Christmas "O Holy Night" opposite of atheism totally

[SteveB]

In fact, let's make this easy for atheists.....
Here are some articles I've found that deal with the question---- does the bible teach slavery is a good idea?

Does the Bible Support Slavery?

Does the Bible condone slavery at the very least by not condemning it? This lecture examines some of the issues we need to consider.

www.bethinking.org

Does the Bible Condone Slavery? | Zacharias Trust | RZIM Europe

www.zachariastrust.org

in fact, since there are so many responses, here is my search

does the bible teach that slavery is a good idea - Google Search

www.google.com

Then, use the blue letter bible search tool.

blb.org

Here's a screenshot of the search bar, at the top of the page.



Pick a single word--- any word-- and the wild-card feature is the asterisk * placed before, in the middle, or after the word to include variations.
the drop down menu provides 16 different translations.


In this image, I've highlighted the drop down.

So.... show us where God/Jesus actually says slavery is a good thing.

 

[Whatsisface]

Rather curious that you select those two as your origin point.

Not at all. The poster said his Bible didn't have the word slavery in it, I quoted a bible that does. That's entirely relevant.

Can you show me a passage which says----
A man SHOULD sell his daughter into slavery.

No, it seems the Bible allows for the choice to do it or not.

I.e., can you show us any passage in the bible which states slavery is a good idea, or that it's a requirement, or should take place?
Show us something that says God actually approves of slavery.

The Bible endorses slavery by stipulating the rules of slavery, rather than saying that slavery is immoral, don't do it.

 

[The Pixie]

In fact, let's make this easy for atheists.....
Here are some articles I've found that deal with the question---- does the bible teach slavery is a good idea?

...

Why not present the argument yourself, Steve?

I contend that these verses make it clear that slavery is morally acceptable:

Lev 25:44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with [ac]severity over one another.​

To be clear, I am talking specifically about chattel slavery, not indentured service. In chattel slavery, the slave is a possession, is a slave for live and can be treated harshly. This is the slavery of black people in the Bible Belt a couple of centuries ago, and this is the slavery that is explicitly permitted in the verses above.

I appreciate the Bible has rules regulating the treatment of Hebrew slaves, and you can certainly make the argument that God was opposed to enslaving Hebrews, just as the whites in the US Bible Belt two centuries ago were opposed to enslaving the white man. But the Bible has no examples of gentile slaves being freed and no rules to free gentile slaves at the jubilee and no prohibition about against treating gentile slaves badly.

So you have read those articles, right, Steve? Time to step up to the plate and show us how I am wrong.

 

[The Pixie]

in fact, since there are so many responses, here is my search

does the bible teach that slavery is a good idea - Google Search

www.google.com

...

To be clear, I appreciate the KJV does a whitewash of the slavery issue by using terms such as bondmen and bondmaids. However, the meaning is clear, given these are "bondmen and bondmaids" are to be regarded as possessions and it is for ever.

Lev 25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.​

46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.​

 

[SteveB]

Not at all. The poster said his Bible didn't have the word slavery in it, I quoted a bible that does. That's entirely relevant.

And it's strange, because I had to go to other translations to find the word slavery in the bible.
the KJV didn't use that word. And considering that it's one of the oldest english translations, it would seem that you have to reach to find it.

No, it seems the Bible allows for the choice to do it or not.

So.... slavery is a choice?
How then does choosing act as a condoning of it?

The Bible endorses slavery by stipulating the rules of slavery, rather than saying that slavery is immoral, don't do it.

I think the bible restricts the act of enslaving another, which is a castigation of those who practice it, not a condoning of it.

You do however raise an interesting point.....

Does the Quran condone slavery?
Muslims are by far and beyond the most engaged in slavery today, so what about them?

 

[SteveB]

To be clear, I appreciate the KJV does a whitewash of the slavery issue by using terms such as bondmen and bondmaids. However, the meaning is clear, given these are "bondmen and bondmaids" are to be regarded as possessions and it is for ever.

Lev 25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.​

46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.​

I don't see it as whitewashing. It's the normal daily language that was used in 1611 Britain.
Are you a Brit?
If so, it seems that you need to take your rant up with the descendants of King James.

 

[SteveB]

Why not present the argument yourself, Steve?

I think there are others who've done a far better job.
And they've documented it for us to use.

I contend that these verses make it clear that slavery is morally acceptable:

Lev 25:44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with [ac]severity over one another.​

To be clear, I am talking specifically about chattel slavery, not indentured service. In chattel slavery, the slave is a possession, is a slave for live and can be treated harshly. This is the slavery of black people in the Bible Belt a couple of centuries ago, and this is the slavery that is explicitly permitted in the verses above.

I'm curious.....
Does the discussion of slavery in the Quran act as a condoning of it?
the bible explicitly rebukes what you call--- chattel slavery.
the Law is really clear about the rules of how slave owners were to treat their slaves. And what happened in 1800's USA was a crime, according to the bible.
So.... complaining to me about this just creates a problem for you, because you don't actually pay attention to the details. You only gloss over them, and ignore what the bible actually says, and details.
Just as long as it fits your biases, the truth be damned!

I appreciate the Bible has rules regulating the treatment of Hebrew slaves, and you can certainly make the argument that God was opposed to enslaving Hebrews, just as the whites in the US Bible Belt two centuries ago were opposed to enslaving the white man. But the Bible has no examples of gentile slaves being freed and no rules to free gentile slaves at the jubilee and no prohibition about against treating gentile slaves badly.

So you have read those articles, right, Steve? Time to step up to the plate and show us how I am wrong.

Seems like you first have to give the detailed evidence that you're right.
No more skimming over the top, to justify your beliefs.

 

[Whatsisface]

I think the bible restricts the act of enslaving another, which is a castigation of those who practice it, not a condoning of it.

That's you bending over backwards to to make the plain meaning of the words in the Bible to mean other than what they plainly say.

 

[SteveB]

That's you bending over backwards to to make the plain meaning of the words in the Bible to mean other than what they plainly say.

I'm not the one having a problem with the bible.
Ever wonder why atheists are the only ones who are ever right about the bible, and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong about it?

 

[Whatsisface]

I'm not the one having a problem with the bible.

Yes you are.

Ever wonder why atheists are the only ones who are ever right about the bible, and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong about it?

Ever wonder why Christians are the only ones who are ever right about the bible, and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong about it?

 

[The Pixie]

I don't see it as whitewashing. It's the normal daily language that was used in 1611 Britain.
Are you a Brit?
If so, it seems that you need to take your rant up with the descendants of King James.

It is whitewashing when you and Authie use "the normal daily language that was used in 1611 Britain" to pretend there is no slavery in the Bible.

 

[The Pixie]

I think there are others who've done a far better job.
And they've documented it for us to use.

Yeah, heaven forbid you could present the argument yourself. You would probably mess it up.

I'm curious.....
Does the discussion of slavery in the Quran act as a condoning of it?
the bible explicitly rebukes what you call--- chattel slavery.

That is simply not true. the bible is quite clear that for gentile slaves, chattel slavery is allowed.

Lev 25:44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with [ac]severity over one another.​

I see you have no quote to support your position.

the Law is really clear about the rules of how slave owners were to treat their slaves. And what happened in 1800's USA was a crime, according to the bible.

But you cannot quote it. or even cite a specific verse.

Kind of like you are making it up.

So.... complaining to me about this just creates a problem for you, because you don't actually pay attention to the details. You only gloss over them, and ignore what the bible actually says, and details.
Just as long as it fits your biases, the truth be damned!

What details? You seem unable to quote the verse or to cite it.

Seems like you first have to give the detailed evidence that you're right.
No more skimming over the top, to justify your beliefs.

I already did, Steve.

I will do it again, just for you:

Lev 25:44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with [ac]severity over one another.​

 

[SteveB]

Yes you are.

Ok, what problem am I having with it?

Ever wonder why Christians are the only ones who are ever right about the bible, and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong about it?

I do indeed. Which is exactly why I read it regularly, and for the purpose of understanding it.

So, how about answering my question.
Ever wonder why atheists are the only ones who are ever right about the bible, and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong about it?
I'll add--- especially since they never read it for the purpose of understanding, and only to win arguments.

 

[Temujin]

I don't see it as whitewashing. It's the normal daily language that was used in 1611 Britain.
Are you a Brit?
If so, it seems that you need to take your rant up with the descendants of King James.

Wrong. I am a Brit, and the feudal idea of bondsmen as possessions went out of fashion at the time of the Black Death in the 1300s.

 

[SteveB]

Yeah, heaven forbid you could present the argument yourself. You would probably mess it up.

And that's a problem why?

That is simply not true. the bible is quite clear that for gentile slaves, chattel slavery is allowed.

Lev 25:44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with [ac]severity over one another.​

I see you have no quote to support your position.

I already provided it.
Apparently you never bothered reading the articles, or did a followup search to see what else is there.

But you cannot quote it. or even cite a specific verse.

I'm asking questions, to which you responded, but some how think that you're right, and nobody else can be.
This makes it pretty clear to me it's not understanding you seek, but domination, and control. Which pretty much makes you no better than the people you claim are the problem.

Kind of like you are making it up.

Except I'm not, The articles I've provided have already demonstrated such.

What details? You seem unable to quote the verse or to cite it.


I already did, Steve.

I will do it again, just for you:

Lev 25:44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with [ac]severity over one another.​

Ironically..... Those laws are for the Jewish nation. I'm not Jewish, nor do I live in Israel.
So, you're barking up the wrong tree.
It is however a real pity that you actually believe a few select verses are the whole picture, and give you a soapbox to build your case upon.
So, let's do it this way. Leviticus 25.

39 ‘And if one of your brethren who dwells by you becomes poor, and sells himself to you, you shall not compel him to serve as a slave. 40 As a hired servant and a sojourner he shall be with you, and shall serve you until the Year of Jubilee. 41 And then he shall depart from you—he and his children with him—and shall return to his own family. He shall return to the possession of his fathers. 42 For they are My servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves. 43 You shall not rule over him with rigor, but you shall fear your God. 44 And as for your male and female slaves whom you may have—from the nations that are around you, from them you may buy male and female slaves. 45 Moreover you may buy the children of the strangers who dwell among you, and their families who are with you, which they beget in your land; and they shall become your property. 46 And you may take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them as a possession; they shall be your permanent slaves. But regarding your brethren, the children of Israel, you shall not rule over one another with rigor.

47 ‘Now if a sojourner or stranger close to you becomes rich, and one of your brethren who dwells by him becomes poor, and sells himself to the stranger or sojourner close to you, or to a member of the stranger’s family, 48 after he is sold he may be redeemed again. One of his brothers may redeem him; 49 or his uncle or his uncle’s son may redeem him; or anyone who is near of kin to him in his family may redeem him; or if he is able he may redeem himself. 50 Thus he shall reckon with him who bought him: The price of his release shall be according to the number of years, from the year that he was sold to him until the Year of Jubilee; it shall be according to the time of a hired servant for him. 51 If there are still many years remaining, according to them he shall repay the price of his redemption from the money with which he was bought. 52 And if there remain but a few years until the Year of Jubilee, then he shall reckon with him, and according to his years he shall repay him the price of his redemption. 53 He shall be with him as a yearly hired servant, and he shall not rule with rigor over him in your sight. 54 And if he is not redeemed in these years, then he shall be released in the Year of Jubilee—he and his children with him. 55 For the children of Israel are servants to Me; they are My servants whom I brought out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

Exodus 21

1 “Now these are the judgments which you shall set before them: 2 If you buy a Hebrew servant, he shall serve six years; and in the seventh he shall go out free and pay nothing. 3 If he comes in by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master has given him a wife, and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. 5 But if the servant plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to the judges. He shall also bring him to the door, or to the doorpost, and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall serve him forever.

7 “And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. 9 And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10 If he takes another wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. 11 And if he does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying money.

Deuteronomy 15

12 “If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you. 13 And when you send him away free from you, you shall not let him go away empty-handed; 14 you shall supply him liberally from your flock, from your threshing floor, and from your winepress. From what the LORD your God has blessed you with, you shall give to him. 15 You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you; therefore I command you this thing today. 16 And if it happens that he says to you, ‘I will not go away from you,’ because he loves you and your house, since he prospers with you, 17 then you shall take an awl and thrust it through his ear to the door, and he shall be your servant forever. Also to your female servant you shall do likewise. 18 It shall not seem hard to you when you send him away free from you; for he has been worth a double hired servant in serving you six years. Then the LORD your God will bless you in all that you do.

Deuteronomy 23

15 “You shall not give back to his master the slave who has escaped from his master to you. 16 He may dwell with you in your midst, in the place which he chooses within one of your gates, where it seems best to him; you shall not oppress him.

Deuteronomy 5

12 ‘Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you. 13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your ox, nor your donkey, nor any of your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you. 15 And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.

This actually goes on for quite a while. So, instead of building your case on just one passage, take the time to learn the whole law, and the details of what it states.

Then you'd do well to take the time to read the whole bible, for the purpose actually understanding. Because this rage you're living in--- it's hurting you more than it is us who follow Jesus.

 

[SteveB]

Wrong. I am a Brit, and the feudal idea of bondsmen as possessions went out of fashion at the time of the Black Death in the 1300s.

So, not long after the Magna Charta? https://www.antislavery.org/magna-carta-slavery/

Rather curious that if what you say is true, the King would've included those inconvenient parts.
Looking at the founders of the abolition group I linked to above.....
I notice that the founders were all christians.
Why is it if the bible is so pro slavery, that followers of Jesus would fight against slavery, to free people?
Perhaps you should be learning that, instead of promoting this hate you so love to foment.

Our history - Anti-Slavery International

Over 180 years of fighting slavery 17 April 1839 The Anti-Slavery Society is formed by Thomas Clarkson, Thomas Fowell Buxton and other abolitionists to campaign against slavery worldwide. 1840 Convened the world’s first anti-slavery convention in London. 1850 Developed ‘slave-free produce’...

www.antislavery.org

BBC - History - Thomas Clarkson

Discover facts about Thomas Clarkson, a leading campaigner against the slave trade in Britain and the British empire.

www.bbc.co.uk

Thomas Fowell Buxton (1786-1845): The Brewer and Politician: The Abolition of Slavery Project

abolition.e2bn.org

In fact, looking at this list on abolition.e2bn.org, it looks like all of the abolitionists were Jesus followers.

 

[Whatsisface]

Ok, what problem am I having with it?

It doesn't say what you'd prefer it to say so you "interpret" or twist the plain meaning of words.

I do indeed. Which is exactly why I read it regularly, and for the purpose of understanding it.

So, how about answering my question.
Ever wonder why atheists are the only ones who are ever right about the bible, and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong about it?
I'll add--- especially since they never read it for the purpose of understanding, and only to win arguments.

You'll have to do better than that. I'll add--- especially since you never read it for the purpose of understanding, and only to win arguments.

 

[SteveB]

It doesn't say what you'd prefer it to say so you "interpret" or twist the plain meaning of words.

So, what am I twisting ?
As I asked above.....

Why is it, if the bible is so pro slavery, that followers of Jesus would fight against slavery, to free people?

You'll have to do better than that. I'll add--- especially since you never read it for the purpose of understanding, and only to win arguments.

So.... you're back to not answering questions.
Ok.
I think this pretty much makes it clear that yours is not the goal of learning and understanding, but in silencing any and all other opinions. We call that the game of whack-a-mole.

 

[Whatsisface]

So, what am I twisting ?

The Biblical verses that allow slavery by saying what you can and can't do as far as slavery is concerned.

As I asked above.....

Why is it, if the bible is so pro slavery, that followers of Jesus would fight against slavery, to free people?

Because they think slavery immoral, and to get round the Bible saying things they think immoral they have to twist the plain meaning of words.

So.... you're back to not answering questions.
Ok.
I think this pretty much makes it clear that yours is not the goal of learning and understanding, but in silencing any and all other opinions. We call that the game of whack-a-mole.

You question assumes you are correct, but it could be asked equally of you which makes it rather silly. It's like asking, have you stopped beating your wife? But to answer your question, no I haven't, because it's such a straw man.

 

[SteveB]

The Biblical verses that allow slavery by saying what you can and can't do as far as slavery is concerned.

As I said, I'm not the one having a problem with the bible.

Because they think slavery immoral, and to get round the Bible saying things they think immoral they have to twist the plain meaning of words.

Well, I have a novel way of testing this.

Contact us - Anti-Slavery International

We'd love to hear from you. Find all our contact information and contact our press office.

www.antislavery.org

Contact them, and tell them what you just told me, and let's see their response.
then you post the body of their response, including your comments to them--- the whole thing.
I'm confident that you'll provide a rather interesting communication.

You question assumes you are correct, but it could be asked equally of you which makes it rather silly. It's like asking, have you stopped beating your wife? But to answer your question, no I haven't, because it's such a straw man.

and your views don't assume you are correct?
Seems to me that if you're going to play hypocrite here, you'd better do a better job of it.