Slavery IS Regulated in the Bible!

[InterestedAtheist]

Among not yet converted people, the overwhelming majority of the general population, as the Christians were a small minority, perhaps we could guess well under 10%, and likely under 5% .

Exactly. All the more reason for Paul to be concerned about it.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

In order to change our tendency to intentionally harm others, do evil, on our own, because of autonomy, freedom of action, God has had to work to change us in our hearts.

Without also saying "slavery is bad", but instead saying "Feel free to punish your slaves as much as you like, just so long as you don't kill them".
God gave humans commandments to live by. Honour thy mother and thy father. Do not steal. Do not lie. Do not murder.
Do not enslave others? No. Do enslave others.

 

[Halbhh]

Without also saying "slavery is bad", but instead saying "Feel free to punish your slaves as much as you like, just so long as you don't kill them".
God gave humans commandments to live by. Honour thy mother and thy father. Do not steal. Do not lie. Do not murder.
Do not enslave others? No. Do enslave others.

What changes people in their hearts?

You know the story of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., yes?

Do you think his overall life and then death helped to change some hearts, back in the 1970s and 80s, well after he had died?

Trying to ask what you already understand, or need to learn on this.

Or, why did Mahatma Gandhi's non-violent protest overturn British power in India? Without guns?

Do you think -- you yourself -- that if either of them had instead used guns and fighting it would have worked better?

Trying to understand your own point of view.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Do you think -- you yourself -- that if either of them had instead used guns and fighting it would have worked better?

Trying to understand your own point of view.

It looks like you haven't made it yet!
I admire Gandhi and Dr. King greatly. Yes, neither of them practised or preached violence. But, at the same time, their philosophies differed greatly from the God of the Bible. Did either of them say that racism was good? God said slavery was good. Did King or Gandhi say that black people should give way to whites and consider themselves inferior to them? God said that slaves should be bought, sold, kept and punished, and should honour their masters.

You keep missing the point. You say that God wanted to change humanity's nature over time. If that was the case, He wouldn't have supported and encouraged slavery while He was doing so.

If Gandhi and King had been responsible for writing the Bible, they would have included commandments against slavery, fiery speeches about the rights of humans not to be enslaved, advice to slaves to resist nonviolently by holding strikes and, in short, a clear message that slavery was wrong, and must be stopped by nonviolent means, as quickly as possible. God, on the other hand, did none of this.

 

[Halbhh]

It looks like you haven't made it yet!
I admire Gandhi and Dr. King greatly. Yes, neither of them practised or preached violence. But, at the same time, their philosophies differed greatly from the God of the Bible. Did either of them say that racism was good? God said slavery was good. Did King or Gandhi say that black people should give way to whites and consider themselves inferior to them? God said that slaves should be bought, sold, kept and punished, and should honour their masters.

You keep missing the point. You say that God wanted to change humanity's nature over time. If that was the case, He wouldn't have supported and encouraged slavery while He was doing so.

If Gandhi and King had been responsible for writing the Bible, they would have included commandments against slavery, fiery speeches about the rights of humans not to be enslaved, advice to slaves to resist nonviolently by holding strikes and, in short, a clear message that slavery was wrong, and must be stopped by nonviolent means, as quickly as possible. God, on the other hand, did none of this.

Letting an idea control your thinking is very disadvantageous, because it makes you see only some things, and blinds you to other things, and makes some things seem colored differently than they plainly are to a neutral eye. Break free of it, and be above it. You could, in time, have instead of a view that emphasizes some selected verses, and repaints some others, and just denies some others, a more neutral view that accepts all the verse as they are.

That way you'd not have to overemphasize a nuanced secondary meaning way to read a verse like this and end up missing one of the plain meanings it says clearly and openly:

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Yes, they need to tell the indentured servants and slaves and for that matter also women, to be patient, and not turn to violence or disruption.

Because the revolution is inside the heart, by conversion.

The old social systems of oppression also would be overturned, by increasing masses of Christians, in time, later, but more importantly, right then at that moment in time, even the slave owners would have a chance to convert, first, in order to save their souls.

And even men who hated women's new freedoms, such as to worship with the men for the first time ever, and more, even the weaker prejudiced among the men would also be given special help, not too much change all at once. 1rst Corinthians chapter 8 is like a template.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That is very sweet.

First of all, I'm not being recalcitrant. I'm just sticking to the facts. If you wish to argue them, feel free. I will be happy to listen, and to respond.


Let's leave this for the moment. I can only discuss so many side issues at once.


The atheist's argument is quite simple: lacking evidence for believing in God, I don't.


While it is certainly true that there are different scenarios that might exist under the heading of "slavery", some of them relatively benign and some appallingly evil, it's quite clear that the Bible sanctions and depicts a morally unacceptable form.


Quotes from the Bible to back up your case that the Bible does not endorse slavery.


Certainly. What Satan was doing was basing each of his arguments on a single idea, that Jesus then refuted with Bible quotes. That's actually what we're doing here. My position is backed up with references from the Bible and yours (and others in this thread) are not.

... if you remember, I stated that God condones slavery, not that He endorses it. These are two different "degrees" of acceptance. Then too, we obviously find somewhere in the theological mix of the O.T. (and in the N.T.) a rule that applies across the board to everyone and that rule is: "...those who 'have' will be given more (such as freedom, well-being and life), and those who 'do not have,' even what they have (again, things like freedom, well-being and life) may be taken away."

Of course, in today's post-Holocaust, pro-Humanist, pro-uber-Everything except doing God's Will kind of world..............................................persons like you want to pull a Psalm 2 style coup.

I guess if that's what you're feeling you must do, Good luck with all of that! You're going to need it!

 

[Halbhh]

If God does not consider something wrong, there is no 'updates' needed.

I asked you about this earlier, but not sure whether you saw it.

Is it correct that you are essentially asking a form of (one variety of a bigger question) -- Why didn't God make everything perfect to begin with?

Or: Why is there any evil at all?

Or Why weren't the Laws perfect to begin with?

(that're all simply another form of the same fundamental question)

This one takes a lot of forms, but they are all asking the same thing.
Here are some instances:

Why did God allow evil?
Why doesn't God just remove evil?
Why would God put a tree in the Garden they shouldn't eat from?
Why did God allow satan to continue?
Why does God allow children to die?
Why ....

and many more.

One quick answer that is very central:

The Bible turns out to be (to neutral eyes) largely a text about how we can be rescued from this mortality and be given Eternal Life, if we come to love others (so that we treat them better than before, and better over time) and have trust in God.

In short, if we become able to live in peace with others, by the manner of our living.

Are we people that love other people? Or just use them?

The latter will die forever.

We are in a condition of real freedom here, so that we can do both good and bad actions, freely, and additionally we are in nature under natural laws of nature (physics), so that we will die in these temporary bodies, and these bodies have natural urges that we could choose to meet by harming others, or instead by cooperating with them.

But loving others isn't always easy!

That's why Christ came, to change us and make it possible to do even when it's harder to do. So that we could become profoundly changed, and thus fit for eternal life.

 

[cvanwey]

I asked you about this earlier, but not sure whether you saw it.

Is it correct that you are essentially asking a form of (one variety of a bigger question) -- Why didn't God make everything perfect to begin with?

Or: Why is there any evil at all?

Or Why weren't the Laws perfect to begin with?

(that're all simply another form of the same fundamental question)

This one takes a lot of forms, but they are all asking the same thing.
Here are some instances:

Why did God allow evil?
Why doesn't God just remove evil?
Why would God put a tree in the Garden they shouldn't eat from?
Why did God allow satan to continue?
Why does God allow children to die?
Why ....

and many more.

One quick answer that is very central:

The Bible turns out to be (to neutral eyes) largely a text about how we can be rescued from this mortality and be given Eternal Life, if we come to love others (so that we treat them better than before, and better over time) and have trust in God.

In short, if we become able to live in peace with others, by the manner of our living.

Are we people that love other people? Or just use them?

The latter will die forever.

We are in a condition of real freedom here, so that we can do both good and bad actions, freely, and additionally we are in nature under natural laws of nature (physics), so that we will die in these temporary bodies, and these bodies have natural urges that we could choose to meet by harming others, or instead by cooperating with them.

But loving others isn't always easy!

That's why Christ came, to change us and make it possible to do even when it's harder to do. So that we could become profoundly changed, and thus fit for eternal life.

I'm sorry, for two reasons.

1. You have not answered many/most/all of my inquiries. You instead ignore them.
2. What you do actually decide to 'take on', does not make sense, and/or, even remotely justifies/satisfies the inquiries in which you decide to actually 'address', regardless.

Case and point:

'Why didn't God make everything perfect to begin with?' In this thread, I'm stating God does not consider slavery a sin. But you do. How do you reconcile this conclusion? 'Perfect' could be considered subjective to you and I. It appears that allowing for chattle slavery always, is 'perfect', under the eye's of God ===> the only authority or standard which would matter, to you.

'Why is there any evil at all?' In my OP, I stated I'm not addressing the 'moral' implications. If you look at my six questions/statements (posted 10 times), you would see that. Yes, the topic of morality gets addressed, but only so far as to what God considers moral. God does not abolish slavery ever. So again, He is either indifferent to it, allows for it, condones it, or likes it. You don't. So you instead attempt to come up with some 'progressive' revelation 'theory', which is not supported in your believed Bible.

It looks as if this is how you attempt to 'justify' your God's eternal commanded allowances; so that His 'morality' aligns more-so with yours Otherwise, you must then admit that God, allowing for slavery, is not what YOU would do.

'The Bible turns out to be (to neutral eyes) largely a text about how we can be rescued from this mortality and be given Eternal Life, if we come to love others (so that we treat them better than before, and better over time) and have trust in God.' I've already responded to this several times. Under the umbrella of Christianity, 'morality' almost becomes superfluous. God sends Himself down for sacrifice, being 'perfect'; to atone for the sins of mankind. And anyone whom believes in this, and truly repents, is saves. 'Morals' are no longer a factor, again, under Christianity. Furthermore, the passage you keep eluding to, Matthew 7:12 or Mark 12:31 even, only applies to non-slaved males. Slaves, and/or even women and children, have restricted 'rights', under the eye's of God's commanded hierarchy.

'But loving others isn't always easy!

That's why Christ came, to change us and make it possible to do even when it's harder to do. So that we could become profoundly changed, and thus fit for eternal life.' No, just, no. If God never mentioned slavery, then you may have a case. However, He does. He sets the rules into play, and never changed them. Same goes for women and children. They are all given a set of restrictions, less than equal to the free male. So again, Matthew 7:12 and Mark 12:31 only truly apply to the free male. The other have limitations, again, under the explicit commands of God.

Yes, they may all go to heaven after death, only IF they are believe and repent. But that is another can of worms entirely. In human life, chattle slavery is completely allowed by God, and YOU are doing a poor job in attempt to reconcile this conclusion.

Request number 11?

1. If you are a Jew, you are not to be enslaved for life. But if you are not a Jew, you can be enslaved for life. If we are 'all one in' with Christ, why the Jewish favoritism? Seems as though Jesus is fond of the flesh, Jewish flesh specifically.

2. God allows slavery then, now, and forever. Any form of slavery is permissible, as slavery is not well defined. God does not consider slavery a sin.

3. Your notion of progressive revelation seems odd. God allows slavery, and does not consider it sin. So why then is there a need for it to later be changed or abolished?

4. God would know people use all forms of slavery. And yet, God never clarifies that any of such slavery is 'wrong.' If God knows humans are either dumb, or self serving, why would God not clarify what type of slavery is not permissible?

5. In affect, what (you) are saying, is that it is the Christians which don't like slavery... Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly? Why is it a 'feather in your cap' moment that America abolished slavery, when Jesus could care less if it's abolished? Jesus allows for it.

6. Slaves are considered property (less-than-human). Slave owners are to do with their slaves what they will, as instructed by the NT.

 

[Halbhh]

How do you reconcile this conclusion?

By looking at the way Christianity caused the world to change over time, ending legal slavery, for example. Quite a dramatic outcome, which goes very much against human nature.

Of course in the unconverted, human nature remains constant.

So, involuntary slavery continues today around the world.

Both in old forms, and in new forms.

If you don't know that, it's something to find out about.

It continues, and some non believers are working against it, and many Christians.

 

[Halbhh]

dp (it's a double post to again point out I've already answered the questions you've asked in that list)

 

[BNR32FAN]

I'm sorry, for two reasons.

1. You have not answered many/most/all of my inquiries. You instead ignore them.
2. What you do actually decide to 'take on', does not make sense, and/or, even remotely justifies/satisfies the inquiries in which you decide to actually 'address', regardless.

Case and point:

'Why didn't God make everything perfect to begin with?' In this thread, I'm stating God does not consider slavery a sin. But you do. How do you reconcile this conclusion? 'Perfect' could be considered subjective to you and I. It appears that allowing for chattle slavery always, is 'perfect', under the eye's of God ===> the only authority or standard which would matter, to you.

'Why is there any evil at all?' In my OP, I stated I'm not addressing the 'moral' implications. If you look at my six questions/statements (posted 10 times), you would see that. Yes, the topic of morality gets addressed, but only so far as to what God considers moral. God does not abolish slavery ever. So again, He is either indifferent to it, allows for it, condones it, or likes it. You don't. So you instead attempt to come up with some 'progressive' revelation 'theory', which is not supported in your believed Bible.

It looks as if this is how you attempt to 'justify' your God's eternal commanded allowances; so that His 'morality' aligns more-so with yours Otherwise, you must then admit that God, allowing for slavery, is not what YOU would do.

'The Bible turns out to be (to neutral eyes) largely a text about how we can be rescued from this mortality and be given Eternal Life, if we come to love others (so that we treat them better than before, and better over time) and have trust in God.' I've already responded to this several times. Under the umbrella of Christianity, 'morality' almost becomes superfluous. God sends Himself down for sacrifice, being 'perfect'; to atone for the sins of mankind. And anyone whom believes in this, and truly repents, is saves. 'Morals' are no longer a factor, again, under Christianity. Furthermore, the passage you keep eluding to, Matthew 7:12 or Mark 12:31 even, only applies to non-slaved males. Slaves, and/or even women and children, have restricted 'rights', under the eye's of God's commanded hierarchy.

'But loving others isn't always easy!

That's why Christ came, to change us and make it possible to do even when it's harder to do. So that we could become profoundly changed, and thus fit for eternal life.' No, just, no. If God never mentioned slavery, then you may have a case. However, He does. He sets the rules into play, and never changed them. Same goes for women and children. They are all given a set of restrictions, less than equal to the free male. So again, Matthew 7:12 and Mark 12:31 only truly apply to the free male. The other have limitations, again, under the explicit commands of God.

Yes, they may all go to heaven after death, only IF they are believe and repent. But that is another can of worms entirely. In human life, chattle slavery is completely allowed by God, and YOU are doing a poor job in attempt to reconcile this conclusion.

Request number 11?

1. If you are a Jew, you are not to be enslaved for life. But if you are not a Jew, you can be enslaved for life. If we are 'all one in' with Christ, why the Jewish favoritism? Seems as though Jesus is fond of the flesh, Jewish flesh specifically.

2. God allows slavery then, now, and forever. Any form of slavery is permissible, as slavery is not well defined. God does not consider slavery a sin.

3. Your notion of progressive revelation seems odd. God allows slavery, and does not consider it sin. So why then is there a need for it to later be changed or abolished?

4. God would know people use all forms of slavery. And yet, God never clarifies that any of such slavery is 'wrong.' If God knows humans are either dumb, or self serving, why would God not clarify what type of slavery is not permissible?

5. In affect, what (you) are saying, is that it is the Christians which don't like slavery... Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly? Why is it a 'feather in your cap' moment that America abolished slavery, when Jesus could care less if it's abolished? Jesus allows for it.

6. Slaves are considered property (less-than-human). Slave owners are to do with their slaves what they will, as instructed by the NT.

Non Jewish slaves were from the spoils of war which were either in the defense of Israel or commanded attack on other nations by God. The Jews were not given the freedom to go around enslaving whoever they wanted. Slaves that were taken as the spoils of war were people who had sinned against God. Slavery actually resulted in the salvation of many people who would’ve otherwise burned in the lake of fire for continuing in worshipping idols and breaking God’s commandments.

 

[cvanwey]

By looking at the way Christianity caused the world to change over time, ending legal slavery, for example. Quite a dramatic outcome, which goes very much against human nature.

Of course in the unconverted, human nature remains constant.

So, involuntary slavery continues today around the world.

Both in old forms, and in new forms.

If you don't know that, it's something to find out about.

It continues, and some non believers are working against it, and many Christians.

You, again, have ignored absolutely everything I have provided.

Are you doing this intentionally, or are you not reading my responses?

All I need to do for this 'response' of yours, is to regurgitate question/comment number 5; which is:

5. In affect, what (you) are saying, is that it is the Christians which don't like slavery... Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly? Why is it a 'feather in your cap' moment that America abolished slavery, when Jesus could care less if it's abolished? Jesus allows for it.

********

Furthermore, as stated many times now, slaves have less 'rights' than a free male. So again, your notion of Matt 7:12 only applies fully to the free male. Less so to slaves, women, and children. And again, yes, they may all go to heaven, provided they all believe and repent. BUT, prior to this, on earth, their rights are restricted, due to God's stated hierarchy, conditions, and explicit allowances/laws.

 

[Halbhh]

Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly?

I've answered that, but perhaps it's best to repeat in case you missed it.

Jesus used the example of mistreating slaves as the epitome of evil, to represent all abuse, of every kind. (Do you need me to repeat that entire answer?)

He told us to change.

This means to over time be different in actions.

Like this: Matthew 7:11-14

And we know all believers are entirely equal in Christ.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

I don't look for ways around this, to discount or refuse to accept it.

But many will. Those mistreating others after conversion to Christianity, including the abuse of (is it the 3rd, 5th time now I've listed this?) imposing involuntary slavery on others-- they won't make it to Life unless they relent, repent, change, we learn.

 

[cvanwey]

Where to begin...?

Non Jewish slaves were from the spoils of war which were either in the defense of Israel or commanded attack on other nations by God.

Slavery is not well defined by the Bible. A chattle slave is in the same 'category' as an 'indentured servant'. Meaning, they are both slaves. Again, all I need to do is to provide the following:

'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.'

You DON'T 'buy' POW's

Please try again sir.

The Jews were not given the freedom to go around enslaving whoever they wanted.

Tell that to the God of the Bible, not me. Because you are providing a baseless claim.

Slaves that were taken as the spoils of war were people who had sinned against God.

Everyone 'sins' against God, every day. What's your point? God hates ALL sin. But apparently, as soon as you declare yourself a 'slave master', you are allowed, by God, special permissions/instructions to take away the rights of other humans, deeming them less-than-human.

But I do agree with you about one statement you've made.... 'Slaves that were taken as the spoils of war'

''So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan."

Seems more like something a human would want, verses the authority from some claimed 'divine "good" agent'? Don't you think?.?.?.?

But hey, maybe taking virgins as lifetime sex-slaves IS 'good'????

Did God allow for it? If so, then the answer must be 'yes' in this specific case. The spoils of THIS war, was for the winners to take virgin sex slaves. Problem solved.

Slavery actually resulted in the salvation of many people who would’ve otherwise burned in the lake of fire for continuing in worshipping idols and breaking God’s commandments.

Again, slavery was not well defined. Example....

Again take verse:

'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.'

And then compare to the classical definition of chattle slavery:

'also called traditional slavery, is so named because people are treated as the chattel (personal property) of the owner and are bought and sold as commodities. Typically, under the chattel slave system, slave status was imposed on children of the enslaved at birth.'

 

[cvanwey]

I've answered that, but perhaps it's best to repeat in case you missed it.

Jesus used the example of mistreating slaves as the epitome of evil, to represent all abuse, of every kind. (Do you need me to repeat that entire answer?)

He told us to change.

This means to over time be different in actions.

Like this: Matthew 7:11-14

And we know all believers are entirely equal in Christ.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

I don't look for ways around this, to discount or refuse to accept it.

But many will. Those mistreating others after conversion to Christianity, including the abuse of (is it the 3rd, 5th time now I've listed this?) imposing involuntary slavery on others-- they won't make it to Life unless they relent, repent, change, we learn.

Okay, now you've again ignored my very last response. So maybe I need to create 'easier-to-answer bullet points?:

- God allows for slavery, always. Hence, it is NOT a sin.

- God places slaves, women, and children into a lower hierarchy than free males. Hence, Mathew 7:12 does not apply to slaves. But the Bible states a slaves can still reach haven, in the after life, if specific rules are followed, given by the Bible.

- Christians disliked slavery enough to abolish it. Jesus could care less. Why would you boast about such Christian actions? Again, Jesus was, at least, indifferent to slavery. So mentioning that Christians were on the frontier forefront of eradicating slavery is NOT a 'feather in your cap.'

 

[BNR32FAN]

Where to begin...?



Slavery is not well defined by the Bible. A chattle slave is in the same 'category' as an 'indentured servant'. Meaning, they are both slaves. Again, all I need to do is to provide the following:

'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.'

You DON'T 'buy' POW's

Please try again sir.



Tell that to the God of the Bible, not me. Because you are providing a baseless claim.



Everyone 'sins' against God, every day. What's your point? God hates ALL sin. But apparently, as soon as you declare yourself a 'slave master', you are allowed, by God, special permissions/instructions to take away the rights of other humans, deeming them less-than-human.

But I do agree with you about one statement you've made.... 'Slaves that were taken as the spoils of war'

''So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan."

Seems more like something a human would want, verses the authority from some claimed 'divine "good" agent'? Don't you think?.?.?.?

But hey, maybe taking virgins as lifetime sex-slaves IS 'good'????

Did God allow for it? If so, then the answer must be 'yes' in this specific case. The spoils of THIS war, was for the winners to take virgin sex slaves. Problem solved.



Again, slavery was not well defined. Example....

Again take verse:

'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.'

And then compare to the classical definition of chattle slavery:

'also called traditional slavery, is so named because people are treated as the chattel (personal property) of the owner and are bought and sold as commodities. Typically, under the chattel slave system, slave status was imposed on children of the enslaved at birth.'

The Hebrew word qânâh doesn’t only mean to buy but also to acquire or possess. Not that it matters. If your intention is to attack God then you won’t want to see it any other way than the worst possible way and I won’t waste my time with someone who is only interested in attacking God.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Brave Sir Robin ran away.

 

[cvanwey]

The Hebrew word qânâh doesn’t only mean to buy but also to acquire or possess. Not that it matters. If your intention is to attack God then you won’t want to see it any other way than the worst possible way and I won’t waste my time with someone who is only interested in attacking God.

You have answered nothing from my post. I'll assume you then have none...

I'm not 'attacking' God. I don't even know if God(s) exists?

But I do come to the conclusion that verses, written about 'slavery' in the Bible, seem to more-so be asserted from likes of man, and not instead some claimed cosmic divine agent. My point of this thread is to demonstrate that the authors of the Bible wanted slavery legal. Either because the authors themselves were slave owners themselves, or were told to write as such, to condone the practices of slavery as a divine allowance.

Since most, especially during this era, were highly 'God-believing', to believe such dictates came from 'above' would leave little to no contest from the God believers, which was many/most; including the ones enslaved themselves.

Do you at least agree there? If not, then please tell me why? The reason you even responded, tells me you too at least find slavery 'less-than-favorable'. And yet, God allows for it, in practically every sense of the undefined word of 'slavery'.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Brave Sir Robin ran away.

...some folks scamper away when there's nothing more to make them stay.

Ohhh! ...that rhymes!

 

[Halbhh]

Okay, now you've again ignored my very last response. So maybe I need to create 'easier-to-answer bullet points?:

- God allows for slavery, always. Hence, it is NOT a sin.

- God places slaves, women, and children into a lower hierarchy than free males. Hence, Mathew 7:12 does not apply to slaves. But the Bible states a slaves can still reach haven, in the after life, if specific rules are followed, given by the Bible.

- Christians disliked slavery enough to abolish it. Jesus could care less. Why would you boast about such Christian actions? Again, Jesus was, at least, indifferent to slavery. So mentioning that Christians were on the frontier forefront of eradicating slavery is NOT a 'feather in your cap.'

Okay, now you've again ignored my very last response. So maybe I need to create 'easier-to-answer bullet points?:

- God allows for slavery, always. Hence, it is NOT a sin.

- God places slaves, women, and children into a lower hierarchy than free males. Hence, Mathew 7:12 does not apply to slaves. But the Bible states a slaves can still reach haven, in the after life, if specific rules are followed, given by the Bible.

Sorry, not trying to ignore -- might you be ignoring a couple of things? It's not always easy to see what invalidates a favorite theory.

Neither of these continues after Christ -- involuntary slavery and other abuses will cease among those that choose the narrow gate of Matthew chapter 7, but will continue to be done by those that will go to the "second death".

Next, Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. means just what it says, even though it won't fit every viewpoint, such as the one you are proposing that "God places slaves, women, and children into a lower hierarchy than free males" -- that is ended also.

Jesus showed it ending in His own actions to include women in ways that surprised his disciples, for instance in John chapter 4. Soon we see women as taking central roles in the early church -- Romans chapter 16.

And as He preached He continued to undercut inequality in ways that many Jews with power hated.

And they killed him for that, and for pointing out their many hypocrisies. Ask if you need more on that.

Your other question is much more important in a way. I'll respond separately for it.