can i own slaves according to the bible?

Author: n8nrgmi

Posts

Total: 93
Topic's author
#1
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
i'm not aware of any verses that forbids slavery. but i can find some that allows it. 

Leviticus 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."

if you look earlier in the chapter, the above is basically words from the Lord through Moses. 

so why can i or can't i own slaves, according to the bible?


Topic's author
#2
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
on a side note. ive heard people say the bible only allows servants from people who owe you money. but the above sounds like slaves for the sake of slaves. 

on another note, some people say the above verse is only God permitting or allowing slavery, not condoning it. the most straightforward way of reading it though is it sounds like it's condoning it. if you want a slave, go ahead and get one. 

but i'm more interested in this thread of knowing if i can own a slave, according to the bible. 
#3
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
oh wow Old Testament, so original
#4
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
It is almost like the Bible was written without today in mind. 
Or without the year 3726 in mind. 
And mere human laws seem to be over rule gods.


#5
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
Various parts of the bible have been used both in favor of, and against, the institution of slavery.

If you want an in depth view from either perspective, just start a debate on it, and someone well researched will fill you in.
#6
Pinkfreud08
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Debates: 17
Posts: 578
2
7
11
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Pinkfreud08
2
7
11
-->
@n8nrgmi
Here comes the damage control from the Christians 
#7
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
i'm not aware of any verses that forbids slavery.
Exodus 21:16 - Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.

What you've done here is called posting from ignorance.

How about this one?

Deut 23:15 - If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master.

Or this one?

Deut 24:7 - If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.

How about from the New Testament?

1 Timothy 1:10 - for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

...but i can find some that allows it.
Untrue. You can find verses that set rules governing slavery, but none that allow it.

The rules of war, or international humanitarian law (as it is known formally) are a set of international rules that set out what can and cannot be done during an armed conflict. ... The rules of war are universal. The Geneva Conventions (which are the core element of IHL) have been ratified by all 196 states.

The law of war refers to the component of international law that regulates the conditions for war and the conduct of warring parties. Laws of war define sovereignty and nationhood, states and territories, occupation, and other critical terms of international law.

Do you think the UN advocates war? “Allows” war? I bet you aren't confused when it’s the UN regulating something considered wrong. Lol.

Here is a parting verse to help with your awareness.

Leviticus 25:39 - If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves.

Because I know this will come up, note here that a person can "sell" themselves and still not be a slave.

Here comes the damage control from the Christians 
Lol! From you being admittedly cluelessly unaware, to causing "damage" all in one post? Funny.
#8
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
on a side note. ive heard people say the bible only allows servants from people who owe you money.

This is a common claim due to the fact that it is partially true. Jews were forbidden from enslaving their fellow Jews but permitted to enslave foreigners at will. The "seven years indentured servitude then release them" plan applied only to other Jews.

The Deut. 24-7 verse quoted by Ethang5 above, for example... Note the words "a fellow Israelite" in the verse. An important note, not just fluff.

Basically pay very close attention to the wording and you will see some rules clearly apply to fellow Jews and some rules clearly apply to foreigners. This is particularly clear in the verses quoted in the OP.

It is important to keep in mind historical context when reading the old testament. It was written by the Jews for the Jews, this idea of god not really caring what race you are only starts to appear in the new testament.
#9
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
Do you think the UN advocates war? “Allows” war? I bet you aren't confused when it’s the UN regulating something considered wrong. Lol.

Does the UN have the power to end all wars forever?

Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
#10
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?

This is the real difficulty. The bible's plenty happy to tell you not to wear mixed cloth. It's plenty happy to condemn you for thought crimes like envy. Stone non-virgin women in front of their dads. But it seems to have skipped the verse that very clearly and simply states "Don't own another human being as property." There's simply no way around it. Yes, it prohibits an israelite from owning an israelite, but as you point out, it also lays out how to treat your foreign born slaves, how to purchase them, from whom, etc. THe fact that both sides have used the bible to support their arguments means it's really poorly laid out in the book what the actual edict is. All of it could have been solved with a commandment or a saying from Jesus someplace, but nope!

Must have been lost in the same draft as the commandment "Thou shalt not rape."
#11
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Jews were forbidden from enslaving their fellow Jews but permitted to enslave foreigners at will.
Untrue.

Exodus 21:16 - Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether 
the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.

this idea of god not really caring what race you are only starts to appear in the new testament.
Again untrue. Exodus is the second book of the bible, written some 6,000 years before the new testament. And the verse says, "anyone" who kidnaps "someone".

Does the UN have the power to end all wars forever?
Does the bible? Can you hear that goal post move? The OP implied that there was no verse explicitly forbidding slavery. I have posted several.

You next comment has so many delicious answers, I'm going to answer it several times...

Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
Sure. Did the UN have the power to add an article saying " war is not permitted under any circumstance?

Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
Do you think that would have stopped slavery? Really?

Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
What part of, "treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you." do you not understand?

There. Nice.

#12
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@ludofl3x
But it seems to have skipped the verse that very clearly and simply states "Don't own another human being as property." 
Yet another stubbornly unaware atheist. Right after a post containing 5 (count em) verses prohibiting slavery!

All of it could have been solved with a commandment or a saying from Jesus someplace, but nope!
Ever notice that the people willfully disobeying God's known commandments are the very ones asking why He didn't make extra ones? Lol!

Eze 18:4 - Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

It is impossible for a human being to own another human being, so the bible makes no law against impossibilities. Just as it does not forbid the artificial creation of life. Cannot be done.

Each of the posters so far have dodged the verse unequivocally prohibiting slavery for anyone, and focused on the verse saying it was wrong for Israelites, so I will post it here again.

Exodus 21:16 - Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.

Perhaps they may stumble as they jump to dodge it this time.
#13
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
I've had this debate many times with atheists. It always goes the same way.

First they will claim there is no verse against slavery.

When I post one, they say it is only for Israelis, not gentiles.

When I show it prohibits slavery for anyone, they complain that it isn't worded how they like!

But only half of them. One half simply keeps pretending they haven't seen the verse, the other half pretends it isn't clear.

When you ask them how the UN can have rules governing war, they will quickly move the goal posts. But if they claim the bible condones slavery by having rules governing slavery, how can they not say that the UN condones war by having rules governing war?

Whether the UN can control war makes no difference to the principle. And if the UN could control war, it would need no rules governing war! 

After all this, a few weeks later, you will find yet another thread claiming that the bible doesn't prohibit slavery, and the process starts again. Often with the same players.

Its as if they want/need the bible to be silent on slavery. It probably is such a long held, deep seated, core belief, that it disorients them to find out it isn't true.
#14
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Exodus 21:16 - Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.

Where does this verse say "slave" or "slavery"? It says kidnap. It doesn't have anything to do with slaves purchased legally from non-Israelite tribes. This can't be the verse that according to you 'unequivocally prohibits" slavery. What it unequivocally prohibits is kidnapping. 

It is impossible for a human being to own another human being, so the bible makes no law against impossibilities.
Sure looks really possible according to American history. Plantation slaves were bought and sold, owned like cattle, willed like furniture down generations, and their owners used the bible to prop up that ownership right. Let's look at the other four:

Deut 23:15 - If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master.
This doesn't prohibit slavery. It says don't return escaped slaves. That's not the same thing by a long shot. It could say "Don't own slaves at all." It doesn't. 

1 Timothy 1:10 - for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine
Odd that homosexuals = slave traders = those that kill their parents. It looks like "law breakers" is the real concern here if you look at the wider context of the passage. Great! So all we need is the verse showing that any form of chattel slavery is against the law. Which...you haven't been able to produce. That makes this Timothy's opinion. Maybe reality resides between HIS ears? 

Deut 24:7 - If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you.
Only a problem to sell a fellow Israelite, not a prohibition on anyone else being sold. Not to mention the bible has passages allowing the Hebrews to take slaves as the spoils of war. Including sex slaves. Which I bet you call "wives" and say "but it was for their own good! Getting repeatedly raped was far easier than trying to survive on your own as a woman!"
#15
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
When I post one, they say it is only for Israelis, not gentiles.

When I show it prohibits slavery for anyone, they complain that it isn't worded how they like!

<br>
Feel free to make this case. "IT isn't worded how they'd like" isn't the same as "That's not what it says." 
#16
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@ethang5
Sooooooooooo it's a contradiction?  



#17
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
Do you think that would have stopped slavery? Really?

This is exceptionally curious. Are you saying that god was in fact powerless to stop slavery, or that he decided not to bother adding this verse because "Eh, people are going to do it anyway"? I don't get it, it's almost like you're saying the bible overblows god's actual practical powers ("it wouldn't have stopped anything") or you're saying the bible is somehow incomplete or unclear (another word for this would be "errant", the opposite of INERRANT) and we have to fall back on man's interpretation as being the issue that causes all the trouble. But....since god made people according to you, and god either wrote or inspired the bible according to you, and people are flawed and interpretations vary so widely, aren't you then saying god designed people poorly, wrote a book that does't make sense without the interpretation by his error prone other creation, and is therefore at fault for the atrocities that arise from his flawed creation trying to figure out his inscrutable book? 

If only there were a reliable way to figure out whose interpretation of the book, whose native language is such a small percentage of the world (Why not write it in Spanish if you're playing the percentages) and barely spoken across most of it, is correct! How can we tell?

#18
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@ethang5
@n8nrgmi


.
ethang5, the perpetual RUNAWAY,

YOUR QUOTE IN POST #13:  "After all this, a few weeks later, you will find yet another thread claiming that the bible doesn't prohibit slavery."

Do you want to call Jesus a LIAR when His inspired words promoted slavery within His time period upon earth? Huh? This takes ALL of your weak contradicting bible passages against slavery and throws them into the dumpster once again. When will you ever learn?


If you don't mind, I'll use only a few of the many New Testament passages that promote the ownership of slaves, okay?

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ." (Ephesians 6:5)

"All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered. Those who have believing masters should not show them disrespect just because they are fellow believers. Instead, they should serve them even better because their masters are dear to them as fellow believers and are devoted to the welfare of their slaves." (1 Timothy 6:1-2)


Ethang5, your complete biblical ignorance is becoming truly tiresome, therefore I suggest that maybe you should take your Satanic "Dog and Pony Show" to a Christian Children's Forum where you will be safer from biblical criticism. Agreed? Thank you.


[ UPDATE: It has been ONE YEAR, 5 MONTHS, AND 23 DAYS since ethang5 as even "tried" to post a new thread upon his own! LOL! ] 

.

#19
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
Did god have the power to add a verse saying "Slavery is not permitted under any circumstances"?
Do you think that would have stopped slavery? Really?

No of course not, but it would have stopped the Israelites from doing it and set a clear example for people thousands of years later (us) as to what gods moral standard was (assuming slavery is against his moral standard that is).

You are the one claiming this text is timeless and perfect with no need for revision, not me.
Topic's author
#20
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@ethang5
so are you saying that the bible says slavery is wrong or a sin, but that God gave clear instructions on how to partake of that sin?
Topic's author
#21
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@ludofl3x
well stated breakdown of ethang's verses. 

#22
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
so are you saying that the bible says slavery is wrong or a sin, but that God gave clear instructions on how to partake of that sin?

It's like if there was a verse that said "Incest is a sin buuut if you really must do incest keep it limited to hanjobs, blowjobs, and 69ing. No anal or vaginal".

Do we see anything like that? No, the book instead says "Incest is a sin FULL STOP".

Or "idol worship is a sin buuut if you really must worship idols at least make sure it is one of these specially permitted ones in the below verses and also make sure to keep worshiping me at the same time".

What we see instead is "Worshiping idols is a sin FULL STOP".

Incest and idol worship are clearly prohibited. That didn't stop either of these things from occuring but they were clearly prohibited anyway. The idea that "clearly prohibiting slavery would not have stopped slavery and therefore would have been pointless to do" is contradicted by these examples.
#23
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@ludofl3x
Where does this verse say "slave" or "slavery"?
(  ; ) told ya) it says kidnap and sell. I guess you agree the bible says kidnapping and selling a person was wrong, but enslaving them was not. Lol

It doesn't have anything to do with slaves purchased legally from non-Israelite tribes.
The verse says "anyone".

What it unequivocally prohibits is kidnapping. 
And selling who you kidnapped. Lol. The verse doesn't say what he wants. Was it not you asking for a verse prohibiting owning a human being?

Sure looks really possible according to American history. 
No slave owner actually owned a human being. Just as a thief never actually owns another persons property.

Sure looks really possible according to American history. 
Yet here you are condemning the book that prohibited it! Weird huh?

This doesn't prohibit slavery. It says don't return escaped slaves.
Why do you think it says that?

That's not the same thing by a long shot. It could say "Don't own slaves at all." It doesn't. 
Yes. It doesn't say what you want. But the letter is not addressed to a slaver owner, so saying don't own slaves at all would have left him free to return the slave! D'oh!

Odd that homosexuals = slave traders = those that kill their parents. It looks like "law breakers" is the real concern here if you look at the wider context of the passage.
Yes, things the bible is against. Its funny to see the atheist contort.

Great! So all we need is the verse showing that any form of chattel slavery is against the law. Which...you haven't been able to produce.
I have. You're in pretend mode. I'm used to it.

That makes this Timothy's opinion.
That's new! It's in the bible, written by an Apostle, saying slavery is wrong, but it's only the writer's opinion. Hee! Hee!

Not to mention the bible has passages allowing....
And here we he to the real reasons for the pretense, so the atheist can throw out everything he has against God. Soon we'll see the kitchen sink come flying out.

Feel free to make this case.
Thanks so much for offering an argument for me, but I think I'll stick to the Bible's contradiction of the OP's claim.

What part of, "treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you." do you not understand?

Note that it is wrong even to treat another person as a slave. This verse has the word slave. Maybe because it's not plural, you can keep up your pretense?

If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves.

Yep. It's obvious the Bible loves and condones slavery, just as that UN loves and condones war! You must purge that evil from among you! But it sure is great!

That is how those passages read to the anti-theist with his obtuse glasses on. Hilarious.
#24
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@ludofl3x
Are you saying that god was in fact powerless to stop slavery,
No, I'm asking you a clear question you're again dodging.

...or that he decided not to bother adding this verse because "Eh, people are going to do it anyway"?
Again no. I'm asking you if you think t would have stopped slavery. Can you answer?

I don't get it, it's almost like you're saying the bible overblows god's actual practical powers... 
Why not just read what I write and answer it instead of this silly spin? Is the question difficult?

But....since god made people according to you, and god either wrote or inspired the bible according to you, and people are flawed and interpretations vary so widely, aren't you then saying god designed people poorly, 
No. That is your argument you wish to substitute for mine. The thread is about whether Christian doctrine allows slavery, not whether the Bible is written the way you like. In dodging my question, you've asked me 5 frivolous ones.

If only there were a reliable way to figure out whose interpretation of the book, [snip] is correct! 
Lol. If we could, maybe Christianity would flourish on every continent and be the world's leading religion! Maybe Christianity would have influenced human history, literature, and art, and have built schools, hospitals, and orphanages all over the world....     wait....

Lol.
#25
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Do you think that would have stopped slavery? Really?

No of course not,
Then why would God add it in? Thanks for simply answering the question too.

..but it would have stopped the Israelites from doing it
Really? Did the Israelites murder? Is there not a law against murder? It would not have stopped people from doing it.

None-the-less, God did make it clear that it was wrong. You're currently pretending not to have seen the verses.

..and set a clear example for people thousands of years later (us) as to what gods moral standard was (assuming slavery is against his moral standard that is).
What part of, "treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you." do you not understand?

How is the penalty of death not clear? Incidentally, some genius will soon pipe up that the penalty was too harsh. And when I ask him, "penalty for what?" He'll dodge the question and do what we just saw Ludo do. Post a bloated wall-o-text about tangential issues.

You are the one claiming this text is timeless and perfect with no need for revision, not me.
No sir. You are the one assuming my position for me. I don't even know what the atheist means by "timeless", and I doubt it makes sense.

The OP implied that bible did not have a verse opposing slavery. I have posted several. That is a fact.

If you have anything which counters, please post them.
#26
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@n8nrgmi
so are you saying that the bible says slavery is wrong or a sin,
Yes. But its the Bible saying so, not just me. At least now you know.

..but that God gave clear instructions on how to partake of that sin?
No. God gave clear instruction how to behave with people indebted to you and paying off that debt with servitude. The word "slave" is used, which anti-theist use to slot in the old South US meaning of that word. But that is not what the Bible means.

But I notice again, you have dodged all of my questions and asked an additional one of me. Why do you guys think you don't need to answer questions? Why do you think your questions deserve answers?

The underlying assumption is that the Bible is talking about the slavery of the old south. And Americans assume this without question. In my travels, I've found only Americans do this. Probably because of their history.

God gave guidelines so that we would not wander into sin in such a power lop-sided relationship. 
#27
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@ethang5
I don't even know what the atheist means by "timeless", and I doubt it makes sense.

Equally relevant no matter the time period in which it is considered, ex. "George Lucas's Star Wars trilogy is a timeless classic"

Welcome to the English language.
#28
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Incest and idol worship are clearly prohibited.
So is slavery. You just refuse to accept that the bible makes a distinction between indentured servitude and old south slavery.

Also, incest and idol worship have narrower meanings than slavery, but notice all three carried the same penalty. Death. Wow huh?

That didn't stop either of these things from occuring but they were clearly prohibited anyway.
So was slavery. The guidelines in the bible are not governing slavery, but indentured servitude.

The idea that "clearly prohibiting slavery would not have stopped slavery and therefore would have been pointless to do" is contradicted by these examples.
Which is why you want it to be my argument. Israelis did not believe a human being could own another human being. They believed all men were owned by God, as such, it would be silly for the bible to say something they considered impossible was wrong.

Instead, the bible says, kidnapping (taking by force) and buying and selling a kidnapped human beings is wrong, and punishable by death.

The bible says we should not even treat a person indebted to us as slaves, and should not return a slave into slavery if he escapes into our care.

The bible clearly prohibits slavery, in law and in the spirit of the law.

I've noticed the position has softened. The OP started out saying he was unaware of any verse prohibiting slavery.

I showed several verses. The position now is that those verses are not "clear", though the verses used the word slavery and condemn the behavior with death.

I think we can consider the OP's claim to be adequately debunked.
#29
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Equally relevant no matter the time period in which it is considered,...
The beliefs you hoist on me are not relevant. I have never called the bible timeless, and it is perfect only in that it is exactly what God intended.

If you want to know what I believe, ask me. Unlike your cohorts, I answer questions put to me. A perk of having a logical worldview.

Don't assume one for me and then build castles in the sky on your assumption.

I'm sure you know what you mean by timeless, but as it isn't my belief, I don't care what you mean by it, so it isn't relevant to me.

Welcome to the English language.
In the university I attended, English was not omniscience.
#30
Zaradi
Zaradi's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 705
2
3
7
Zaradi's avatar
Zaradi
2
3
7
-->
@ethang5
This will probably be viewed as confrontational, given what subforum we're in, but I'm actually genuinely curious.

The example of war you give is an interesting one to think of in regards to the concerns of the OP. Legally speaking, I'm wondering how something smaller scale, like killing another person, interacts with the 'war' line of logic.

Most societies have rules and guidelines that govern the specifics of killing someone if I find myself in a situation where I have to (eg. Self-defense/stand your ground laws), but there also exists laws that state that you shouldn't kill people as a general principle.

My only thought in opposition to it is that it could be too broad of an example and that itd need to be focused down more into lawful killings and unlawful killings before it could really be applied to the same lines of reasoning as your example of war.

Thoughts?