It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Slavery and the Bible

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   
The form of slavery that existed in Israel was vastly different from the tyrannical forms of slavery that have existed throughout history.

God’s Law stated that kidnapping and selling a human was punishable by death. Furthermore, guidelines were provided to protect slaves. For example, a slave who was maimed by his master would be set free. If a slave died because his master beat him, the master could be punished with death. Women captives could become slaves, or they could be taken as wives. But they were not to be used for mere sexual gratification.

The gist of the Law must have led righthearted Israelites to treat slaves with respect and kindness, as if these were hired laborers.—Exodus 20:10; 21:12, 16, 26, 27; Leviticus 22:10, 11; Deuteronomy 21:10-14.

Some Jews voluntarily became slaves to their fellow Jews in order to repay debts. This practice protected people from starvation and actually allowed many to recover from poverty. Furthermore, at key junctures in the Jewish calendar, slaves were to be released if they so desired. (Exodus 21:2; Leviticus 25:10; Deuteronomy 15:12)

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Sparky63]




posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   


This practice protected people from starvation and actually allowed many to recover from poverty.


Thats just patently absurd. Using that logic we should have slavery today to feed the hungry and to help the poor.

The fact is the biblical laws allowed one to own slaves for life passed from one generation to the next, to never be given a chance to taste freedom.


However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)


[edit on 30-11-2006 by etshrtslr]

[edit on 30-11-2006 by etshrtslr]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by etshrtslr

Thats just patently absurd. Using that logic we should have slavery today to feed the hungry and to help the poor.

The fact is the biblical laws allowed one to own slaves for life to never be given a chance to taste freedom.


[edit on 30-11-2006 by etshrtslr]


I don't think that this is absurd. If a man owed a large amount of money he could sell himself to someone for a specific period of time. He would actually be considered a conscripted labourer. What would the alternative be? There was no provision for bankruptcy. NO money meant no food. If he hired himself out he was guaranteed food shelter and covering. He could work until his debt was paid off.

And you are wrong about slaves never being freed.

(Exodus 21:2) 2 “In case you should buy a Hebrew slave, he will be a slave six years, but in the seventh he will go out as one set free without charge.

(Leviticus 25:10) 10 And YOU must sanctify the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty in the land to all its inhabitants. It will become a Jubilee for YOU, and YOU must return each one to his possession and YOU should return each one to his family.

(Deuteronomy 15:12-14) 12 “In case there should be sold to you your brother, a Hebrew or a Hebrewess, and he has served you six years, then in the seventh year you should send him out from you as one set free. 13 And in case you should send him out from you as one set free, you must not send him out empty-handed. 14 You should surely equip him with something from your flock and your threshing floor and your oil and winepress. . . .

You are correct that the limits on the time one could own slaves applied only to Hebrew slaves. Not foreign slaves. They could be kept and even passed down from generation to generation.



[edit on 30-11-2006 by Sparky63]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   


And you are wrong about slaves never being freed.


So slavery is ok because after six or seven years they could be set free?

As you correctly mentioned that only applied to Hebrew slaves unfortunately foreign slaves did not have that option and they could never be set free.

The point is slavery is wrong no matter what even for a day a week a year or a lifetime.

The bible condones slavery and there is no getting around that fact.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
For example, a slave who was maimed by his master would be set free. If a slave died because his master beat him, the master could be punished with death...

The gist of the Law must have led righthearted Israelites to treat slaves with respect and kindness, as if these were hired laborers.—Exodus 20:10; 21:12, 16, 26, 27; Leviticus 22:10, 11; Deuteronomy 21:10-14.


I would just like to clarify that you just said that it was okay, according to the Bible, to beat a slave, so long as you didn't kill the slave. Now does that sound very Christian-like? Apparently it is! But if you read the Hebrew version of the Bible and read a little more into it, the fact is, as long as the slave that you beat lives for about 24 hours, you won't get in trouble with the law or with God:


When a man strikes his slave, male or female, and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be punished; for the slave is his money. -Exodus 21:20



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by etshrtslr


So slavery is ok because after six or seven years they could be set free?



I never said that I condoned slavery. I never said that that made it right. You are mistaking my supplying of facts to stating my opinion, a common practice here on ATS.

I wholeheartedly abhor slavery. Let me state for the record:
I do not now, nor have I ever owned slaves!
I hope that is clear.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist

I would just like to clarify that you just said that it was okay, according to the Bible, to beat a slave, so long as you didn't kill the slave.


PLease show me where I said it was OK. I merely provided some background info for the sake of discussion.

Don't kill the messenger!! PLease don't confuse this background info with my personal view of slavery. Why would you jump to the conclusion that I thought it was OK when all I did was attempt to shed some light into why someone in those ancient times might find themselves in that situation.

Just so no one is confused. I do not support slavery!!!
I hope that is clear.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist
But if you read the Hebrew version of the Bible and read a little more into it, the fact is, as long as the slave that you beat lives for about 24 hours, you won't get in trouble with the law or with God:



You are of course correct. The law at that time did allow a slave to be beat.
If the master beat the slave to death, the master could be put to death.

(Exodus 21:12) 12 “One who strikes a man so that he actually dies is to be put to death without fail.

It does seems strange that if the slave after having been beaten lingers for a day or two but then dies, that the master would go unpunished. Perhaps "intent" is taken into consideration. If a slave lingered on for a day or two, there might be reasonable question as to whether the death resulted from the beating.

But thats just a guess on my part.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 02:53 PM
link   


You are mistaking my supplying of facts to stating my opinion, a common practice here on ATS.


My mistake then, but it seems to me you were defending slavery by offering reasons and excuses as to why it was ok in the bible. ie..providing food and shelter for those that would not have it otherwise if not for the fact they were slaves.

The point im trying to make in this thread and Ill keep repeating it over and over....there is absolutly no justification for slavery EVER!

And the holy book used by christians all over the world actually condones slavery.

As another poster mentioned in this thread....the bible is a virtual how to manual on how to buy, sell and trade slaves.

I was born, raised and baptized a christian and for a period of 10 years I read the bible everyday.

It finally got to the point I could no longer ignore these glaring inconsistancies in what the bible actually said.ie...we are all equal in the eyes of the lord but its ok to beat the slaves you own.

If the bible is the inspired word of god and the word condones the beating, buying and selling of slaves how could anyone with any moral character and able to think for themselves believe the bible is really the word of god or not question what kind of god they are worshiping?

However, I do think there are alot of good spirtual lessons in the bible but on the whole I cant see how it was inspired by God when it condemns certain people to a life of slavery.

I think it should be obvious to those that can think for themselves the bible has been and still to this day used to control people.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by etshrtslr]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I think is is important to consider that during that time slavery was an accepted practice in virtually every nation. It is not "condoning" the practice to try to understand the reasons why it existed and the details surrounding this custom.

One thing is for certain, alll forms of slavery were not the same. People became slaves for different reasons. It is a knee jerk reaction in my opinion to paint them all with the same brush.

Substitue "slave" for "indentured servant" and you accurately describe the situation for those Hebrew slaves.

For the foreign slaves it was another story. Pity the poor man or woman who was on the losing side in any battle back then. But given the choice between death and slavery some would chose death, while others would choose slavery. Its a cruel, cruel world for sure.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   


One thing is for certain, alll forms of slavery were not the same. People became slaves for different reasons. It is a knee jerk reaction in my opinion to paint them all with the same brush.


Im sorry but that sounds exactly like what an apologist for the bible would say.

What I want to know is how can the bible be the inspired word of god when it condones the beating, buying and selling of other humans?

And if the bible is the inspired word of god why would anyone want to worship a god that condoned the beating, buying and selling of humans?



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by etshrtslr


Im sorry but that sounds exactly like what an apologist for the bible would say.



How is it being an apologist when it is simply a fact that some became slaves for economic reasons while others became slaves because of war. Some slaves could buy their freedon while others could not. Some slaves were freed after a set time while others were not.

Like the cop on Dragnet used to say," Just the facts maam".

I think you are barking up the wrong tree by acusing me of being an apologist for the Bible. I don't have a dog in this fight.

Thats like accusing someone who gives some facts about theconstruction of pyramids of condoning the religious practices of the pharohs. You are jumping to conclusions my friend. I do not agree with Slavery, I don't know how to make it any clearer.
I will now take my ball and go home.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
PLease show me where I said it was OK. I merely provided some background info for the sake of discussion.

Don't kill the messenger!! PLease don't confuse this background info with my personal view of slavery. Why would you jump to the conclusion that I thought it was OK when all I did was attempt to shed some light into why someone in those ancient times might find themselves in that situation.


See now you misread what I wrote. At no point in my post did I jump to the conclusion that you, personally, said it was okay. I said that you said that the Bible says that it is okay. I wasn't putting words in your mouth; I was asking if you realized that you were saying that the Bible claims beating a slave is okay. See, this is my exact quote verbatim:


I would just like to clarify that you just said that it was okay, according to the Bible, to beat a slave, so long as you didn't kill the slave.


[edit on 30/11/06 by an3rkist]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Sparky63,

I appreciate your contribution to this thread. However, some of the things you have been saying are fact are just your opinion....like saying some slaves would not have had food or shelter if not for the fact they were slaves. None of us would ever know if some of them could or would have thrived on their own as free humans. I think certainly some would have.

The economic reasons for slavery are simple....Its nothing more than pure greed....not wanting to pay for the labor or services provided by slaves.

Lets also not forget the fact that some made a business and profited from the buying selling and trading of slaves.

I know you dont condone slavery but the question in my OP has still not been answered. And the reason it wont be answered is, one either belives that the bible is the word of god and the god they worship condones the beating, buying and selling of humans and they cant or wont admit that. Or they just dont care the god they worship condones the beating, buying and selling of humans.







[edit on 30-11-2006 by etshrtslr]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by shihulud
Esoteric, what about this for one of your word merges.

To Intelligent design (ID) in a step

TO ID IN A STEP

Now P's are usually silent so we get

TO ID IN A STE

Reverse it

ETS AN IDIOT

ET's (ESOTERIC TEACHER's) AN IDIOT.

See how easy it is to MAKE STUFF UP to suit your 'argument'

G


i d i o t [mirror] to i.d. i

yes, i have identified myself, and yes, in hell (where you are) i am not:

Heaven [mirror] Hell
t o i d i ....[mirror]....i d i o t


thanks for playing,
som





[edit on 30-11-2006 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
you don't even know what an "opinion" is.


This is getting a bit personal and will probably catch the attention of the mods soon, but exactly what evidence do you have to support that I, personally, do not know what an opinion is. And how in the world is that relevant?


If you don't know why it is relevent, then that is the proof that you do not know what an opinion is.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:10 PM
link   
ET,



yes, i have identified myself, and yes, in hell (where you are) i am not:


You have many threads on this site that I love and respect but honestly I think you are going over board in this thread.

Seriously the only thing I can think of is this thread has hit a nerve with you, and if thats the case you should be looking within yourself and not lashing out at other posters.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
If you don't know why it is relevent, then that is the proof that you do not know what an opinion is.


Well I hate to sound like a broken record, but seriously - how is it relevant whether I know what an opinion is or not? I can't even believe my knowledge of the definition of "opinion" is in question, expecially when it is completely irrelevant in this thread. Now I'm done criticizing you because it has gone nowhere, and I hope you're done criticizing me about irrelevant subject matter.

Now in an attempt to get this thread back on the subject at hand, I give you this:


The Christian church's main justification of the concept of slavery is based on Genesis 9:25-27. According to the Bible, the worldwide flood had concluded and there were only 8 humans alive on earth: Noah, his wife, their six sons and daughters in law. Noah's son Ham had seen "the nakedness of his father." So, Noah laid a curse -- not on Ham, who was guilty of some type of indiscretion. The sin was transferred to Noah's grandson Canaan. Such transference of sin from a guilty to an innocent person or persons is unusual in the world's religious and secular moral codes. It is normally considered highly unethical. However, it appears in many biblical passages. The curse extended to all of Canaan's descendants:

Genesis 9:25-27: "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, 'Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem. May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japeth live in the tents of Shem and may Canaan be his slave'. "


www.religioustolerance.org...

[edit on 30/11/06 by an3rkist]



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

i d i o t [mirror] to i.d. i

yes, i have identified myself, and yes, in hell (where you are) i am not:

Heaven [mirror] Hell
t o i d i ....[mirror]....i d i o t


thanks for playing,
som

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Esoteric Teacher]


Sorry to disappoint you but I'm in Scotland not Hell, although sometimes you could be forgiven LOL.

But you in heaven - neveah - nevah - never!!!!


G



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 05:35 AM
link   
Well let's see....

in the old days, people owned those who weren't skilled enough to have a marketable trade, or wealthy enough to peddle what the skilled produced, or lucky enough to born into the elite.

of course, occasionally even some of those lucky ones I mentioned above ran into hard times, had to borrow, beg or steal, and ended up among the unlucky ones. or an invading force came into their area...or.....

well, let's just say that their were alot more unlucky ones than self-sustaining lucky ones around.

okay..they were owned, sold, traded, and used. But, what is owned, sold, traded and used also has value to the owner, doesn't it. they have an invested interest, if you own a car, do you let it go without oil, tuneup, and such. not if your smart.

I really don't see much difference between this and the concept of employment. except that we now have the freedom to change masters if we don't like the way one is treating us...if we can find one that will treat us better. We still have masters that are smart enough to value their servants, and take care of them by providing a living wage and adequate compensation package along with good insurance and such. and we have the stupid masters who just can't see why they should have to. and in a master's household, we might find a few very pampered servants that the master deems to be far more valuable than they are, and others who's value is grossly underestimated.
when the masters decide that so many aren't worthy enough to warrent a living wage, well, we have credit and government agencies to pick up the tab....
it's all the same game, they just want you to think that you are freer....

it would have been illegal for paul to not have sent the slave back to his owner. and we are to obey the stupid laws society has instituted. so, instead he sent them back with some advice, treat your slave as your brother. treat others as you would yourself...you want to be free...then treat others as if they are also free! don't want to be hungry, don't let anyone in your charge be hungry!!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join