• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Can morality exist without God cont..

SteveB28

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2015
4,032
2,426
96
✟21,415.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Did Hebrews go around and intentionally and exclusively single out any individuals because of their race and enslaved them solely because of their race? Yes or No?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I'll say yes. Leviticus 25: 44-46 explicitly states that it is only those who are from non-Hebrew races who may be bought and sold as slaves.

" You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly."

Pretty clear. That's a race-based policy.
 
Upvote 0

Dave Ellis

Contributor
Dec 27, 2011
8,933
821
Toronto, Ontario
✟59,815.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
CA-Conservatives
So when I said that people were not enslaved exclusively because of their race or nationality and you originally responded with "Well, actually yes. Slavery was based on race." What you really meant was "Well...actually yes, the Hebrews never enslaved anyone exclusively because of their race or nationality. However, the laws regulating slavery was based on race?

No, that's not what I said. If the laws about who you can enslave are written with the only criteria being race, then people are being enslaved exclusively based on race.

Regardless, where are you even going with this?
 
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'll say yes. Leviticus 25: 44-46 explicitly states that it is only those who are from non-Hebrew races who may be bought and sold as slaves.

" You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly."

Pretty clear. That's a race-based policy.

Nice try.

It only says that non-hebrew races can be made slaves. It does not say that non-hebrew races are to become slaves exclusively because they are non-hebrew. People were enslaved for a number of reasons by the Hebrews but none of which was because they were non-hebrew.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

Dave Ellis

Contributor
Dec 27, 2011
8,933
821
Toronto, Ontario
✟59,815.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Nice try.

It only says that non-hebrew races can be made slaves. It does not say that non-hebrew races are to become slaves exclusively because they are non-hebrew. People were enslaved for a number of reasons by the Hebrews but none of which was because they were non-hebrew.

Oh, well in that case, slavery is clearly moral, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No, that's not what I said. If the laws about who you can enslave are written with the only criteria being race, then people are being enslaved exclusively based on race.

Regardless, where are you even going with this?
That was my argument from the beginning. It took this long for you to finally admit that the hebrews never exclusively enslaved anyone solely because of their race. Thank you. It was fun. [emoji4]

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

Dave Ellis

Contributor
Dec 27, 2011
8,933
821
Toronto, Ontario
✟59,815.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
CA-Conservatives
That was my argument from the beginning. It took this long for you to finally admit that the hebrews never exclusively enslaved anyone solely because of their race. Thank you. It was fun.

When did I admit that?

Your position is morally bankrupt.
 
Upvote 0

SteveB28

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2015
4,032
2,426
96
✟21,415.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Nice try.

It only says that non-hebrew races can be made slaves. It does not say that non-hebrew races are to become slaves exclusively because they are non-hebrew. People were enslaved for a number of reasons by the Hebrews but none of which was because they were non-hebrew.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Oh, it was a winning try, have no fear.

We need go no further than your first two sentences. Only non-Hebrews could be bought and sold as slaves. A Jew could not do this to a fellow Jew.

That's a race-based policy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
When did I admit that?

Your position is morally bankrupt.
My point is not about morality. It was about historical facts.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

Dave Ellis

Contributor
Dec 27, 2011
8,933
821
Toronto, Ontario
✟59,815.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
CA-Conservatives
My point is not about morality. It was about historical facts.

Then it's off topic.

This thread deals with if morality can exist without god, and it appeared in the ethics and morality forum.

Since your god endorses slavery in his holy book, I would argue that morality exists despite your god.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Then it's off topic.

This thread deals with if morality can exist without god, and it appeared in the ethics and morality forum.

Since your god endorses slavery in his holy book, I would argue that morality exists despite your god.
The original post you responded to was on topic. Your arguing about the historical accuracy of my post is not. Yet here we are.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

Dave Ellis

Contributor
Dec 27, 2011
8,933
821
Toronto, Ontario
✟59,815.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
CA-Conservatives
The original post you responded to was on topic. Your arguing about the historical accuracy of my post is not. Yet here we are.

Oh, here we go again... You're back to strawmanning me.

I never made that argument, stop claiming I did.
 
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Oh, here we go again... You're back to strawmanning me.

I never made that argument, stop claiming I did.
Here is a copy/paste of my original post. Tell me where I mentioned anything about the laws and regulations not being based on race?

The Bible does not specifically condemn the practice of slavery. It gives instructions on how slaves should be treated (Deuteronomy 15:12-15; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1), but does not outlaw slavery altogether. Many see this as the Bible condoning all forms of slavery. What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.

The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. In the United States, many black people were considered slaves because of their nationality; many slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings. The Bible condemns exclusively race-based slavery in that it teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27). At the same time, the Old Testament did allow for economic-based slavery and regulated it. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing,” which is what happened in Africa in the 19th century. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8–10).

Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16). A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes. In Leviticus and Exodus primarily.

Leviticus 25 makes it very clear as to the difference between the treatment for "brother" Jews and "foreigners" when it comes to slavery.....

If your brother becomes poor beside you and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave: 40 he shall be with you as a hired worker and as a sojourner. He shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee. 41 Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and go back to his own clan and return to the possession of his fathers. 42 For they are my servants,[e] whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves. 43 You shall not rule over him ruthlessly but shall fear your God. 44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. 45 You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. 46 You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly.

So, here we see that the fate of a foreign slave is immediately more dire than a Hebrew. The foreign slave will be a "possession forever", whereas Hebrews will have a limited 'tenure'. Like any other property, they can be passed on to the next generation.....like a chair or table.

Exodus deals with the treatment of slaves and here again you only choose to focus on the 'nicer bits'.........

Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. 2 When you buy a Hebrew slave,[a] he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. 3 If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out alone.5 But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.

7 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has designated her[b] for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. 9 If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. 10 If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. 11 And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.


20 “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.


26 “When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. 27 If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth.

I have emboldened some of the 'juicier' parts for your consideration.

You can see that there is quite a difference. Hebrews can be enslaved for a fixed period only, unless of course the master tries the nasty trick of "giving" a wife to the slave, knowing that the man may well fall in love with this woman and then be forced to make a very serious choice at the end of his enslavement. So compassionate!

And verse 7 begins "When a man sells his daughter as a slave...." Need any more be said!?
So, how did a foreign slave become a slave in the first place?[emoji4]

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

SteveB28

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2015
4,032
2,426
96
✟21,415.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Here is a copy/paste of my original post. Tell me where I mentioned anything about the laws and regulations not being based on race?

Oh good. So you do agree that biblical slavery was race-based. Great.

Now answer the difficult questions, if you dare to try:

Is it morally acceptable to enslave other people?

Is it morally acceptable to discriminate on the basis of race?

If 'yes' to either, explain why. If 'no', then why do you consider this the 'perfect word of a benevolent God'?
 
Upvote 0

SteveB28

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2015
4,032
2,426
96
✟21,415.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Hmm, When we say the word morals we must define what is good or bad.

An unchanging outside of earth morale giver.

That is still nothing more than a concept of obedience. If some external agent has to "give" you your concept of right and wrong, you are simply following what they tell you. That may be fine for small children who are yet unable to reason, but most of us eventually......well, grow up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,133
3,090
✟405,773.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Why is this important? The buying and selling of slaves means that you are involved in a slave trade!
Did you ever figure out that anytime you reference a scripture the default translation in the hyperlink is the KJV?[emoji4]

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Upvote 0

SteveB28

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2015
4,032
2,426
96
✟21,415.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Did you ever figure out that anytime you reference a scripture the default translation in the hyperlink is the KJV?[emoji4]

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

What!?

What does any of that have to do with your 'perfect word of God' promoting a race-based slave trade?

You know, it really does seem that, in your discussion with both Mr Ellis and myself, you use every opportunity you can to avoid the issue!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larniavc
Upvote 0

Hoghead1

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2015
4,911
741
78
✟8,968.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Here is a copy/paste of my original post. Tell me where I mentioned anything about the laws and regulations not being based on race?

The Bible does not specifically condemn the practice of slavery. It gives instructions on how slaves should be treated (Deuteronomy 15:12-15; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1), but does not outlaw slavery altogether. Many see this as the Bible condoning all forms of slavery. What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.

The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. In the United States, many black people were considered slaves because of their nationality; many slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings. The Bible condemns exclusively race-based slavery in that it teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27). At the same time, the Old Testament did allow for economic-based slavery and regulated it. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing,” which is what happened in Africa in the 19th century. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8–10).

Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16). A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Yes, but slavery is still slavery, and the Bible does condone slavery. No doubt about it.
 
Upvote 0