Slavery

[TagliatelliMonster]

It is the Bible's view as inspired by its author....if you don't agree, take it up with him....OK?

We would, but the authors have been dead for a long time. And the god you obviously are trying to refer to as the "author", doesn't seem to be around / available for a chat.
You however, are. And you are here, spewing and defending that barbaric immoral nonsense. So we'll discuss it with you - it's not like we have any other choice.

The Bible's laws, in principle, are the same yesterday, today and always. If you don't subscribe to them, that is not my problem.

If you DO subscribe to them, it kind of is a problem.
You are one of those people who blames the victim.

The equivalent of yourself in the islamic faith, would be among the people throwing rocks at a rape victim in a public stoning in rural Afghanistan.

Can't you see that?

I am not anyone's judge......I am just a messenger. Shooting the messenger never works though, does it?

You defend the message. That makes you a valid target.

 

[nPeace]

Just leaving your house can cause you to be harmed, so I guess we should never go anywhere. Hell, being home can harm us, too. Regardless, if you are doing nothing wrong yourself and someone attacks you, the attacker is culpable for what they did. Otherwise, the logical conclusion of your ludicrous view would lead to chaos.

I believe, most people agree with the wise proverb... (Proverbs 22:3) Wise people see trouble coming and get out of its way, but fools go straight to it and suffer for it.(ERV)
Or, put another way... Sensible people foresee trouble and hide from it,
but gullible people go ahead and suffer the consequence. (GW)

Why you don't accept that, is clearly due to a self serving bias... because there is no way in God's earth, you can be speaking from any rationality, or reason...
If you are comparing sitting in your living room, to walking into the middle of a drug deal... because that's basically what you are saying. I see no difference between you, and the man who drinks himself half to death, or gets in a car, and drives down Washington street, at 150 mph in rush hour traffic. Yes, "live without a care because you could die, just sitting in your living room."
The Greeks put it this way, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow, we will die."

So go ahead, feel free to sow, but why deny the reason you are reaping.
The law is fixed.
It is a fundamental truth - a natural law, if you prefer. "You reap what you sow."
That will never change.

Isn't that what Deejeis saying.

Lol, "illicit sex". I'm a 30 year old adult who has had relationships with other adults and isn't a virgin. Oh, no. How horrible. Into the flames of Gehenna I go.

You seem to want to make it clear where you stand.
That's good.
There are those who crawl on their hands and knees, begging God for mercy, with their face wrenched, and there are those with their face wrenched, but they grit their teeth, and give God the finger.
They both have one thing in common... their face twisted in pain.
Do not be misled: God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a person is sowing, this he will also reap; because the one sowing with a view to his flesh will reap corruption from his flesh, but the one sowing with a view to the spirit will reap everlasting life from the spirit. (Galatians 6:7, 8)

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So you think the current moral standards in the world are better?

It's painfully obvious that that is the case.

What moral compass exists today?

Reason. Actual reasoned morality instead of mere obedience to perceived authorities.

I should perhaps point out the suicide rate among our youth who have the physical maturity to engage in sex but not the emotional or mental maturity to manage relationships.
Most have no desire for a relationship anyway.....they just want to copulate. Its hardly a good way to live and pass on good good behavior patterns to the children...whoever their fathers might be....
The fabric of society is held together in strong family relationships.....which are now disappearing.
The most powerful empire on earth fell because they failed to value the family and allowed decadence and immorality to rule them......I can see its happening again.

Calling the world "civilized" is hardly backed up by the outcomes of their behavior. Its becoming more and more uncivilized.

Give me the Bible's standards any day. You can choose whatever standards you like.....makes no difference to me.
IMO all humans have done is swap one kind of slavery for another.....

Whole bunch of claims. No evidence at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Tell me. If I live in a world where they are men who lurk in the shadows of dark alleys at night to do wicked deeds - rape, rob, and even murder, do I share responsibility if I venture into a dark alley at night, unaccompanied, and any of those things happen to me?
It's just a yes or no answer.

NO



If you live in a world where the Nazi party comes to power and round up jews to kill them just because they are jews. Do you then share responsability for getting killed because you are a jew?


wtf man

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'll take the NO, and dismiss the added part.

If you believe that knowing of the dangers, and walking into is, is actually a wise, sensible thing, and you have not acted foolishly, and therefore you share responsibility for what you fell victim to, then I have only this to say.
The man that knows he can fall off a 30 foot scaffold, but is just minding his own business painting the building and does not use safety measures, shares no responsibility for his death, if a shift of wind plunges him onto the concrete below... according to what you just said.

Gravity is not a sentient being and moral agent with a responsability to his fellow human
Your comparision is idiotic.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just leaving your house can cause you to be harmed, so I guess we should never go anywhere. Hell, being home can harm us, too. Regardless, if you are doing nothing wrong yourself and someone attacks you, the attacker is culpable for what they did. Otherwise, the logical conclusion of your ludicrous view would lead to chaos.

Your death is your own responsibility, because you were alive.

Can you believe these people?
I'm having a hard time actually believing they are sincere.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Rome was not conquered by any outside enemy.......it fell in large measure due to its own moral decay from within. The fabric of society was treated with little regard and it unraveled...big time. We never learn the lessons of the past and are thus doomed to repeat them.

You haven't paid much attention in history classes, it seems.
Or maybe you were homeschool and your parents taught you this nonsense.

 

[night912]

The narrative for slavery?
I feel like I am in a jungle... lost.
Please explain what you are talking about... please.

Yes, the narrative for slavery in the bible, specifically regarding slavery in the nation of Israel during that era. In regards to that, cherry picking bits and pieces from the bible is not considered as being the narrative.

Welcome to the jungle. Where you are really lost if you're just looking for that which you want and not look at what's actually there.

God condone slavery(I'm not the only one who thinks that, others agree with me, just ask nPeace) and teach how it should be, in accordance with his laws on slavery. So what is the narrative of slavery as it is written in the bible? It's not that hard, since you did manage to picked some cherries from the tree. All you have to do now is pick all the cherries. So pick all the bible verses regarding slavery, and give the narrative.

BTW,
I've read the bible, that's why I know that the verses you've presented were not all of the verses that talked about slavery. So try again.

 

[thomas t]

Of course I hate what JWs keep preaching in this thread. It's blurring the lines between rape and consensual sex. This is what makes people shocked here among other things.
Rape is rape. Consensual sex is consensual sex.

Don't abuse Jesus' holy name to spread your own JW teachings about rape. Rape is rape ... and this is what you need to set straight, I think.

In answering your question, rape cannot involve consent, I think.

but the context specifically shows it deals specifically with rape hence "because she did not scream"

the passage explicitely says "she did not scream": However, this doesn't transform this verse into a rape story or a rule covering rape.
There are all sorts of sex during which the woman does not scream.

Dear fellow reader, let me explain why this is so important a passage: Jehova Witnesses, as can be seen in this thread, try to use Deuteronomy 22:24 in an attempt to "show" that there is no rape without screaming. But Deuteronomy 22:24, at least its Hebrew version, does not mention rape. Their argument is moot, as I see it.
...

There you go. i did not say what you concluded, or perhaps just misinterpreted, or whatever, idk. Case closed.

well, no reader could have come up with the idea that you did NOT agree with the representation of your opinion in #155.
If you did not agree, you could have made that clearer.

Whose hypothesis is it? Yours of course.

no, I mean this hypothesis written by your fellow JW (see #155):

"@nPeace has already explained that if the attack took place in a city, someone would have heard her scream,"
so there it is: no scream no rape - as a hypothesis.

Now you even state clearly:

As far as I know, I agree with my fellow JW.

ah.

've been saying that all along.. not just now.
I can say it again. I did not say that "rape without any screaming involved is no rape."
If you want it said louder, I can do that too... but no, I did not say what you jumped to as a conclusion.

So, here you're contradicting yourself. See above.


So, it's not lack of humbleness here if I read your posts as they are written. I just don't assume hidden messages that noone can read, that's all.

What would you get out of that Thomas, other than a big fat ego?

this is getting personal. Stop this.

I always attempt to leave room for God.
I did not put my own words, or thoughts in your mouth.
I don't think that I lost the case.
I did not commit perjury.
I wouldn't be thrown out by "any proper judge".
And I don't believe that a woman who does not put up a fight under no threat of harm, is necessarily raped without consent.
I didn't claim to "know so much" on this specific Bible verse.
I never claimed or implied that rape does need to involve beating, and vicious manhandling. So I wasn't proven wrong here, I think.

Thomas

EDITED

 

[thomas t]

Today, men only have to see....

and they want the woman.

no, speaking for myself... I only want the woman if she agrees.
I'm not a potential rapist.

Sometimes I used to receive these sorts of glances... but the moment the women found out how much money I earn, they changed their mind. This is how it used to be up to the present day.
They are entitled to change their minds.
I only want a woman when she wants me, too, of course.

Thomas - non Jehova Witness

 

[SkepticThinker]

No ma'am. You are mistaken. God's view has not changed, on slavery, or any other human practice.

Oh, okay. So we should still be practicing slavery then.

One that reads the Bible carefully, and without bias, sees this.

I've read the Bible. That's how I know the God talked about in it condones slavery. Where else would I get it from? The same place where a bunch of pro-slavery Americans got their justifications for keeping the slave trade alive.

Do you imagine that God viewed the actions men took up, as his way, just because he allowed it?
No. That is not the case.

No. I would expect that a supreme ruler of the universe that supposedly had men write down his thoughts about the way we're supposed to behave, would at least be consistent. I would expect said deity's moral pronouncements to be universal and timeless. What I wouldn't expect would be this same deity just letting human beings do what they want to do without bothering to tell them that certain behaviours and practices are immoral; like slavery. This same god certainly took a lot of time discussing the immorality of wearing clothing of mixed fabrics or eating shellfish or talking back to one's parents, but couldn't take the time to be clear and state that slavery is wrong?
Come on.

In fact, Jesus confirmed this on more than one occasion.
For example...

Spoiler

(
(Mark 10:2-12) 2 And Pharisees approached, intent on testing him, and they asked whether it was lawful for a man to divorce a wife. 3 He answered them: “What did Moses command you?” 4 They said: “Moses allowed the writing of a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her.” 5 But Jesus said to them: “Out of regard for your hard-heartedness, he wrote this commandment for you. 6 However, from the beginning of creation, ‘He made them male and female. 7 For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother, 8 and the two will be one flesh,’ so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man put apart.” 10 When they were again in the house, the disciples began to question him about this. 11 He said to them: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and if ever a woman after divorcing her husband marries another, she commits adultery.”

?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Wow. Just Wow.
@Deeje, I think sometime persons either don't carefully read what is written, either in the Bible, or by Bible believers.
Or, they just deliberately read into what is said, what they think... based on their strong emotions against it.
Dear me.

As stated, I'm responding to Deeje's own words. Words that she claims are supported by the Bible. Maybe you need to read her words more carefully.

Hell yes, I have strong emotions about rape. I also have strong emotions about people trying to blame rape victims for being raped. Crazy, I know.

Dear me, indeed.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Thanks for sharing that post. I missed that, due to the fact that my time is often limited, so I sometimes barely have time to respond to posts, and peep at a few on the page.

From what I gathered here @Deeje is highlighting the situations that make rape an easy occurrence, and the responsibility that the victim may share.

I will start with the Bible example. i hope you are familiar with these accounts.
Dinah - she customarily visited with the girls in their cities, who did not serve her God.
She put herself in harms way.
For one thing, the girls she considered friends, did not value God's moral standards, so what might they have conversed about? Sex? Virginity? A handsome man? How it feels? ... Who knows?
we can only speculate. However, when you read the account carefully, there are a few things to note.
1) The Bible does not say Shechem grabbed hold of her, and raped her. Genesis 34:2
2) Her bothers killed Shechem and his men with the sword and then took Dinah from Shechem’s house, and left Genesis 34:26
Notice, she was in Shechem's house.

Questions
Whether one refers to it as rape, or not, one thing that is clear from reading the account, is, Dinah put herself in a compromising position, and one cannot determine that her feelings at the time may have been mixed, uncertain...
We can only speculate.
These situations occur today. some women, are indecisive, and men use that to their advantage, and take them. They may not be any violence involved, but oftentimes, manipulation, and persuasion.

Is that not one of the reasons there is such a thing as statutory rape?
a young mind, is much more vulnerable to manipulation, and uncertainty. No violence is used there.

In the case of Tamar, Ammon used his strength against her. however, he also took advantage of her vulnerability, and indecisiveness.
She was not party to the attack, because she was lured there under pretense.
Her indecisiveness cost her though, and failure to scream, as ell.

There are some blanks we can only speculate about though.
Did Tamar have any romantic feelings for her brother? Did they talk about it?
Interesting questions, since the Bible says,
(2 Samuel 13:1, 2) . . . Now David’s son Abʹsa·lom had a beautiful sister named Taʹmar, and David’s son Amʹnon fell in love with her. Amʹnon was so distressed that he became sick because of his sister Taʹmar, for she was a virgin and it seemed impossible for Amʹnon to do anything to her.

Ammon must have been "sick with desire".
However, please note...
(2 Samuel 13:11-14) ... he grabbed her and said: “Come, lie down with me, my sister.” But she said to him: “No, my brother! Do not humiliate me...
But he refused to listen to her, and he overpowered her and humiliated her by raping her.

I think I could see my sister saying, "What? Are you crazy? What's gotten into you? Then when I persist.... Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Then all the attendants come running, and catch me in the act.
That's a decisive girl, and what is more, it was a surprise that I even thought of such a thing.
Not so, the case with Tamar.

I'll tell you something though - true story. Someone deliberately commited adultery so that they could get a divorce from their mate, and marry the other person they pulled it off.
I don't know if Tamar was in love with her brother, but... hmmm.
We can only speculate.

In any case, we can see how the situations provided the opportunity for rape to be carried out, by those who saw the woman (particularly their beauty), and desired them.
Today, men only have to see....

Spoiler

and they want the woman.
All @Deeje is saying, i think, is that these are what most rapist look for, and what makes them "sick with desire".
Thus for women who put themselves in these positions, they may be creating the circumstances which are inviting to these 'rapists', and in that sense sharing some responsibility.

However, I am sure she is not saying that this is the only reason these women are raped, because men will rape a one, two, three.... ninety-nine year old, whether they are dressed, or not,
There is a saying, "Some men thirst after anything in a skirt". How true. Some men are just 'sick with thirst'.

I do like to see women dressed modestly though. it does prevent your eyes ... and mind, from wandering where you don't want them to.

Spoiler

Do you disagree with any of this?

Oh, I disagree.

This is just more victim blaming and making excuses for rapists.
Oh, the poor rapist couldn't help himself because he saw some buttocks and lost control of himself.

If this is Biblical morality, I want nothing to do with it. Secular morality is superior to this antiquated and dangerous way of thinking.

 

[nPeace]

I make plenty of mistakes.
Just not on that scale.

As for taking things to heart... You should reflect on the magnitude of the nonsense you wrote there. It is extremely telling concerning the extreme and absurd lengths you go to try and defend the undefendable. All this was a result of you trying to claim that children are the property of parents, and the only reason you were trying to argue that is to defend the undefendable, barbaric and primitive concept of biblical slavery where slaves actually are the property of their masters.

Maybe you should reflect on that.

Look, I made a simple mistake.
I was about to log off. I had a thought. I added that. Hit the send button. logged off.
Some hours after the thought hit me that I was applying the word "Yours" in a limited sense, but by the time I logged back in, to remove it, you had already responded.
It's that simple.
It's not as you are trying to make it out to be.
I am always amazed by the level some Atheists go to try to make themselves seem rational in their "non-belief" beliefs. To me, it's as though they go through every piece of Christian material looking for anything they think they can pick at, to say "Aha. I am better."
It seems like such a sad life.
If you feel satisfied by trying to make a simple mistake large enough to surpass any you have made, feel free.

You never addressed the question as to why enslaving surrendered prisoners of war is wrong, so I am wondering why you bring up the subject again, when we have already covered the fact that God did not approve of the Israelites owning their fellow brothers as slaves. He ended that practice.

So, if you want to discuss, slavery of captive enemies, we can do that, otherwise, you are really just cherry picking at this moment, and the cherries are only fit to throw away, as they mean nothing to the thread, unless you have a good reason you can lay on the table, as to what other options the Israelites should choose, when their enemies are at their mercy.

So what's wrong with making enemies serve you, rather than destroy them? That's the question.
What's your beef, in other words?

Be back later.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Revealing dress needs to be interpreted?
I think it’s pretty obvious what is revealing and what isn’t!

Sure it does.

Did you not read the rest of my post, about how standards of "revealing dress" have changed over time.
It wasn't all that long ago that a woman's ankles and wrists were considered too sexy to be exposed and must be covered up so as to protect the women from would-be rapists. Which of course is nonsense.

Instead of trying to find ways to blame the victim, here's a novel concept: BLAME THE RAPIST. People don't rape because they saw the top of a breast and just couldn't help themselves. And relying on these antiquated ways of thinking about this stuff prevents us from moving forward and investigating the ACTUAL reasons why people rape, which are much more complex than "I saw an ankle and lost control of myself." As if that's a valid excuse for anything anyway.

And @Deeje wasnt saying, nor even implying, total guilt was the immodest woman’s. Not even close. Men need to control themselves.
But rarely are actions that require adjudication 100% guilty or innocent. This world is proof of that.

Thank you for helping to illustrate the vast differences between secular morality and Biblical morality.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Rome was not conquered by any outside enemy.......it fell in large measure due to its own moral decay from within. The fabric of society was treated with little regard and it unraveled...big time. We never learn the lessons of the past and are thus doomed to repeat them.



You are reading way more into my posts than what I have actually said....I did not ever say that rape is always encouraged, and that women are always to blame.....but some men will not take no for an answer, once the process has begun consensually. A woman can't say "yes, yes, yes, and then when it gets too hot and sweaty, say "no, no, no"....not without accepting some of the blame herself.

Slavery

Putting yourself in harm's way is not a wise course. Walking along minding your own business is not what is being considered here....is it?

She totally can do that if she chooses. Any. Time. She. Wants.
The guy won't die or anything if she changes her mind.

Of course.

I can't even believe that needs to be pointed out to someone.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I believe, most people agree with the wise proverb... (Proverbs 22:3) Wise people see trouble coming and get out of its way, but fools go straight to it and suffer for it.(ERV)
Or, put another way... Sensible people foresee trouble and hide from it,
but gullible people go ahead and suffer the consequence. (GW)

Why you don't accept that, is clearly due to a self serving bias... because there is no way in God's earth, you can be speaking from any rationality, or reason...
If you are comparing sitting in your living room, to walking into the middle of a drug deal... because that's basically what you are saying. I see no difference between you, and the man who drinks himself half to death, or gets in a car, and drives down Washington street, at 150 mph in rush hour traffic. Yes, "live without a care because you could die, just sitting in your living room."
The Greeks put it this way, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow, we will die."

So go ahead, feel free to sow, but why deny the reason you are reaping.
The law is fixed.
It is a fundamental truth - a natural law, if you prefer. "You reap what you sow."
That will never change.

Isn't that what Deejeis saying.


You seem to want to make it clear where you stand.
That's good.
There are those who crawl on their hands and knees, begging God for mercy, with their face wrenched, and there are those with their face wrenched, but they grit their teeth, and give God the finger.
They both have one thing in common... their face twisted in pain.
Do not be misled: God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a person is sowing, this he will also reap; because the one sowing with a view to his flesh will reap corruption from his flesh, but the one sowing with a view to the spirit will reap everlasting life from the spirit. (Galatians 6:7, 8)

You're just repeating yourself now and throwing in silly threats about being damned. Is that supposed to be scary? FYI, religious threats of damnation don't work on people who don't share your religion. We just think it's offensive and stupid.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Yes, she can. You can change your mind with someone at any time. Girls have changed their minds with me. I had one woman who showed me nudes, we seduced each other, she invited me over to spend the night and I was expecting sex as that was where it was going but she changed her mind. It hurt and I felt rejected

Well, you did the right thing, for sure! Good!

But a few men wouldn't have. Especially in today's world! She really took a chance....unless she knew you, what type of person you are: one who respected women.
I think that mostly comes from the training your Mother gave you.

 

[nPeace]

Your death is your own responsibility, because you were alive.

Can you believe these people?
I'm having a hard time actually believing they are sincere.

I believe I am responsible for my actions. I am sorry if you don't feel the same.
Foolish actions do lead to sad consequences.
If I choose a particular course, knowing the risks involved, I share the responsibility.
For example...
If I get in a motor car, and put pedal to the metal, and wind up badly burnt, and damaged, I share the responsibility, even if the car malfunctioned.
If I choose a course that involves life or death - for example, I join a political party, knowing that the opposition are violent, i accept some of the responsibility, if I am harmed.
There are many more I can mention. It's not one rule applies to every situation, but as you are accustomed doing, you like to cherry pick scenarios, which make things appear to be in your favor, but they do not apply. They are black and white, imo.

i can raise an equally foolish argument, like if I go into my garden, and a bee stings me, do I share responsibility for being stung. That has nothing at all to do with what I said, and what I am relating to. If however, I saw a bee hive in my garden, and I went into the garden, and got stung, I deserve it, because I acted stupidly - as stupid as the most stupid arguments,

You nay think your point is a good one and it may be, but applied to another conversation. Perhaps you can save it for such..
I think your argument would more apply, if it went this way - in line with my earlier post... If you are aware that the Nazis are rounding up Jews, to execute them, and you choose, as a Jew, to put yourself in their hands, do you accept any responsibility for your death?
Perhaps you can ask the martyrs when they return to life. as for me, I accept they are consequences for my choices, and Jesus did say, that if you follow him, be prepared to drink the cup that he drank.

No one is saying the person killed themselves, as no one is saying the victim raped themselves, but we saw the danger, and we either went to it, or hid from it.
Proverbs 22:3 (CEV)
When you see trouble coming,
don’t be stupid
and walk right into it -
be smart and hide.

Edit: @TagliatelliMonster and this is what happens when you have limmited time, but you are trying to respond so that you can get to the other things you are doing, you miss thoughts, or the thoughts are not always complete. So mistakes can be made.
Consider too... No one is saying that all women that are raped share the responsibility, so if a Jew is caught, even though he did all he could to concealed himself, or if some unsuspecting Jew is caught, these are circumstances that exist, beyond the control of the person - like being in your living room, and a stalker breaks in and rapes or murders the occupants - women and children.

This is the point being made.
Sorry if you do not grasp it.

 

[nPeace]

Yes, the narrative for slavery in the bible, specifically regarding slavery in the nation of Israel during that era. In regards to that, cherry picking bits and pieces from the bible is not considered as being the narrative.

Welcome to the jungle. Where you are really lost if you're just looking for that which you want and not look at what's actually there.

God condone slavery(I'm not the only one who thinks that, others agree with me, just ask nPeace) and teach how it should be, in accordance with his laws on slavery. So what is the narrative of slavery as it is written in the bible? It's not that hard, since you did manage to picked some cherries from the tree. All you have to do now is pick all the cherries. So pick all the bible verses regarding slavery, and give the narrative.

BTW,
I've read the bible, that's why I know that the verses you've presented were not all of the verses that talked about slavery. So try again.

Have you not read my posts? Like you, I don't see the need to repeat what I have already written.
I am truly sorry if you missed those posts, but I am not to blame for that, am I?
Please be sure to follow the discussion, if you are truly interested in what you are asking here.
I clearly gave the narrative for the slavery in Israel, from the Bible, and in all cases, I quoted many scriptures.
It should not be hard to find the posts of any user, in a thread. The search engine is your friend.