Why can’t evolution explain itself

CrowCross said:
No, As the site explained....more traditional.
Click to expand...
I think "tradition" is a pathetic way to try to pretend slavery is morally acceptable.

CrowCross said:
It also explained that "slavery" wasn't quite what you like to express it as.
Click to expand...
For Hebrew slaves it was not.

For gentiles slaves it was quite different. That was chattel slavery, the Bible is quite clear on that. It takes some selective reading to think otherwise. But creationists have always been good at that.

Just like the slavery for blacks that Christians in the Bible belt of the US advocated in much of the nineteenth century.
 
The Pixie said:
I think "tradition" is a pathetic way to try to pretend slavery is morally acceptable.


For Hebrew slaves it was not.

For gentiles slaves it was quite different. That was chattel slavery, the Bible is quite clear on that. It takes some selective reading to think otherwise. But creationists have always been good at that.

Just like the slavery for blacks that Christians in the Bible belt of the US advocated in much of the nineteenth century.
Click to expand...
I forgot, you're the slave expert. My bad.
 
CrowCross said:
I forgot, you're the slave expert. My bad.
Click to expand...
I do not have to be an expert. I am just reading the text.

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.​

It is quite clear that: (1) Hebrew slaves were to be treated very differently to gentile slaves; and (2) gentile slaves were chattel slaves just like blacks in the US before the civil way.

This is the scripture you say is "is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness".
 
The Pixie said:
I do not have to be an expert. I am just reading the text.

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.​

It is quite clear that: (1) Hebrew slaves were to be treated very differently to gentile slaves; and (2) gentile slaves were chattel slaves just like blacks in the US before the civil way.

This is the scripture you say is "is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness".
Click to expand...
So, I'm now supposed to throw the bible in the garbage pail...just because you don't understand all the different kinds of slaves?
Heck, Paul was a slave for Christ....
 
CrowCross said:
So, I'm now supposed to throw the bible in the garbage pail...just because you don't understand all the different kinds of slaves?
Heck, Paul was a slave for Christ....
Click to expand...
Paul was not a chattel slave. He was not the property of another person. That this the type of slavery we are discussing here, the slavery that black people in the pre-bellum US experienced.

The Bible that you claim "is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness" tells us chattel slavery is okay. How you deal with that is up to you, I guess, but personally I think throwing it in the garbage pail is better than turning a blind eye to it.
 
The Pixie said:
Paul was not a chattel slave. He was not the property of another person. That this the type of slavery we are discussing here, the slavery that black people in the pre-bellum US experienced.

The Bible that you claim "is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness" tells us chattel slavery is okay. How you deal with that is up to you, I guess, but personally I think throwing it in the garbage pail is better than turning a blind eye to it.
Click to expand...
"Paul was not a chattel slave."....Exactly.
As you should be aware by now your definition of slavery isn't the only definition. For example there are also enduntured servants. (who are "slaves")
 
mikeT said:
Why would an all-knowing god communicate using words with more than one definition?

His Word seems designed to cause confusion...
Click to expand...
Confusion for those who demand there only be one type of "slavery". Then insist God is a bad guy because you force your interpretation onto Him.
 
CrowCross said:
Confusion for those who demand there only be one type of "slavery". Then insist God is a bad guy because you force your interpretation onto Him.
Click to expand...
No form of slavery is acceptable. Trying to find nuanced acceptability in slavery is typical Christian sophistry.
 
CrowCross said:
"Paul was not a chattel slave."....Exactly.
Click to expand...
So your comment had no relevance to the issue of chattel slavery. We are discussing chattel slavery, as condoned by the Bible@

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.​

CrowCross said:
As you should be aware by now your definition of slavery isn't the only definition. For example there are also enduntured servants. (who are "slaves")
Click to expand...
I never suggested otherwise.

I am talking about chattel slavery, which the Bible explicitly condones. The type of slavery that blacks suffered in pre-bellum US. Not the slavery of Hebrew slaves, where they got released after a few years, not the metaphorical slavery of Paul. But chattel slavery in which the slave is regarded as property and is a slave for life.
 
The Pixie said:
So your comment had no relevance to the issue of chattel slavery. We are discussing chattel slavery, as condoned by the Bible@

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 never suggested otherwise.

I am talking about chattel slavery, which the Bible explicitly condones. The type of slavery that blacks suffered in pre-bellum US. Not the slavery of Hebrew slaves, where they got released after a few years, not the metaphorical slavery of Paul. But chattel slavery in which the slave is regarded as property and is a slave for life.
Click to expand...
What ever. I'm done talking slaves for now. You know my position.
 
CrowCross said:
What ever. I'm done talking slaves for now. You know my position.
Click to expand...
Yes, your position is you think a book that advocates chattel slavery "is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness".

My position is slavery morally abhorrent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top