Judaism and Slavery in the Biblical Era

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
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 ba ...[text shortened]... val.

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

i am having no trouble whatsoever, so if you shall be pleased you shall answer the question posed to you without squirming and slithering to avoid it this time, what has this got to do with me. I acknowledge that slavery was practised, again what has this got to do with me? are you saying that because i believe the text to be inspired that i am complicit in advocating slavery? Indeed what is it you are saying? That the text cannot be inspired? what exactly is the point of your objection? indeed what is it you are saying? are you unable to express it in clear and succinct manner? Is the language cumbersome and obstructive? perhaps your quiet and unassuming nature makes it difficult for you to express yourself due to the sensibilities of others, well then, don't be shy, out with it, you are a man and among friends are you not?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i am having no trouble whatsoever, so if you shall be pleased you shall answer the question posed to you without squirming and slithering to avoid it this time, what has this got to do with me. I acknowledge that slavery was practised, again what has this got to do with me? are you saying that because i believe the text to be inspired that i am com ...[text shortened]... s of others, well then, don't be shy, out with it, you are a man and among friends are you not?

why bother Robbie? he's a bit of a dullard...

Originally posted by duecer
why bother Robbie? he's a bit of a dullard...

i want to know what he is driving at? is he stating that i because we suppose the text to be inspired that we are advocates of slavery? what is he really trying to say Deucer, do you know?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i want to know what he is driving at? is he stating that i because we suppose the text to be inspired that we are advocates of slavery? what is he really trying to say Deucer, do you know?

he wants to hold us accountable for the actions of hard hearted ignorant fools

Originally posted by duecer
he wants to hold us accountable for the actions of hard hearted ignorant fools

ok, but we are no longer under Law, but conscience, so is the only way of trying to make it stick by saying, OK, you people uphold the integrity of the text, therefore you must support slavery, is that really it?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ok, but we are no longer under Law, but conscience, so is the only way of trying to make it stick by saying, OK, you people uphold the integrity of the text, therefore you must support slavery, is that really it?

what he fails to recognize is that slavery was never mandated or encouraged in the old testament, simply allowed, much like divorce, not mandated or encouraged but allowed. The integrity of the text still stands, as he has failed to make any kind of argument to the contrary.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i am having no trouble whatsoever, so if you shall be pleased you shall answer the question posed to you without squirming and slithering to avoid it this time, what has this got to do with me. I acknowledge that slavery was practised, again what has this got to do with me? are you saying that because i believe the text to be inspired that i am com ...[text shortened]... s of others, well then, don't be shy, out with it, you are a man and among friends are you not?

Listen, you've spent umpteen posts denying that approval is explicitly given in Leviticus 25:44-46 using every absurd argument imaginable. Now, like a little kid you're trying to change the subject rather than admit that fact.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Listen, you've spent umpteen posts denying that approval is explicitly given in Leviticus 25:44-46 using every absurd argument imaginable. Now, like a little kid you're trying to change the subject rather than admit that fact.

no i have not, did i not state that God permitted it! I do not deny that slavery was practised, now i want to know what it has got to do with me? either answer the question or slither away around it! am i also complicit in supporting slavery, no, well then why are you whinging on about it for i tell you truly, is not entirely clear, then again, hard to see, the dark side is 😉

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i have not, did i not state that God permitted it! I do not deny that slavery was practised, now i want to know what it has got to do with me? either answer the question or slither away around it! am i also complicit in supporting slavery, no, well then why are you whinging on about it.

All you or anybody else need do is read this thread to see that you have and have done so repeatedly. Are you really so far removed from reality that you cannot admit this fact? Once again, you really should get professional help.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
All you or anybody else need do is read this thread to see that you have and have done so repeatedly. Are you really so far removed from reality that you cannot admit this fact? Once again, you really should get professional help.

sooo, 'i should get professional help', that is what it has to do with me, ok thanks a bunch for that, that's really cleared that little matter up!

Originally posted by Proper Knob


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.

lots of things are outlawed in the old testament, yet it didn't stop people from doing them anyway. What use is it to have yet one more law that people will break with impunity?

Many of the "guidlines ", if you will, were remedies for social problems that had no reasonable solution. Like theft for instance, if I steal your belongings, and squandor the money, and am later caught, how will I repay you? Remember now that I am a thief, and my word isn't worth bullspit. Forced servitude seems like a more reasoned response than cutting off someones hands does it not?

Perhaps someone makes a number of bad business decisions and bankrupts himself beyond any ability to repay, should his debtors go unsatisfied? Remember that they are in an agrarian economy, and little things can be the difference between life and death.

Seems to me that a whole lot of 21st century "ethical perspectives" are being used to pass judgment on a cultural context so far removed from what we know as to be laughable.

Originally posted by duecer
lots of things are outlawed in the old testament, yet it didn't stop people from doing them anyway. What use is it to have yet one more law that people will break with impunity?

Many of the "guidlines ", if you will, were remedies for social problems that had no reasonable solution. Like theft for instance, if I steal your belongings, and squandor the mon ...[text shortened]... o pass judgment on a cultural context so far removed from what we know as to be laughable.

its beautiful!

Originally posted by duecer
lots of things are outlawed in the old testament, yet it didn't stop people from doing them anyway. What use is it to have yet one more law that people will break with impunity?

Many of the "guidlines ", if you will, were remedies for social problems that had no reasonable solution. Like theft for instance, if I steal your belongings, and squandor the mon o pass judgment on a cultural context so far removed from what we know as to be laughable.

What use is it to have yet one more law that people will break with impunity?

Well why bother having any at all then? These laws were supposedly the word of God, the code by which to run a moral life in the eyes of God. I can hardly envisage God, wherever he is saying -

'Well, i would give them more laws to follow, but there only going to break them'.

Seems to me that a whole lot of 21st century "ethical perspectives" are being used to pass judgment on a cultural context so far removed from what we know as to be laughable.

What's laughable is your 'God of love' who chose to give guidelines on how to carry out slavery when he could so easily have condemned it. He chose not to. It's nothing more than man made stories and a barbaric code of living from a distant past, the sooner it fades to dust the better.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its beautiful!

Slavery is beautiful?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Slavery is beautiful?

are you sober? get a bottle of irn bru and drink that, takes the fluff away from your mouth in minutes, the post was beautiful, not slavery. You have as yet to prove, why God allowing slavery should make the text any less inspired. Is it because 'God is love', and slavery are incompatible?