- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29975
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009Good point. Why isn't there an 11th Commandment?
You’re equating something that goes against the Ten Commandments (murder) with something that does not go against the Ten Commandments (indentured servitude or slavery as a result of conquest.)
Is God responsible for people running up debts they can’t pay? Is God responsible for one group of people seeking to fight and conquer another group? How much ...[text shortened]... do you want God to have in the affairs of men while still respecting the free will He gave them?
'Thou shall not make a slave out of your neighbour.'
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29975
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009If God condemns slavery now, why hasn't he always done so, in all situations and with all people (if he is indeed unchanging? )
The Mosaic law pertained to the Jews. I don’t know where you get the idea that God changed His mind. Focusing on one segment of humanity and ignoring the rest constitutes changing His mind?
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009God is depicted as condoning chattel slavery here:
You’re equating something that goes against the Ten Commandments (murder) with something that does not go against the Ten Commandments (indentured servitude or slavery as a result of conquest.)
Is God responsible for people running up debts they can’t pay? Is God responsible for one group of people seeking to fight and conquer another group? How much ...[text shortened]... do you want God to have in the affairs of men while still respecting the free will He gave them?
Leviticus 25
44“ ‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45You 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. 46You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life,..
Why isn't God depicted as being against slavery, just as God is depicted as being against murder?
You can't reasonably pin it on man having free will - unless you're going to argue that God isn't responsible for how he is depicted in Leviticus 25:44-46.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeI think you’re equating God’s position on something with His reaction to it. Those are two different things.
If God condemns slavery now, why hasn't he always done so, in all situations and with all people (if he is indeed unchanging? )
God’s position on sin is consistent throughout the Bible. But His reaction to it, as it pertains to humans in the flesh, changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeHow much interference do you want God to have in the affairs of men while still respecting the free will He gave them?
Good point. Why isn't there an 11th Commandment?
'Thou shall not make a slave out of your neighbour.'
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneHow much interference do you want God to have in the affairs of men while still respecting the free will He gave them?
God is depicted as condoning chattel slavery here:
Leviticus 25
44“ ‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; [b]from them you may buy slaves. 45You 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. 46You can bequeath ...[text shortened]... s you're going to argue that God isn't responsible for how he is depicted in Leviticus 25:44-46.[/b]
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeBecause a great deal of violence and evil springs forth from bearing false witness against another person and committing adultery.
God goes out of his way to prohibit lying and lusting after your neighbor's wife, but doesn't see fit to condemn slavery and ownership of another human being.
How odd.
Compare that to someone who runs up a debt he can’t pay and agrees to become an unpaid servant of the person to whom he owes the debt.
Or compare that to the losing side in a war which would have treated the victors in the same way if the victors had lost.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29975
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009"...But His reaction to it, as it pertains to humans in the flesh, changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament."
I think you’re equating God’s position on something with His reaction to it. Those are two different things.
God’s position on sin is consistent throughout the Bible. But His reaction to it, as it pertains to humans in the flesh, changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
That's a strange end to your sentence. (Which I'm not sure you thought through).- You have stated that God's 'reaction' has changed between the old and new testament. How is that possible sir with an unchanging God?
21 Mar 18
1 edit
Originally posted by @romans1009How does your question make any sense?
How much interference do you want God to have in the affairs of men while still respecting the free will He gave them?
Condemning slavery no more impedes free will than condemning murder.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29975
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009With respect sir, you really have no understanding of slavery.
Because a great deal of violence and evil springs forth from bearing false witness against another person and committing adultery.
Compare that to someone who runs up a debt he can’t pay and agrees to become an unpaid servant of the person to whom he owes the debt.
Or compare that to the losing side in a war which would have treated the victors in the same way if the victors had lost.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeThe position of God did not change. He just chose a different way to address it. You want God to be identical in His responses to a free-will entity who creates or is in circumstances of near infinite variety?
"...But His reaction to it, as it pertains to humans in the flesh, changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament."
That's a strange end to your sentence. (Which I'm not sure you thought through).- You have stated that God's 'reaction' has changed between the old and new testament. How is that possible sir with an unchanging God?
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
21 Mar 18
Originally posted by @thinkofoneThe consequences of violating one or more of the Ten Commandments would certainly be different than the consequences of a violation or transgression not included among the Ten Commandments.
How does your question make any sense?
Condemning slavery no more impedes free will than condemning murder.
To a God-fearing people, that would certainly have an impact on their free will.