Judaism and Slavery in the Biblical Era

Originally posted by Proper Knob
That's a bit wishy-washy Rob.

He did more than permit the practise to continue, he gave guidelines on to how carry out the practise. If as you say he didn't want people to be subjected to slavery, why didn't he outlaw the practise instead of giving guidelines? He is supposedly God after all, the omnipotent creator.

i do not know why the practice was not outlawed, i am a human, not a God. Indeed even if it were outlawed amongst the Israelites, the nations would still have carried on the practice. As i have stated, there is all manner of evil permitted, yet God lets its happen.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i do not know why the practice was not outlawed, i am a human, not a God. Indeed even if it were outlawed amongst the Israelites, the nations would still have carried on the practice. As i have stated, there is all manner of evil permitted, yet God lets its happen.

All manner of evil permitted and a God that doesn't outlaw slavery when he could've quite easily done so.

Mmmmmmmn, maybe, and i'm throwing this out there, the Bible wasn't divinely inspired? Pretty wild thought i know, but let's look at this objectivley. An omnipotent God who for some reason, decided not to outlaw slavery when he had the chance. Instead he did the opposite and gave detailed guidelines on how to carry out slavery. It seems a little perverse to me.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
All manner of evil permitted and a God that doesn't outlaw slavery when he could've quite easily done so.

Mmmmmmmn, maybe, and i'm throwing this out there, the Bible wasn't divinely inspired? Pretty wild thought i know, but let's look at this objectivley. An omnipotent God who for some reason, decided not to outlaw slavery when he had the chance. Ins ...[text shortened]... and gave detailed guidelines on how to carry out slavery. It seems a little perverse to me.

I see, simply because God did not outlaw slavery it is therefore taken as a pretext for establishing that the Bible is not inspired, do tell the reasoning behind that.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I see, simply because God did not outlaw slavery it is therefore taken as a pretext for establishing that the Bible is not inspired, do tell the reasoning behind that.

The failure to outlaw the practise of slavery is just another piece of the pie.

I find the notion of a God who fails to outlaw slavery, when he could've done quite easily, abhorrent. You may want to do his work, i'll reject him and hope for the day when his ideology has faded to dust.

You've already told me the prospect of judgement, when i will be annihilated along with billions of other people, fills you with revulsion. How do you feel about a God who refused to condemn slavery when he could've done, but instead chose to give forth detailed guidelines on how to carry out slavery?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
The failure to outlaw the practise of slavery is just another piece of the pie.

I find the notion of a God who fails to outlaw slavery, when he could've done quite easily, abhorrent. You may want to do his work, i'll reject him and hope for the day when his ideology has faded to dust.

You've already told me the prospect of judgement, when i will b ...[text shortened]... ld've done, but instead chose to give forth detailed guidelines on how to carry out slavery?

but i have asked for reasoning, indeed what is the reasoning which states that because God at that particular epoch of history, did not outlaw slavery, it means that the scriptures are uninspired? You cannot kill an ideology which states that all men shall be brothers and live eternally in paradise, for it is spiritual in nature and all yearn for it. What i feel is irrelevant, i am dust, carbon and water nothing more, shall i therefore instruct now God? such a course is neither reasonable nor logical!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
but i have asked for reasoning, indeed what is the reasoning which states that because God at that particular epoch of history, did not outlaw slavery, it means that the scriptures are uninspired? You cannot kill an ideology which states that all men shall be brothers and live eternally in paradise, for it is spiritual in nature and all yearn for it ...[text shortened]... hing more, shall i therefore instruct now God? such a course is neither reasonable nor logical!

Tell you tomorrow. I have guests.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Tell you tomorrow. I have guests.

so have i, three children who stayed up all night playing computer games! have a great time 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
we are taught to use our own minds and discern for ourselves what is indeed good and proper, endorse is your term, not mine, i reject it, God has not actively supported slavery he has merely allowed its practice, it was never his intention that persons should be subject to slavery, you have provided no reasonable basis to the contrary and i reject th ...[text shortened]... ing carries his approval. You silly person, give yourself a wedgie in honour of your stupidity!

Once again approval is explicitly given in Leviticus 25:44-46:

you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you... they also may become your possession...‘You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves.

Are you really so dim so as not to be able to distinguish between explicit approval and allowing something to exist? Are there passages that say, "You may torture little children", "you may rape women", etc.?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
but i have asked for reasoning, indeed what is the reasoning which states that because God at that particular epoch of history, did not outlaw slavery, it means that the scriptures are uninspired? You cannot kill an ideology which states that all men shall be brothers and live eternally in paradise, for it is spiritual in nature and all yearn for it ...[text shortened]... hing more, shall i therefore instruct now God? such a course is neither reasonable nor logical!

You cannot kill an ideology which states that all men shall be brothers and live eternally in paradise, for it is spiritual in nature and all yearn for it.

You can however reject those aspects of a particular religion which are incompatible with the above. The problem comes when people refuse to look at the religion critically (or they don't know how).

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
the last line should be "Are there any fundamental Christians who will condemn God's endorsement of slavery?"

i am a christian and i don't believe god necessarily dictated all the wonderful stuff in the OT like genocide and etc.

Bravo. Finally a Christian willing to state that not everything in the Bible necessarily reflects the "will of God". I assume that you include the approval of the taking and keeping of slaves as part of this? I gave that as an "out" later in the thread.

Sad to say, you are the first to do so, so far as I've seen (as I haven't read every post in detail).

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Once again approval is explicitly given in Leviticus 25:44-46:

[b]you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you... they also may become your possession...‘You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves.

Are you really so dim so ...[text shortened]... sages that say, "You may torture little children", "you may rape women", etc.?[/b]

yes but as i have pointed out, what has that got to do with me? are you saying that because i support the integrity of the text and its inspiration i am complicit in advocating slavery, indeed, what is it you are trying to state with these underhanded and crafty machinations? Is 'are you so dim', the total capacity of your reasoning ability, please do turn up the tone.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
You cannot kill an ideology which states that all men shall be brothers and live eternally in paradise, for it is spiritual in nature and all yearn for it.

You can however reject those aspects of a particular religion which are incompatible with the above. The problem comes when people refuse to look at the religion critically (or they don't know how).

yes its twoo!

Originally posted by realeyez
You should read a little bit more the context in which you are referencing, you have taken it out of it. Taking only a section out of an entire book, it becomes easy to do that. Someone has also commented on slaves back then and the slave times that we have more knowledge on (more up to date slavery). That person was right slavery back then, and the treatme ...[text shortened]... condemned?
Yes, when working off your debt. Just treat the person (slave) as a person or equal.

On the flip side non believers too owned slaves so should I say All non believers are wrong? Evolution, or the Universe (basically what you believe in) is evil?

That you ask this indicates that you do not understand the issue. I suggest that you read the original post.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
To try and put an end to this, allow me to say that God sis NOT "endorse" slavery, any more than he endorsed divorce or any other sin. He did however, put restrictions and made rules regarding man, based on man's sinful nature. God worked with what He had. Once sin entered the world, things went downhill and have been so ever since. Jesus came into the ...[text shortened]... d's plan, but their own wickedness required His actions. The same could be said of slavery.

Approval is explicitly given in Leviticus 25:44-46:

you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you... they also may become your possession...‘You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves.

If you believe this to be the "word of God", then you must also believe that God gave explicit approval for slaves to be acquired and kept as possessions.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes but as i have pointed out, what has that got to do with me? are you saying that because i support the integrity of the text and its inspiration i am complicit in advocating slavery, indeed, what is it you are trying to state with these underhanded and crafty machinations? Is 'are you so dim', the total capacity of your reasoning ability, please do turn up the tone.

You really seem to have trouble understanding the context of discussion.

I was addressing this statement made by you. I'd have though that that would have been clear:

God has not actively supported slavery he has merely allowed its practice, it was never his intention that persons should be subject to slavery, you have provided no reasonable basis to the contrary and i reject the premise entirely, to permit is hardly to approve of, unless of course you are willing to state that Gods allowance of suffering carries his approval.

Explicit approval was given in Leviticus 25 as I showed in my response to this.