Exodus 21, it's translations, interpretations and defense of interpretations.

[Napoleon]

No, humans are perfectly capable of determining if things are just.

I value my kneecaps quite a lot. If the mafia don says he is just for demanding protection money or me, do that make him just if I value my kneecaps enough o pay him?

Slavery was just for most of human history. What humans consider just is shifting sands. No less arbitrary than the deity you criticize. The difference is that the deity presumably has the power to snuff you and every other human out of existence for not adhering to its value system.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Leviticus 25:44

"`Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.”

The god of the Bible thinks it’s okay (and therefore moral) for people to own slaves.

But then, Paul says this to the Galatians:

For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise. Galatians 3:27ff

It's incredibly easy to pick out verses from the bible to say what you want them to say - it's also incredibly dishonest intellectually.

Anyone who's actually read the bible knows that slavery is not something God says is "ok." He acknowledges it, true; but that doesn't mean He approves of it or thinks it's moral.

I'm curious - why do you hate God as you do?

 

[Questerr]

Slavery was just for most of human history. What humans consider just is shifting sands. No less arbitrary than the deity you criticize. The difference is that the deity presumably has the power to snuff you and every other human out of existence for not adhering to its value system.

It was never just. It’s an inherent violation of another person, no different from rape.

Why am I not surprised a white supremacist genocide apologist is pro-might makes right?

 

[Napoleon]

It was never just. It’s an inherent violation of another person, no different from rape.

Why am I not surprised a white supremacist genocide apologist is pro-might makes right?

You say that from the perspective of 21st century Western values. Slavery was considered just for most of human history.

 

[Questerr]

But then, Paul says this to the Galatians:

For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise. Galatians 3:27ff

It's incredibly easy to pick out verses from the bible to say what you want them to say - it's also incredibly dishonest intellectually.

Anyone who's actually read the bible knows that slavery is not something God says is "ok." He acknowledges it, true; but that doesn't mean He approves of it or thinks it's moral.

I'm curious - why do you hate God as you do?

That quote from Galatians says slaves can be saved. Everyone is equally able to be saved. Nowhere does it say it’s immoral to own slaves.

The Bible does not ever say no one should own slaves or that owning slaves is immoral.

In fact, there are at least two opportunities by Jesus and later Paul to explicit condemn slavery as evil. Instead both of them take that chance to tell slaves to not resist their enslavement, even if their owners mistreat them.

 

[Questerr]

You say that from the perspective of 21st century Western values. Slavery was considered just for most of human history.

By the slavemasters. Why should their perspective matter instead of that of the slaves?

Rapists think they are just in raping people. Are they?

 

[Napoleon]

By the slavemasters. Why should their perspective matter instead of that of the slaves?

Rapists think they are just in raping people. Are they?

Slavery was a much more nuanced institution than you imply. Self-sale, for example, was an easy ticket to much sought after Roman citizenship. And it was widely used for thousands of years as collateral for loans. If you were to jump into a time machine and ask them - they’d tell you, yeah, it’s perfectly acceptable. So would involuntarily slaves as it was the right and expectation of any battle or war victor to take slaves and they were likely doing it themselves until they finally got the short end of the stick.

 

[Questerr]

Slavery was a much more nuanced institution than you imply. Self-sale, for example, was an easy ticket to much sought after Roman citizenship. And it was widely used for thousands of years as collateral for loans. If you were to jump into a time machine and ask them - they’d tell you, yeah, it’s perfectly acceptable. So would involuntarily slaves as it was the right and expectation of any battle or war victor to take slaves and they were likely doing it themselves until they finally got the short end of the stick.

We aren’t talking about self-sale. We are talking about chattel slavery for life against one’s will and conferring that status on one’s children: which is what the Bible says is allowed (and therefore moral).

 

[weaver2]

Just my opinion, but...

The entirety of the Law was to demonstrate to man that we are incapable of upholding it. The penalty for breaking the Law (any law no matter how seemingly insignificant) is death, and therefore mankind needs a Savior.

Most people seem to follow the 10 Commandments pretty well. Why would set up a body of law that nobody could follow unless they were deep into the guilty pleasure of punishing people. Sounds like a nasty sort of God.

 

[Napoleon]

We aren’t talking about self-sale. We are talking about chattel slavery for life against one’s will and conferring that status on one’s children: which is what the Bible says is allowed (and therefore moral).

No, now you’re shifting the goal posts to chattel slavery. And unless you’re claiming that some celestial peeping Tom wrote the Bible you’ve just refuted your own argument.

 

[Questerr]

No, now you’re shifting the goal posts to chattel slavery. And unless you’re claiming that some celestial peeping Tom wrote the Bible you’ve just refuted your own argument.

The Bible specifically allowed chattel slavery and never once calls it immoral.

I think men wrote the Bible. Evil men with moralities similar to your’s who cared more about their own power than human life.

 

[Schism]

Most people seem to follow the 10 Commandments pretty well.

LOL! No, they don't.

 

[Napoleon]

The Bible specifically allowed chattel slavery and never once calls it immoral.

I think men wrote the Bible. Evil men with moralities similar to your’s who cared more about their own power than human life.

You should consider yourself fortunate that you weren’t born in the Bronze Age. Nobody believed slavery was immoral.

 

[Daisy]

Slavery in Bible History

Consider the following regulations included in the Law given through Moses:

● Kidnapping a man and then selling him was punishable by death. (Exodus 21:16) However, if despite all the provisions made to prevent poverty, an Israelite found himself deeply in debt, perhaps as a result of poor management, he could sell himself as a slave. In some cases he might even be able to earn a surplus by which he could redeem himself.—Leviticus 25:47-52.

● This was not the oppressive kind of slavery that has been common in many lands through the ages. Leviticus 25:39, 40 says: “In case your brother grows poor alongside you and he has to sell himself to you, you must not use him as a worker in slavish service. He should prove to be with you like a hired laborer, like a settler.” So this was a loving provision to care for Israel’s poorest.

● A person found guilty of stealing who was unable to make full restitution according to the Law could be sold as a slave and in this way pay off his debt. (Exodus 22:3) When he had worked off the debt, he could go free.

● Cruel and abusive slavery was not allowed under God’s Law to Israel. While masters were allowed to discipline their slaves, excesses were forbidden. A slave killed by his master was to be avenged. (Exodus 21:20) If the slave was maimed, losing a tooth or an eye, he was set free.—Exodus 21:26, 27.

● The maximum time that any Israelite would have to serve as a slave was six years. (Exodus 21:2) Hebrew slaves were set free in the seventh year of their service. The Law demanded that every 50 years all Israelite slaves were to be set free nationwide, regardless of how long the individual had been a slave.—Leviticus 25:40, 41.

● When a slave was released, the master was required to be generous toward him. Deuteronomy 15:13, 14 says: “In case you should send him out from you as one set free, you must not send him out empty-handed. You should surely equip him with something from your flock and your threshing floor and your oil and winepress.”

Later, in the days of Jesus and his apostles, slavery was an entrenched practice in the Roman Empire. As Christianity spread, it was inevitable that individuals who were slaves and others who were slave owners would come in contact with the good news and become Christians. Neither Jesus Christ himself nor his apostles preached a gospel of social liberation, as if trying to reform the existing system. Rather, both slaves and slave owners were admonished to love one another as spiritual brothers.—Colossians 4:1; 1 Timothy 6:2.

The End of Slavery

As is the case with every Bible-related question, the issue of slavery must be considered in context. A careful examination of the Scriptures reveals that God deplores the mistreatment of humans.

Such an examination also reveals that the kind of slavery practiced by God’s people in the Bible is not the cruel and abusive slavery that is envisioned by most people today. And the Bible shows that God will deliver us from all forms of slavery in due time. Then, all mankind will enjoy true freedom.—Isaiah 65:21, 22.

HAVE YOU WONDERED?

● Does the Bible condone the mistreatment of slaves?—Leviticus 25:39, 40.

● How were Christians to treat slaves?—Colossians 4:1.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102011251

 

[Daisy]

We aren’t talking about self-sale. We are talking about chattel slavery for life against one’s will and conferring that status on one’s children: which is what the Bible says is allowed (and therefore moral).

Wrong...

The maximum time that any Israelite would have to serve as a slave was six years. (Exodus 21:2) Hebrew slaves were set free in the seventh year of their service. The Law demanded that every 50 years all Israelite slaves were to be set free nationwide, regardless of how long the individual had been a slave.—Leviticus 25:40, 41.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102011251

 

[weaver2]

LOL! No, they don't.

Do your friends and relatives kill, steal, lie, cheat, worship strange idols, dishonor their father and mother? We won't go into covet: Capitalism is built on coveting. In fact if we all stopped coveting capitalism die.

 

[Questerr]

You should consider yourself fortunate that you weren’t born in the Bronze Age. Nobody believed slavery was immoral.

The slaves did.

But like non-whites, you wouldn’t consider them people.

 

[Schism]

Do your friends and relatives kill, steal, lie, cheat, worship strange idols, dishonor their father and mother?

I don't know any killers, but the rest of your list is pretty common among humans.

We won't go into covet: Capitalism is built on coveting. In fact if we all stopped coveting capitalism die.

You seem to be supporting my comment.

 

[Questerr]

Wrong...

The maximum time that any Israelite would have to serve as a slave was six years. (Exodus 21:2) Hebrew slaves were set free in the seventh year of their service. The Law demanded that every 50 years all Israelite slaves were to be set free nationwide, regardless of how long the individual had been a slave.—Leviticus 25:40, 41.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102011251

That only applied to HEBREW slaves. Non-Hebrew were slaves for life and so were their children.

Was that moral and good?

 

[Napoleon]

The slaves did.

But like non-whites, you wouldn’t consider them people.

No they didn’t.

 

[weaver2]

I don't know any killers, but the rest of your list is pretty common among humans.
You seem to be supporting my comment.

Well, I did say follow the 10 "pretty well" Even God doesn't follow his 10 Commandments very well. And you cannot expect people to follow "no coveting"when coveting is our national pastime.

 

[Schism]

Well, I did say follow the 10 "pretty well"

"pretty well" isn't good enough. The penalty for sin is death. There are no exceptions, just a Savior.

Even God doesn't follow his 10 Commandments very well.

Now you're just making it up.

 

[Questerr]

No they didn’t.

I bet you think raped women as “asking for it”.

 

[Napoleon]

I bet you think raped women as “asking for it”.

What I know is that humans did not believe slavery to be immoral for the vast majority of our history. And you would have been easy pickins in the Bronze Age.

 

[Arlette]

What I know is that humans did not believe slavery to be immoral for the vast majority of our history. And you would have been easy pickins in the Bronze Age.

That's 'cause no "God" pointed it out.