Was slavery condemned in the Bible?

[presonorek]

IIRC, the first slaveholder in the Bible was Abraham. If I'm not right, someone will correct me.

God put his own people into slavery for disobedience and he allowed his people to subdue other nations and take slaves. So, when, if ever, did it become a sin?

Only on a RW message board would we have a thread discussing how slavery isn't a sin.

Let me guess. You think the world is round too. After all. It has to be just because. Right?

 

[fncceo]

IIRC, the first slaveholder in the Bible was Abraham. If I'm not right, someone will correct me

Abraham was a Chaldean... a part of the Babylonian Empire. The Babylonians were slave holders centuries before the birth of Abraham.

 

[ding]

Kidnapping in biblical times was FOR THE PURPOSE of obtaining slaves and it
was considered a serious crime (sorta like a felony) Legal Biblical slavery is not chattel slavery. It is more like indentured servitude of a limited term. It was
considered a really lousy situation.

Beating a human was alright because it wasn't chattel slavery?

This makes it justified?

Female Hebrews could be sold by their fathers into slavery for life.

That's okay?

Only kidnapping Hebrews was punishable. Non-Hebrew slaves had no such rules. Leviticus 25:44

If a male slave sold himself into mslavery to pay debt, and had kids while enslaved, the kids became his master's property permanently.

That's okay?

How about rules in exodus: If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.




Treating your human slaves "less bad" than they were traditionally treated....makes it OKAY for what the literal God of belief condones?



Religion

you are not entirely correct-----the issues are EXPOUNDED upon in the
Talmud which actually rules that INJURING A SLAVE in any way requires
that the slave be set free-----and paid for his time. The legal code of the
bible was-----according to scholars ----A WORK IN PROGRESS. ----that's
the basis of the weirdo idea of "tikkun" As to the issue of "permanent slavery"--
it is not clear to me that it was a fact for anyone

You missed the point, Rosie.

Slavery, at all, is wrong.

The Bible being a work in progress makes it not the inspired word of God, as an ipso facto, especially if it does (it does) condone beating your slave. Even if that's later amended in another, separate book, it's damning for the Bible being the "inspired word of God," as well as damning for objective morality as defined as grounded in God itself.

Then, the selling your daughters into slavery thing...the slaves being born into slavery thing...the different slavery rules for non-hebrews, as though non-hebrews don't deserve the same human rights....thing.

There really is no good argument for the way that the Bible condones slavery. That it's got some loopholes as compared to antebellum slavery is besides the point - it actually misses the point entirely.

Do you have any evidence that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God OR is that your personal belief?

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

 

[ding]

IIRC, the first slaveholder in the Bible was Abraham. If I'm not right, someone will correct me.

God put his own people into slavery for disobedience and he allowed his people to subdue other nations and take slaves. So, when, if ever, did it become a sin?

Only on a RW message board would we have a thread discussing how slavery isn't a sin.

By what standard do you say slavery is wrong?

Just because? I am interested in your moral argument against slavery. I am guessing you don't have one.

The thing I like about this conversation is how it proves people believe in absolute right and wrong. Even the ones who say they don't.

 

[ding]

Kidnapping in biblical times was FOR THE PURPOSE of obtaining slaves and it
was considered a serious crime (sorta like a felony) Legal Biblical slavery is not chattel slavery. It is more like indentured servitude of a limited term. It was
considered a really lousy situation.

Beating a human was alright because it wasn't chattel slavery?

This makes it justified?

Female Hebrews could be sold by their fathers into slavery for life.

That's okay?

Only kidnapping Hebrews was punishable. Non-Hebrew slaves had no such rules. Leviticus 25:44

If a male slave sold himself into mslavery to pay debt, and had kids while enslaved, the kids became his master's property permanently.

That's okay?

How about rules in exodus: If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.




Treating your human slaves "less bad" than they were traditionally treated....makes it OKAY for what the literal God of belief condones?



Religion

you are not entirely correct-----the issues are EXPOUNDED upon in the
Talmud which actually rules that INJURING A SLAVE in any way requires
that the slave be set free-----and paid for his time. The legal code of the
bible was-----according to scholars ----A WORK IN PROGRESS. ----that's
the basis of the weirdo idea of "tikkun" As to the issue of "permanent slavery"--
it is not clear to me that it was a fact for anyone

You missed the point, Rosie.

Slavery, at all, is wrong.

The Bible being a work in progress makes it not the inspired word of God, as an ipso facto, especially if it does (it does) condone beating your slave. Even if that's later amended in another, separate book, it's damning for the Bible being the "inspired word of God," as well as damning for objective morality as defined as grounded in God itself.

Then, the selling your daughters into slavery thing...the slaves being born into slavery thing...the different slavery rules for non-hebrews, as though non-hebrews don't deserve the same human rights....thing.

There really is no good argument for the way that the Bible condones slavery. That it's got some loopholes as compared to antebellum slavery is besides the point - it actually misses the point entirely.

Do you have any evidence that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God OR is that your personal belief?

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Actually Mr. vasuderatorrent has a good point. What's wrong with hating gays? Do you believe that is immoral or something? Where did you get that opinion from? Why would the opinion that it is wrong to hate gays be anymore right than the opinion that it is good to hate gays? It's not like you believe in good and bad is it? You don't believe in absolute goodness, right?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Beating a human was alright because it wasn't chattel slavery?

This makes it justified?

Female Hebrews could be sold by their fathers into slavery for life.

That's okay?

Only kidnapping Hebrews was punishable. Non-Hebrew slaves had no such rules. Leviticus 25:44

If a male slave sold himself into mslavery to pay debt, and had kids while enslaved, the kids became his master's property permanently.

That's okay?

How about rules in exodus: If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.




Treating your human slaves "less bad" than they were traditionally treated....makes it OKAY for what the literal God of belief condones?



Religion

you are not entirely correct-----the issues are EXPOUNDED upon in the
Talmud which actually rules that INJURING A SLAVE in any way requires
that the slave be set free-----and paid for his time. The legal code of the
bible was-----according to scholars ----A WORK IN PROGRESS. ----that's
the basis of the weirdo idea of "tikkun" As to the issue of "permanent slavery"--
it is not clear to me that it was a fact for anyone

You missed the point, Rosie.

Slavery, at all, is wrong.

The Bible being a work in progress makes it not the inspired word of God, as an ipso facto, especially if it does (it does) condone beating your slave. Even if that's later amended in another, separate book, it's damning for the Bible being the "inspired word of God," as well as damning for objective morality as defined as grounded in God itself.

Then, the selling your daughters into slavery thing...the slaves being born into slavery thing...the different slavery rules for non-hebrews, as though non-hebrews don't deserve the same human rights....thing.

There really is no good argument for the way that the Bible condones slavery. That it's got some loopholes as compared to antebellum slavery is besides the point - it actually misses the point entirely.

Do you have any evidence that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God OR is that your personal belief?

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

 

[ding]

you are not entirely correct-----the issues are EXPOUNDED upon in the
Talmud which actually rules that INJURING A SLAVE in any way requires
that the slave be set free-----and paid for his time. The legal code of the
bible was-----according to scholars ----A WORK IN PROGRESS. ----that's
the basis of the weirdo idea of "tikkun" As to the issue of "permanent slavery"--
it is not clear to me that it was a fact for anyone

You missed the point, Rosie.

Slavery, at all, is wrong.

The Bible being a work in progress makes it not the inspired word of God, as an ipso facto, especially if it does (it does) condone beating your slave. Even if that's later amended in another, separate book, it's damning for the Bible being the "inspired word of God," as well as damning for objective morality as defined as grounded in God itself.

Then, the selling your daughters into slavery thing...the slaves being born into slavery thing...the different slavery rules for non-hebrews, as though non-hebrews don't deserve the same human rights....thing.

There really is no good argument for the way that the Bible condones slavery. That it's got some loopholes as compared to antebellum slavery is besides the point - it actually misses the point entirely.

Do you have any evidence that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God OR is that your personal belief?

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You missed the point, Rosie.

Slavery, at all, is wrong.

The Bible being a work in progress makes it not the inspired word of God, as an ipso facto, especially if it does (it does) condone beating your slave. Even if that's later amended in another, separate book, it's damning for the Bible being the "inspired word of God," as well as damning for objective morality as defined as grounded in God itself.

Then, the selling your daughters into slavery thing...the slaves being born into slavery thing...the different slavery rules for non-hebrews, as though non-hebrews don't deserve the same human rights....thing.

There really is no good argument for the way that the Bible condones slavery. That it's got some loopholes as compared to antebellum slavery is besides the point - it actually misses the point entirely.

Do you have any evidence that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God OR is that your personal belief?

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

 

[ding]

Do you have any evidence that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God OR is that your personal belief?

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

God wouldn't make gays and then tell people to hate them.

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

 

[irosie91]

in order to understand what the lines in Leviticus meant to the people to whom
it was addressed ------one needs to review commentaries. It is silly to rely on
the translation --------private diddling between consenting "friends" was probably
ignored. -----the issue was either the ORGANIZED stuff-----or some sort of
cult involving the "behavior"-----I base my comment on the actual practical
discussions thrown around in the talmud

 

[ding]

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

Sure but if you believe it means a command to kill gays that observation is at odds with the practice of the Jews so maybe that interpretation isn’t correct.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Where did God command us to hate gays? Is that like the 11th commandment? Did I miss something?

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

If I were to accuse evangelical christians of wanting to kill gays and use that passage as evidence would you say "we don't go by the OT anymore"?

just curious...

because MOST conservatives would.....

 

[ding]

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

If I were to accuse evangelical christians of wanting to kill gays and use that passage as evidence would you say "we don't go by the OT anymore"?

just curious...

because MOST conservatives would.....

No. I guess I’m not most conservatives.

Do you really believe that evangelical Christians want to kill gays?

 

[anynameyouwish]

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

If I were to accuse evangelical christians of wanting to kill gays and use that passage as evidence would you say "we don't go by the OT anymore"?

just curious...

because MOST conservatives would.....

No. I guess I’m not most conservatives.

Do you really believe that evangelical Christians want to kill gays?

judge roy moore from Alabama ran for senate (and only lost by a few thousand votes), was ENDORSED BY TRUMP and every conservative media outlet in the country and HE thinks/believes and has stated, that homosexuality is a sin, should be a crime, gays should be locked up and quite possibly executed in keeping with his religious beliefs.

MILLIONS of conservatives had no problem with that and voted for him.

Trump had no problem with that and endorsed him BIGLY......

are you saying those people do NOT exist?

must be voter fraud, then.......

 

[ding]

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

If I were to accuse evangelical christians of wanting to kill gays and use that passage as evidence would you say "we don't go by the OT anymore"?

just curious...

because MOST conservatives would.....

No. I guess I’m not most conservatives.

Do you really believe that evangelical Christians want to kill gays?

judge roy moore from Alabama ran for senate (and only lost by a few thousand votes), was ENDORSED BY TRUMP and every conservative media outlet in the country and HE thinks/believes and has stated, that homosexuality is a sin, should be a crime, gays should be locked up and quite possibly executed in keeping with his religious beliefs.

MILLIONS of conservatives had no problem with that and voted for him.

Trump had no problem with that and endorsed him BIGLY......

are you saying those people do NOT exist?

must be voter fraud, then.......

Like I said before, I’m not most conservatives.

I’m still trying to figure out if it is your belief that most evangelical Christians want to kill gays.

Is it?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

in order to understand what the lines in Leviticus meant to the people to whom
it was addressed ------one needs to review commentaries. It is silly to rely on
the translation --------private diddling between consenting "friends" was probably
ignored. -----the issue was either the ORGANIZED stuff-----or some sort of
cult involving the "behavior"-----I base my comment on the actual practical
discussions thrown around in the talmud

Try using English and proper punctuation. Whatever you said is gibberish. Thanks.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

Sure but if you believe it means a command to kill gays that observation is at odds with the practice of the Jews so maybe that interpretation isn’t correct.

That verse has NOTHING to do with Jews. So your interpretation is incorrect.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Lev. 20 : 13

Okay I see it is a sin, but God has not commanded anyone to hate the gays, just carry out a penalty.

Does it command that they be put to death?

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

If I were to accuse evangelical christians of wanting to kill gays and use that passage as evidence would you say "we don't go by the OT anymore"?

just curious...

because MOST conservatives would.....

Most Christians are not Christians, but members of organized churchianity. They have talking points like politicians and pet biblical theories that if you challenge them, they get defensive and make false accusations against you.

I don't know what laws they go by. Personally, I will acknowledge that the Old Testament is just as relevant today as the new. The law is the law, which is why all men are sinners.

Today's Christians could never kill a gay (or any other sinner) since they do not acknowledge that the law is still applicable. If there is no law, there is no sin since sin is a transgression of God's law. Since there are no transgressions of God's law (under modern thinking) since that law was supposedly done away with, you can do anything you damn well please unless a mob or a tyrannical government prevents it.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Does it not say that? Today somebody had to kill a cow. I ate a portion of it. Did the people working where the cows were killed hate the cow?

I was a jury foreman once. They guy committed the crime and he could have gotten the death penalty. The judge gave him life without parole. To this day, I have no personal feelings toward the guy one way or another. Even he had been fried, I would not hate him.

I felt sympathetic for the girl he beat and raped. After the trial was over we all hugged and cried over her ordeal. Still, I didn't have any personal feelings in my vote to convict.

I don’t believe it does say that.

I looked it up and quoted it. Leviticus 20: 13 Authorized King James Version

All I can tell you is what I read.

If I were to accuse evangelical christians of wanting to kill gays and use that passage as evidence would you say "we don't go by the OT anymore"?

just curious...

because MOST conservatives would.....

No. I guess I’m not most conservatives.

Do you really believe that evangelical Christians want to kill gays?

judge roy moore from Alabama ran for senate (and only lost by a few thousand votes), was ENDORSED BY TRUMP and every conservative media outlet in the country and HE thinks/believes and has stated, that homosexuality is a sin, should be a crime, gays should be locked up and quite possibly executed in keeping with his religious beliefs.

MILLIONS of conservatives had no problem with that and voted for him.

Trump had no problem with that and endorsed him BIGLY......

are you saying those people do NOT exist?

must be voter fraud, then.......

I don't understand them. If God's laws were abolished OR if they argue it only applies to Jews (both positions without any biblical support) then it should be okay to be gay... OR are the Christians talking out both sides of their mouths?

Excuse my language, but if mainstream Churchianity wasn't so fucked up, there would be no priests being chased down for being pedophiles; the Mormons wouldn't be facing lawsuits for child abuse; Jimmy Swaggart would have quit chasing whores after the first time he got caught; Pat Robertson wouldn't have his lips attached to Donald Trump's ass and the "conservatives" would not have elevated a whore-monger, liar, cheat, and double agent globalist to the level of a god, being more faithful to him than the Christ they claim to worship.