Is Slavery Moral?

[cvanwey]

I don't recall slavery being considered good in the bible. And seem more man made. A lot of things didn't seem good in the bible. I don't believe God thought everything in the bible was okay . God seem to let people do their thing. And mainly stayed out of the way.

If God stayed out of the way, then why did God 'regulate' slavery If God stayed out of the way, why make very specific concessions and rules about a 'man-made' concept of slavery; instead of simply stating "thou shout not own other humans as property"?

 

[cvanwey]

It's always interesting watching people who believe there is no God argue objective morality.

Though I'm the first to admit morals most likely cannot be 'objective', what actually amazes me is that many devout believers will demonstrate dishonesty, or a cognitive dissonance, to protect/support their beloved belief system. Much of this thread further demonstrates intellectual dishonesty (from the fundamentalist believer's side).

And if you care to address 'objective morals', please read post #412

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

If God stayed out of the way, then why did God 'regulate' slavery If God stayed out of the way, why make very specific concessions and rules about a 'man-made' concept of slavery; instead of simple stating "thou shout not own other humans as property"?

I don’t recall God regulating slavery. I recall the Egyptian holding his people as slaves. God later punished Egypt. Until they let this people go.

 

[cvanwey]

Jesus summed up two laws, love your neighbor and God. I think He is getting at these underlying moral laws, but He is by no means confirming the national law. He quite literally overturns it and commands the polar opposite, so the proposition He is saying the national law cannot be changed, or is confirmed is manifestly untrue.

Slavery here is absolutely anachronistic as it does not carry the same understanding. Israels issuance is based both on allievation of poverty, and the inclusion of foriegn peoples in a land where only ethnic Israelites can own land. One cannot equate a modern, well exemplified term, with a three thousand year old word with unique ANE context, and sentences worth of description.

You are the second poster to use the word 'anachronistic' now. However, such responses appear to instead demonstrate 'rationalization' and/or 'cognitive dissonance.' It also appears intellectually dishonest.

You are a very smart guy, I give you props for that... However, the Bible is very clear... Slaves are classified as [property]. And are therefore, sub-human. All other 'stated law's' do not apply to sub-humans.

So please continue to respond, and demonstrate further dishonesty. However, none of your responses will negate the Biblical verses, in which you appear to desperately attempt to 'justify' (i.e.) Exodus 21:20-21 and Leviticus 25:44-46

Thnx

 

[cvanwey]

I don’t recall God regulating slavery. I recall the Egyptian holding his people as slaves. God later punished Egypt. Until they let this people go.

Check the verses from the OP. They are all claimed to be 'inspired by God" from both the OT and NT.

Furthermore, no Jews resided in Egypt at this point in time.

 

[Kemet]

Wrong...on two counts.

You can’t prove a negative.

There is no evidence for the ‘exodus’....

You're correct of course. I like quote's and your quote from Orwell is also very...very... accurate.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act..."--Orwell

 

[dmmesdale]

Again, you are either misreading my prior responses, or are ignoring them. How might one provide evidence of absence? Also, you are shifting the burden of proof. But I'll guess I'll try anyways...

It is your side which asserts Jesus and all the ancients were effectively wrong so it is your burden to prove them all wrong and they do it all the time in courtrooms.

From Wikipedia -

Wiki is not credible.

(if you do not find the below statement credible, please provide your authoritative source outside the Bible itself, as I also acknowledge that sometimes people to not accept Wikipedia):

The Bible is multiple compiled and is evidence. If you do not want me to use the Bible then by the same standard you should not use the Bible. But you do and i am getting tired of your double standards. Do as you say and not as you do. You use the Bible in your opening post. It is not a stacked deck here.

"The consensus of modern scholars is that the Bible does not give an accurate account of the origins of Israel.

Appeals to consensus does not prove Jesus, Paul, Josephus, or Philo guilty of mythmaking. We already know their opinion, now what can they prove? Opinion is not evidence.

The Bible was written by humans. The Exodus was written from oral tradition and legendary tales; by humans.

Assertions absent one shred of credible evidence.

1)If it all was written later then why does the genealogy of Moses include his father marrying his aunt in violation of Torah law? Both Hebrew slaves?

Ex.6:20 Amram (Dad) took as his wife Jochebed (Mom) his father's sister, and she bore him Aaron and Moses, the years of the life of Amram being 137 years.

2) Why does it mention Moses marrying Zipporah, a Midianite and daughter of a polytheistic priest? (Jethro) Esp when the Midianites were later enemies of Israel?
If it was late then why did they include these details?

3)Also, Exodus contains regulations originated by Jethro, the father in law and pagan preist included in the Torah. (Ex.18) If late why include all that? A pagan preist and a Midianite enemy contributung to Torah law?

I trust and hope that you some day either understand the responses above, or at least acknowledge that your return responses do not apply to my prior responses.

Thanks

You have not proved anything. There is no mystery to your responses.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Though I'm the first to admit morals most likely cannot be 'objective', what actually amazes me is that many devout believers will demonstrate dishonesty, or a cognitive dissonance, to protect/support their beloved belief system. Much of this thread further demonstrates intellectual dishonesty (from the fundamentalist believer's side).

And if you care to address 'objective morals', please read post #412

Actually, it seems as though your “gotcha” posts are being responded to with accurate scripture.

 

[cvanwey]

It is your side which asserts Jesus and all the ancients were effectively wrong so it is your burden to prove them all wrong and they do it all the time in courtrooms.

This response, again, makes very little sense... I state the Exodus never happened because 2 million Jews did not reside in Egypt during this claimed story line. Yes, I will even assert this (based upon the extreme lack in evidence). Why? Because the only 'evidence' for such a claim comes from one book, the book of Exodus (written by one author). All other sources cannot corroborate such an assertion, but instead can find no evidence supporting such a claim.

Wiki is not credible

. The Bible is multiple compiled and is evidence. If you do not want me to use the Bible then by the same standard you should not use the Bible. But you do and i am getting tired of your double standards. Do as you say and not as you do.

I had a feeling you would use the 'wiki is not credible card.' My point is that archeologists have no evidence for Jews in this region, during this time period. So producing evidence of absence is quite a specious request.

I am certainly not presenting a double standard. You, again, are not understanding my responses....

I state the Exodus did not happen. I state archeologists cannot produce credible evidence supporting millions of Jews in Egypt, and enslaved, during such a stated time period. Yes, people wrote the Bible. Yes, the story was written to comprise of the story of Exodus. I say, again, that archeologists cannot support this claim. Therefore, the claim carries no weight.

Your argument that the Bible was composed of multiple authors is actually correct. 40 to be roughly exact... However, all 40 did not write about the Exodus, did they? So again this response is not relevant.

I'm reading passages from the Bible, then stating that outside evidence does not corroborate the story. This is not using the Bible in the way [you] are using the Bible. I'm reading passages, and stating why these asserted passages and claims do not align with outside evidence. You are not doing this. You are using the claim to 'prove' the claim.

On the flip side.. If you asked me about a 'scientific claim', and I referenced one passage from one book, and nothing more, then now we have a fair analogy...

 

[cvanwey]

Actually, it seems as though your “gotcha” posts are being responded to with accurate scripture.

It's not a 'gotcha' post... It's to demonstrate that many are dishonest within their responses, in attempt to justify man-written verses to support slavery. That's all

 

[dmmesdale]

I state the Exodus did not happen.

Then prove Jesus wrong with evidence.

 

[cvanwey]

Then prove Jesus wrong with evidence.

Huh? First and foremost, I would rather you start a new post, as we are now going way off topic. And secondly, I'll reply with a fair analogy...

'Then prove Muhammad wrong with evidence.'

Your request is not falsifiable.

But, for the sake of this post, lets keep it to the topic of slavery. At least the Exodus claims slavery within the story....

 

[dmmesdale]

Huh? First and foremost, I would rather you start a new post, as we are now going way off topic. And secondly, I'll reply with a fair analogy...

'Then prove Muhammad wrong with evidence.'

Your request is not falsifiable.

But, for the sake of this post, lets keep it to the topic of slavery. At least the Exodus claims slavery within the story....

If you wish to use a wiki source for Moses then this one presents the facts. It is up to you to prove all them ancient sources wrong.

Moses in Judeo-Hellenistic literature - Wikipedia

 

[cvanwey]

If you wish to use a wiki source for Moses then this one presents the facts. It is up to you to prove all them ancient sources wrong.

Moses in Judeo-Hellenistic literature - Wikipedia

You've again missed many of my points....

I can honestly care less the origination of the source (Bible, Wiki, Facebook, peer review publications, other..). It becomes the evidence or merits of the claims themselves, which demonstrate any consistency towards the weight of the demonstrated evidence. When you read the publications in context, it becomes apparent that 2 million Jews did not live in Egypt. Archaeologists simply cannot produce any evidence to support such a large and vast claim. This then becomes the nail in the coffin. To continue to argue the minutiae of the Exodus account becomes NO different than arguing over scant details for Homer's 'The Iliad." If the entire story line is false, then we are wasting time debating fiction.

You are asking me to debate over a fictional story. The only reason I engage, is because of it's context to slavery, and that's all.... You appear to be attempting to distract, or divert the actual issue.. Which is, is slavery moral?

So I will start anew, just for you...

I state the Biblical verses were written by humans, with a clear and direct objective to justify slavery. And what better way to do such a thing then to appeal to a higher power. Now please prove ME wrong

This actually has no relevancy to whether God exists or not. Many Christians think some verses were ad libbed by humans, to support their own selfish needs.

 

[Phil 1:21]

It's not a 'gotcha' post... It's to demonstrate that many are dishonest within their responses, in attempt to justify man-written verses to support slavery. That's all

I have no doubt you believe that.

 

[cvanwey]

I have no doubt you believe that.

Read the 500+ posts and judge for yourself ;-)

 

[Moral Orel]

Jesus summed up two laws, love your neighbor and God. I think He is getting at these underlying moral laws, but He is by no means confirming the national law. He quite literally overturns it and commands the polar opposite, so the proposition He is saying the national law cannot be changed, or is confirmed is manifestly untrue.

Which thing specifically are you talking about that He "literally overturned"? He confirmed some things, and added some things, to the 10 Commandments and to "national law".

Slavery here is absolutely anachronistic as it does not carry the same understanding. Israels issuance is based both on allievation of poverty, and the inclusion of foriegn peoples in a land where only ethnic Israelites can own land. One cannot equate a modern, well exemplified term, with a three thousand year old word with unique ANE context, and sentences worth of description.

We absolutely can. Owning people is bad. Context doesn't matter sometimes. The reason you own people doesn't matter. If your answer to this thread is "sometimes, in some circumstances" then you've shown that we absolutely can fear that someday Christians, given enough power, might enslave people.

Your reasons aren't accurate anyways. They sacked foreign cities, and forced people from their homes under threat of death. That isn't "inclusion of foreign peoples".

 

[Ana the Ist]

We absolutely can. Owning people is bad.

Why?

If someone wants to be a slave, I see nothing immoral about it.

 

[Noxot]

we are all slaves in one way or another. I need food in order to live and that is a kind of slavery. it is slavery to exist in a world where things must die in order for other things to live. it is slavery to pay taxes. it is slavery to have to work a 9 to 5 job in order to survive. ect.

how and why a slave is a slave has to be considered but slavery is never an ideal state for the human spirit. anything that would try to destroy or deform the perfect image of humanity is evil. because the world is full of necessity some of us might judge that being a slave is better than not being a slave.

it is evil to steal someone and make them your servant or tool. I can only justify slavery in a bad situation such as when an entire culture is full of evil and the choice was between having a decent life of slavery ( and thus maybe even a chance to escape) OR you or your family being tortured or murdered. or when you are so broke that you decide to become someones slave so you can have food and shelter. but it is still degrading to the human spirit.

 

[cvanwey]

we are all slaves to some measure. how and why a slave is a slave has to be considered but slavery is never an ideal state for the human spirit. anything that would try to destroy or deform the perfect image of humanity is evil. because the world is full of necessity some of us might judge that being a slave is better than not being a slave.

But in stated 'Biblical slavery', the human is then concluded as property. And property no longer yields the same rules and conditions as non-slaved humans. They might be above a 'chair' in hierarchy. However, they appear to be about on the same level as a dog or a horse. Meaning, they are living and breathing; so don't kill it, as it does continue to serve a future purpose.

it is evil to steal someone and make them your servant or tool. I can only justify slavery in a bad situation such as when an entire culture is full of evil and the choice was between having a decent life of slavery ( and thus maybe even a chance to escape) OR you or your family being tortured or murdered. or when you are so broke that you decide to become someones slave so you can have food and shelter. but it is still degrading to the human spirit.

So I take it you have a moral issue with:

44Your male and female slaves shall come from the nations around you; from them you may purchase slaves. 45You may also purchase them from the foreigners residing among you or their clans living among you who are born in your land. These may become your property'