Sheshonq

Then you're sadly misinformed and unable to view this rationally.

You're also ignoring the thrust of my question: why would these foreigners in long, inherited captivity in Israel be:

(a) more inclined to idol worship than they would be
(b) inclined to borrow the majority culture of their captors around them

Since (b) is what every other captive group of people have done, you'll need to show evidence why it wouldn't happen this time, ESPECIALLY when captives are taken as children and integrated into the daily life of their captors.

In point of fact, some kind of spirituality does seem to be the inclination of man. The fact that is doesn't always yield your favorite kind of spirituality is besides the point.

Which doesn't really help your argument. What you're now claiming is that the Hebrews were just as bad as the surrounding peoples.

So assume for argument's sake that we're talking about 100 slaves here. The goal is to not have 100 idol worshippers running loose in Israel. According to you, the addition of these foreign slaves would have no more impact on the state of idol worship in Israel than the birth of an equal number of Hebrews.

Your argument that has no basis, then. You can't say that Moses was justified in ordering the killing of innocent children to prevent idol worship, unless Moses was also ordering the deaths of Hebrew children as well.

Sheshonq

Have you grown a spine yet? Ready to answer the questions you've been running from?

No I didn't think so. :rolling:

Sheshonq

No, just you quoting scriptures and running from answering the question.

if slavery was immoral, then why was slavery even permitted in the first place?


Nope. they had a peace treaty with Gibeon. Their deaths were avenged not because they were considered valuable, but because there was a standing peace treaty (and an oath) that they would not be harmed by the Israelites.

JOS 9:18 And the children of Israel smote them not, because the princes of the congregation had sworn unto them by the LORD God of Israel. And all the congregation murmured against the princes.
JOS 9:19 But all the princes said unto all the congregation, We have sworn unto them by the LORD God of Israel: now therefore we may not touch them.
JOS 9:20 This we will do to them; we will even let them live, lest wrath be upon us, because of the oath which we sware unto them.
JOS 9:21 And the princes said unto them, Let them live; but let them be hewers of wood and drawers of water unto all the congregation; as the princes had promised them.
JOS 9:22 And Joshua called for them, and he spake unto them, saying, Wherefore have ye beguiled us, saying, We are very far from you; when ye dwell among us?
JOS 9:23 Now therefore ye are cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen, and hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my God.

No it doesn't. It's a one-time event specific to the Gibeonites, and stems from the peace treaty that indicated no harm would come to them at the hands of the Israelites. It is not part of the Hebrew law concerning the treatment of slaves.

SA2 21:2 And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.)
SA2 21:3 Wherefore David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD?

As usual, the skeptics know more about the bible than the christians do. :rolling:

No you haven't. You fail again, sugarhitman. But you're used to that by now.

arnoldo

Free Will

Sheshonq

Well in that case we'd just have to counter your highly improbable and contrived scenario by launching Nephilim spaceships commanded by Space Admiral Elvis Presley. That should teach Sodom a lesson, shouldn't it?

I mean, if you can pull all this absurd bullshit out of the thin air and expect anyone to take you seriously, I guess we can counter with an answer of the same quality as your "question".

Sheshonq

Free Will doesn't apply to God, who ordered and approved of the slavery.
If Free Will excuses slavery why doesn't it excuse murder?

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: In your opinion, why did God make rules to protect slaves, both Hebrew slaves, and non-Hebrew slaves? In addition, in your opinion, why did God inspire James to write that if a man refuses to give food to hungry people, he is vain, and his faith is dead?

If you would prefer to answer those questions at the General Religious Discussions Forum, just let me know and I will start a new thread there.

If you do not have enough confidence to debate those issues, I will understand. There is no need for you to embarrass yourself any more than you already have. After all, in this thread I showed that YOUR OWN SOURCES disagreed with you regarding your utterly absurd claim that Elaine Pagels and Bart Ehrman support Christianity. You outdid youself regarding that issue, and that took some doing considering how many times you have embarrassed yourself at these forums. You never admitted that you were wrong, even though you know that you were wrong. Another good example is your utterly absurd claim in a thread at http://www.freeratio.org//showthread...40#post5724340 at the Evolution/Creation Forum that the flood was regional. A regional flood is out of the question. You used parts of an article by G.R. Morton at http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gflood.htm against the global flood. I have used the same article myself against the global flood on many occasions. Morton is a geophysicist, and he is a Christian. He used to a YEC, but he eventually realized that a global flood did not occur. Unfortunately for him, he did not offer reasonable proof that the flood was regional. Morton said
"1 Peter 3:20 says 8 people were saved in the Flood. In order to argue that this means the Flood was global, one must assume that people were spread all over the earth. This is not at all clear from the Scripture." Now how in the world could Peter have knows anything about a global or regional flood?

Do you intend to defend your absurd claim in the thread at the Evolution/Creation Forum that I mentioned? Several months ago, you claimed that the flood was regional in another thread at the Evolution/Creation Forum. You might have used Dr. Hugh Ross as a source on that occasion. Regardless of which sources that you wish to use, a regional flood is out of the question.

Sheshonq

Grown a spine yet?

The question isn't going away merely because you want to create a distraction.

sugarhitman

But why should a corrupt God honor a peace treaty between Jews and Bondmen? I mean they are non hebrews and bondmen so why are the Jews fearful of doing them harm if God was so "bias" or hateful of non Jews. And why were they given over to non hebrews for judgement? And the fact remains they were bondmen.



What good is a covanant of Peace with Canaanites if God hates them? (I cant wait to hear this).



Also why are you not defending Allah? Your brother syhed is all alone defending your god. Yeah, i have got you all figured out....and know where you stand.

WVIncagold

Nice try no i am not.
No one gets to keep my children
No one gets to keep my wife
no one gets to beet me until i cant get up for two days
I can hit back
I sign a contract but by no means am i owned by the bank who carries the note our current state of that industry should be sign of that being nothing more than shtman nonsense.
I work because i choose to. it is easier than steeling or trying to live an agrairian life based on baser needs. Nice try but i have a choice of not going to work.
Do not equate working to ownership. To do so is simplistic and shows your inability to comprehend the simplest of statements.

You also did not answer anything. So try again?

Since slavery was so nice and is supported by the bible then would you support it today in order to fend off hunger and destitution? After all it is rehablitation and people could get trades according to the assertions in this thread.
So is the bible the inspired word of god to be followed without critic or just a bunch of suggestions from a god that was no better than the surrounding gods who by the way never declared him to be the one true god? Considering your gods fear that others would turn away so quickly from him sounds like he was the erkel of gods in that area and nobody took him all that serious ( amongst the other gods anyways).