Who's Calling, Please?

[Eightcrackers]

No, read post 210. And non jews were freed in the year of jubilee every 70 years.

Then why does it say that gentile slaves could be owned for life and passed on to children?

It depends on what they were beaten for. If they were beaten for abusing a young girl that was pretty good ancient justice maybe better than today. We dont know what exactly some were beaten for.

If you bend over backwards any further, your spine is going to snap.

You are a slavery apologist.
Make your peace with that.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

.

 

[El Cid]

No, see my post 210 where I demonstrate that gentiles and hebrews are to be treated the same.

And yet Lev 25 explicitly says it is only Hebrew slaves are not to be treated harshly. Hmm, seems there is a contradiction in the Bible.

No, as I stated earlier, the Mosaic laws are written in the form of case law. Since in most cases the servant will be a hebrew, then that example is used. But it is obvious from the verses I referenced in post 210, foreigners are not to be oppressed which obviously includes harshness.

An alternative interpretation of Lev 19:33 would be that it is talking about Israelites who are strangers. It certainly does not say "gentile".

Most translations say foreigners which is the same thing.

Except hebrew slaves were freed every 7 years and gentile slaves were only freed every 70 years, ie the Year of Jubilee. These verses are just the standard case. Just like our law books of today, they used case law, instead of describing every possible scenario.

And yet Lev 25 says gentile slaves can be kept for life. Hmm, another contradiction.

Because given ancient lifespans it is unlikely many make it to the 70 year jubilee.

See verses 26-27. If the master does any permanent damage to the slave he is freed. So even just a permanent scar could produce freedom for the slave.

You are taking that out of context. The start of the chapter makes clear this applies to Hebrew slaves only.

21:1 “These are the laws you are to set before them:
2 “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything.

Those verses do not deal with punishments.

Combined with it being voluntary, this was totally unlike any form of chattel slavery at the time and far less harsh than American slavery.

Voluntary for Hebrew slaves. Slavery for Hebrew slaves was totally unlike any form of chattel slavery at the time and far less harsh than American slavery. For gentile slaves, not so much.

No, see above.

During ancient times when there was no welfare, this was a life saver for the poor and during economic collapse. If properly practiced it could save thousands of lives during an economic crisis. And it was not for life if the slave lived near the time of the Year of Jubilee when all slaves were freed including gentiles.

So we both recognise that God could have instituted welfare. Instead, he chose to advocate chattel slavery for gentiles.

No, not chattel slavery, more like indentured servitude. In some ways you could make an argument for indentured servitude over welfare. For one thing if not handled properly it can cause entire nations to go backrupt. Look at Venezuela and look at France now and how they are increasing the age for their Social security in order to prevent national collapse. And there are other issues with it.

 

[The Pixie]

No, as I stated earlier, the Mosaic laws are written in the form of case law. Since in most cases the servant will be a hebrew, then that example is used. But it is obvious from the verses I referenced in post 210, foreigners are not to be oppressed which obviously includes harshness.

And yet it explicitly states a gentile slave can be kept for life.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

Because given ancient lifespans it is unlikely many make it to the 70 year jubilee.

So what you are saying is there is precious little difference between saying they are slaves for life and slaves until the 50 year Jubilee. So your claim about it being morally okay suddenly looks pretty poor. The claim itself is dubious, and there is little practical difference anyway.

Those verses do not deal with punishments.

I never supposed they did. They deal with Hebrew slaves, as opposed to gentile slaves, as Exodus 21:2 makes clear.

No, not chattel slavery, more like indentured servitude. In some ways you could make an argument for indentured servitude over welfare. For one thing if not handled properly it can cause entire nations to go backrupt. Look at Venezuela and look at France now and how they are increasing the age for their Social security in order to prevent national collapse. And there are other issues with it.

It was more like indentured servitude for Hebrew slaves, certainly. They got freed after seven years, they were explicitly to be treated well.

Not so much gentile slaves.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

They were slaves for life, they were to be treated as property, and the prohibition about ruthless treatment did not apply.

 

[El Cid]

Wasn't specified to be voluntary for gentiles or prisoners of war.

Then why didn't Yahweh institute a welfare system instead of allowing people to be owned for life as property, and beaten?
We did it, after all.

See post 243.

 

[Eightcrackers]

See post 243.

It is dismal how far down this rabbit hole you have gone.

This is bordering on battered woman syndrome.

 

[El Cid]

No, as I stated earlier, the Mosaic laws are written in the form of case law. Since in most cases the servant will be a hebrew, then that example is used. But it is obvious from the verses I referenced in post 210, foreigners are not to be oppressed which obviously includes harshness.

And yet it explicitly states a gentile slave can be kept for life.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

It appears you didnt read post 210.

Because given ancient lifespans it is unlikely many make it to the 70 year jubilee.

So what you are saying is there is precious little difference between saying they are slaves for life and slaves until the 50 year Jubilee. So your claim about it being morally okay suddenly looks pretty poor. The claim itself is dubious, and there is little practical difference anyway.

You are missing a key point, though, it is voluntary life time service.

Those verses do not deal with punishments.

I never supposed they did. They deal with Hebrew slaves, as opposed to gentile slaves, as Exodus 21:2 makes clear.

They have to be treated equally. Leviticus 19:33-34.

No, not chattel slavery, more like indentured servitude. In some ways you could make an argument for indentured servitude over welfare. For one thing if not handled properly it can cause entire nations to go backrupt. Look at Venezuela and look at France now and how they are increasing the age for their Social security in order to prevent national collapse. And there are other issues with it.

It was more like indentured servitude for Hebrew slaves, certainly. They got freed after seven years, they were explicitly to be treated well.

Not so much gentile slaves.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

They were slaves for life, they were to be treated as property, and the prohibition about ruthless treatment did not apply.

No, they had to be treated equally Leviticus 19:33-34.

 

[The Pixie]

It appears you didnt read post 210.

It appears you did not read any of my posts responding to your post 210.

The Bible explicitly states gentile slaves are to be regarded as property and are slaves for life. At best you have proved a contradiction in the Bible.

You are missing a key point, though, it is voluntary life time service.

For Hebrew slaves - male Hebrew slaves at that.

Not for gentile slaves. The bible explicitly states gentile slaves are to be regarded as property and are slaves for life.

They have to be treated equally. Leviticus 19:33-34.

No, they had to be treated equally Leviticus 19:33-34.

Clearly contradicted by Lev 25.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

Why do you keep ignoring these verses? I will keep quoting them every time you pretend they do not exist.

 

[El Cid]

It appears you did not read any of my posts responding to your post 210.

The Bible explicitly states gentile slaves are to be regarded as property and are slaves for life. At best you have proved a contradiction in the Bible.


For Hebrew slaves - male Hebrew slaves at that.

Not for gentile slaves. The bible explicitly states gentile slaves are to be regarded as property and are slaves for life.


Clearly contradicted by Lev 25.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

Why do you keep ignoring these verses? I will keep quoting them every time you pretend they do not exist.

No, just like any book statements in the Bible have to be understood in context and in the correct type of literature. Foreigners and gentiles were required to be treated just like hebrews as shown in Leviticus 19. But because there were more hebrews in Israel than foreigners, they use the case law example with Israelites. This was common practice in ancient law codes. So no contradiction.

 

[The Pixie]

No, just like any book statements in the Bible have to be understood in context and in the correct type of literature.

So we can decide what we want it to say, and then go and find verses that support that view, even when other verses say exactly the reverse.

Foreigners and gentiles were required to be treated just like hebrews as shown in Leviticus 19. But because there were more hebrews in Israel than foreigners, they use the case law example with Israelites. This was common practice in ancient law codes. So no contradiction.

Clearly contradicted by Lev 25.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

Why do you keep ignoring these verses? I will keep quoting them every time you pretend they do not exist.

 

[El Cid]

It is dismal how far down this rabbit hole you have gone.

This is bordering on battered woman syndrome.

What rabbit hole?

 

[Eightcrackers]

What rabbit hole?

Defence of slavery.

 

[El Cid]

It appears you did not read any of my posts responding to your post 210.

The Bible explicitly states gentile slaves are to be regarded as property and are slaves for life. At best you have proved a contradiction in the Bible.


For Hebrew slaves - male Hebrew slaves at that.

Not for gentile slaves. The bible explicitly states gentile slaves are to be regarded as property and are slaves for life.


Clearly contradicted by Lev 25.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

Why do you keep ignoring these verses? I will keep quoting them every time you pretend they do not exist.

No, Other than the length of service gentiles and hebrews had to be treated equally as stated in Leviticus 19 and Exodus 22:21-24. I am sure I could take one of your statements out of context and make it appear you contradicted yourself too.

 

[The Pixie]

No, Other than the length of service gentiles and hebrews had to be treated equally as stated in Leviticus 19 and Exodus 22:21-24. I am sure I could take one of your statements out of context and make it appear you contradicted yourself too.

Explain how context changes the meaning of these verses so that it says gentile slaves are freed at the Jubilee.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Explain how context changes the meaning of these verses so that it says gentile slaves are freed at the Jubilee.

Lev 25:44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You 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. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.​

No, my guess is that was likely MADE UP or INVENTED by anti-semites years later. Does that debate tactic sound familiar?

But seriously, isn't it ironic how you doubt about 80% of the New Testament, but accept Leviticus, written a couple of thousand years earlier? You don't believe Jesus could be in Galilee and Jerusalem on the same day, but you DO believe in a discriminatory year of jubilee. You are a selective Bible thumper. Strange characteristic for a purported atheist. Everything in the Bible is "made up" unless you think it reflects poorly on the Bible itself. Then you are a Bible literalist.

 

[Caroljeen]

But seriously, isn't it ironic how you doubt about 80% of the New Testament, but accept Leviticus, written a couple of thousand years earlier? You don't believe Jesus could be in Galilee and Jerusalem on the same day, but you DO believe in a discriminatory year of jubilee. You are a selective Bible thumper. Strange characteristic for a purported atheist. Everything in the Bible is "made up" unless you think it reflects poorly on the Bible itself. Then you are a Bible literalist.

...or poorly on the character of God. Nevertheless, God is merciful knowing they write these things in ignorance and will grant them grace to repent because he desires to forgive them.

 

[The Pixie]

...or poorly on the character of God. Nevertheless, God is merciful knowing they write these things in ignorance and will grant them grace to repent because he desires to forgive them.

You miss the fact that I do not think God exists. I have no opinion on the character of God, other than that.

The point about the verses in Leviticus is that they are good evidence the Bible was written by man, without input from a perfectly good God. Those verses were written by men who wanted to keep slaves, and did not give two hoots about people from other tribes. But they did care about people in their own tribe, so they created laws that protected their own people, but no one else.

How do you explain your perfect God saying gentiles can be kept as slaves for life and regarded as property?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

You miss the fact that I do not think God exists. I have no opinion on the character of God, other than that.

Which makes it even dumber. You are protesting the character of what you think is a fictional person. Why not spice things up a bit and from this point on make your internet career out of blasting Hans Gruber? Your current career seems to be stuck.

 

[Eightcrackers]

No, Other than the length of service gentiles and hebrews had to be treated equally as stated in Leviticus 19 and Exodus 22:21-24.

Wrong:

You 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. You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

- Lev. 25:45-46

A clear and obvious demarcation between the permissible treatment of Israelite, and non-Israelite slaves.

The NLT makes it even more obvious:

You may also purchase the children of temporary residents who live among you, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property,
passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat them as slaves, but you must never treat your fellow Israelites this way.


You are out of your depth in this debate, I'm afraid.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Wrong:

You 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. You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

- Lev. 25:45-46

A clear and obvious demarcation between the permissible treatment of Israelite, and non-Israelite slaves.

Let us know when you come up with a verse permitting ruthless rule over non-Israelite slaves in order to back up your "obvious demarcation" remark.