some 10,000 Romans who defected from Rome to the jewish side - they agreed to go through the tests to determine their genuineness.

The hebrew laws forbids enforced conversion - but these laws are not seen in all scriptues!

spamandham · 07-16-2009, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

No it doesn't. It *condones* the peculiar institution. Else, it would simply have said, "Slavery is an abomination", rather than regulating it in great detail.

It does better than that. It gives laws which make slavery impossible.

Of course this is nonsense, but let's persue it anyway.

Making regulations that in a round-about way make slavery impossible to implement legally is somehow better than simply prohibiting it outright?

Can you explain why I should not consider the Jewish conception of god to be essentially an insane dictator?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Slavery was abolished by implementing the Hebrew laws

Not only is this nonsense from a historical perspective, it's nonsense even from the perspective of the Hebrew texts, which you clearly have not comprehended, assuming you've read them at all.

Quote:

The laws guarantee equal rights to all - stranger or inhabitant.

Exodus 21:20
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Yep, equal rights alright, it's just that some are more equal than others.

storytime · 07-16-2009, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Here's an interesting note.

"But Judas, a Gaulonite, from the city called Garnala, taking with him Sadduchus, a Pharisee, urged the people to revolt, both of them saying that the taxation meant nothing else than downright slavery, and exhorting the nation to defend their liberty".

"And in the second book of his history of the Jewish war, he writes as follows concerning the same man: "At this time a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas, persuaded his countrymen to revolt, declaring that they were cowards if they submitted to pay tribute[tax, interest] to the Romans, and if they endured, besides God, masters who were mortal. These things are recorded by Josephus." (my brackets)

Now, if the Jews thought it would be the same as slavery to pay tribute to Caesar, and their old scripts commanding them that they should not be slaves to any men, but that they should be the slave holders themselves, this presents a more reasonable clue to why the Jews objected to Roman taxation than all the gods[idols] of Rome that the Jews were not forced to worship.

ref: newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm

In fact, Josephus himself says the initiation of the war was the refusal to allow sacrifices to Rome. This was a declaration of the war, and the premise of taxes only says the Jews paid their taxes, even when they were higher than fr most other nations, and were later instigated by one group this does not apply anymore.

If Europe was monotheist they would have stood with the Jews - they did the reverse. The Jews were the only peoples who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous - and they stuck to their premise till the end. Can't ask for more than that. Rome is dead - freedom of belief was won through one peoples who faught alone till the end.

But what you're saying is that Jews did not like paying interest[taxation] to Rome.

I think you may be right, the Jews were the only people who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous; but that was because the Jews in those days were ignorant and backward, uneducated because Jewish customs did not permitted their higher education in the Roman world. And the Jews were jealous of the more affluent Romans just as they were jealous of all the other countries they came in contact with. The Jews wanted recognition their way. It didn't happen. It will never happen. To blame Rome for Jewish stupidity in not having peace or learning how to be civilized among the world of nations is like blaming America, Iraq, Iran, Britain, China or whomever for Jewish stupidity today.

Freedom of belief was already an option for the world. It was never an option for Jews. The Hebrew God would not allow it, so the Jews suffered and blamed and accused everyone else.

premjan · 07-16-2009, 04:31 PM

Well, vassals not paying taxes was a pretty common thing that empires down the ages have probably had to face. Blasphemy may just have been one of many rationalizations.

arnoldo · 07-16-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

In fact, Josephus himself says the initiation of the war was the refusal to allow sacrifices to Rome. This was a declaration of the war, and the premise of taxes only says the Jews paid their taxes, even when they were higher than fr most other nations, and were later instigated by one group this does not apply anymore.

If Europe was monotheist they would have stood with the Jews - they did the reverse. The Jews were the only peoples who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous - and they stuck to their premise till the end. Can't ask for more than that. Rome is dead - freedom of belief was won through one peoples who faught alone till the end.

But what you're saying is that Jews did not like paying interest[taxation] to Rome.

I think you may be right, the Jews were the only people who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous; but that was because the Jews in those days were ignorant and backward, uneducated because Jewish customs did not permitted their higher education in the Roman world. And the Jews were jealous of the more affluent Romans just as they were jealous of all the other countries they came in contact with. The Jews wanted recognition their way. It didn't happen. It will never happen. To blame Rome for Jewish stupidity in not having peace or learning how to be civilized among the world of nations is like blaming America, Iraq, Iran, Britain, China or whomever for Jewish stupidity today.

Freedom of belief was already an option for the world. It was never an option for Jews. The Hebrew God would not allow it, so the Jews suffered and blamed and accused everyone else.

Actually, the roman proctur Florus foolishly stole silver from the temple resulting in a massacre. Then, according to Josephus, Eleazar moved that no sacrificial gift be offered to foreigners in the temple. Nevertheless, the saying of rendering to Caesar what is Caesar's seems to be the best course of action in these delicate matters.

IamJoseph · 07-16-2009, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Not only is this nonsense from a historical perspective, it's nonsense even from the perspective of the Hebrew texts, which you clearly have not comprehended, assuming you've read them at all.

Its not nonsense and there is no other way. Historically, this problem has only been successfully dealt with by the Hebrew laws, and this is also the case today. The same applies to Animal Rights - all of these come from the Hebrew - exclusively.

Quote:

Exodus 21:20
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Yep, equal rights alright, it's just that some are more equal than others.

What that law is saying is correct: where the damage is not malicious, it forbids false charges being implemented - without this clause, the issue is lessened and will not work. The reference to 'if the slave gets up in a day or two' is not a means of allowing bad treatment, but must be considered what this cnstitutes in each generation's terms and acceptability - which are different for each times.

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

07-16-2009, 03:29 AM	#95
IamJoseph Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: AUSTRALIA Posts: 2,265	Jews dont convert others. It is forbidden to even induce. Entering is made very difficult and leaving very easy. This has been the factual, historical tradition seen from the Jews from the first days in Canaan to wherever the Jews have been - in direct contrast of two religions which make enforced conversion their first and most sacred doctrine. Also, Jews remain the only peoples who did not seccumb to enforced conversion decrees in Europe and the Middle-east. Even the Prophetess Ruth had to undergo stringest tests, as well as some 10,000 Romans who defected from Rome to the jewish side - they agreed to go through the tests to determine their genuineness. The hebrew laws forbids enforced conversion - but these laws are not seen in all scriptues!

07-16-2009, 04:31 PM	#98
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	Well, vassals not paying taxes was a pretty common thing that empires down the ages have probably had to face. Blasphemy may just have been one of many rationalizations.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.