cv: As a preface, let's not forget why I am responding to you here... Via, your assertion in post #82:
"
If you live in a society based on Christian principles you are less likely to suffer."
Please reference the basic definition of 'suffer': "
to submit to or be forced to endure"
I disagree, and will continue to demonstrate... I will start with the topic of slavery and the topic of men > women. Okay, now back to it...
Ed1wolf said:
↑
No, there is no trickery. An Hebrew educated in the law and almost all Hebrew men were, would know about this law.
cv: Most men were not educated, let alone in Hebrew law. Most were also illiterate. Furthermore, the ones which were educated likely were not the ones being on the 'slavery' end of the deal
No, ALL Hebrew men were commanded by God to learn the law, write it down, and memorize it (Deuteronomy 11:18-21). During the periods when they were obeying God, the ancient Hebrews were probably the most literate nation on earth at the time. And the ones that could not read were read to every Sabbath by the priests.
Ed1wolf said:
↑
Some men would abandon their wife and kids, many men today do.
cv: Basic common sense would indicate that such a law would trap the slave, and 'convince' more to stay, verses to leave - (by way of deciding to abandon their family).
No, there was no deception or trapping, see above.
Ed1wolf said:
↑
And no, the stake would not be permanent, in the year of Jubilee ALL slaves were freed. But yes, under the Old covenant women did not have all the rights they have under the New, Christ raised women up higher. This law was to help the master not lose too much of his workforce at one time. Also, it would help keep families together.
cv: Did you not read the verse I provided???
"Then he will be his servant for life."
That was only stated because the year of Jubilee only occurred every 50 years which would be life for many.
cv: Furthermore, you had made another assertion that slavery was merely either voluntary, or for prisoners. Well, I also provided Verse to demonstrate that this is also NOT the case.
4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.
Are you going to address this?
I did address it, first this only applied to women in slavery not all women. And second under the New covenant they would be allowed to go free because the husband and wife are one flesh, a unity, and cannot be separated under the New Covenant.
Ed1wolf said:
↑
This is like an apprenticeship for being a wife with no sex of course. Marriage was much more important in ancient times than today because there was no police force or welfare system it was needed for security for women. Yes, men had much more authority under the Old covenant especially a father over his daughter as I say above. Christ changed things under the New.
cv: The provided Verse was another example to demonstrate that such actions were not voluntary. The women had no say in the matter. And furthermore, that the woman was not to be freed, like some men might be. Please revisit the Verses:
7
“If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.
I did not deny these things under the Old Covenant, but this applied only for underage women in their fathers household. I do not deny that Fathers have almost total control of their minor daughters. Not when they became adults, as Genesis 1:27 teaches an adult woman was spiritually equal to men, both are created in the image of the Creator and King of the universe.
Ed1wolf said:
↑
No, He doesn't hate them, but they are not part of His ideal church government, though they can be deaconesses. Actually, in the story of Adam and Eve the man comes across even worse than the woman, Paul is saying woman was deceived by Satan who is a super genius, but Adam was deceived by his wife.
cv: Why then is it NOT 'ideal' for a woman to be a head pastor, minister, or priest?
We dont know exactly though science has proven that men and women are mentally different, part of the reason could be those differences.
cv: In conclusion, here is the take-away....
No. If societies were to continue to follow Christian values, such societies would suffer greater.
Case/point - slavery. Under Biblical law, it is allowed forever, with additional allowances for beating.
No, in most cases it is voluntary and not forever. As I demonstrated above. And beating was only allowed for acts deemed serious enough to justified by the judges.
cv: Case/point - women are considered less than men.
No, that was only under the OT law not NT law. And even under the Old covenant only in the case of women that were married to voluntary slaves. All the other laws about slavery being voluntary and temporary applied to all other women except young daughters with the permission of her father.
cv: Under civil law, slavery has been completely abolished.
Yes, by Christians utilizing the principles I stated above.
cv: Under civil law, women are not oppressed.
Yes, based on the Christian principle that all humans are equally created in the image of God.
cv: Thus, if we were to continue in Biblical law, the 'suffrage' would likely be higher, by definition
No, because as I explained to doubtingmerle, there would be less STDs, people would be heathier, children would be healthier because families would stay together longer because of lower divorce rates, and etc. In addition, as a side note there would be a rational basis for human rights unlike secular humanism.