SA Huguenot
Well-Known Member
I realised something a few years ago which actually proved to me how one person's bias writings influences thousands because they never even bothered to go and find out if what they were taught was actually the truth or not.As to the slavery issue...slavery is the correct term to describe the condition whereby someone can purchase another human being and have them as personal property to be passed down to his heirs, which was the case in the Bible.
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
So, if the slave lives for at least a day or two before he dies from the beating, no punishment of the owner is required because the slave is the owners PROPERTY.
Exodus 21:1-36 ESV /
“Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 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. But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ ...
Special dispensation for a Hebrew slave only. But even then, the owner can keep his wife and children. Does this sound like a servant???
Deuteronomy 15:16-17 ESV /
But if he says to you, ‘I will not go out from you,’ because he loves you and your household, since he is well-off with you, then you shall take an awl, and put it through his ear into the door, and he shall be your slave forever. And to your female slave you shall do the same.
Deuteronomy 20:14 ESV /
But the women and the little ones, the livestock, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as plunder for yourselves. And you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the Lord your God has given you.
Leviticus 25:45[edit]
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
Leviticus 25:46[edit]
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.
Leviticus 25:44[edit]
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
There is never a justification for owning another human being as property. And to try and justify or minimize such acts in the Bible is to abandon the moral high ground.
Demons do not cause schizophrenia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not actually believe Jesus healed the sick anymore than I believe present day "faith healers" heal the sick.
My reasoning is not circular. The purpose was to point out that the writers of the Bible story didn't even know the cause of mental illness and attributed it to demon possession. How is that circular?
Yes, you can assert that Jesus was god and rose from the dead and turned water into wine, etc. But you have no credible evidence to support those assertions.
We can heal the sick...with modern medicine. We cannot heal the sick by praying or other such woo. We cannot raise the dead, period.
Once all brain activity ceases, there is no coming back.
I was not addressing sexual equality in some supposed afterlife. I was addressing the fact that women in ancient Israel were treated like property and had fewer rights and less personal freedom than men. Stop trying to redirect.
I don't hate Jesus. I don't even know if he existed.
In the case between you and me, Iwould say we have a display of the exact situation.
- the atheists for over 250 years accused the Bible of being the constitution of slavery.
- the Christian Bible readers would argue the opposite.
- The Atheist would then go and listen to other atheists, visit a concordance on slavery, and take verses from the Bible to strengthen their point.
- The Christian are then asked about the quotes, and come what may, no explanation will suffice the atheist.
- The atheist then accuses the Christian of spinning the Biblical verses to suit their position.
- The Christian eventually, like me, will take a full complete collection of everything the Bible say about slavery, enter into debates and discussions with the Atheist on the topic, but yet, even the smallest inclination of sone interperitation will be hanged on to demand the atheist view, and zero tollerance to the Biblical one.
Now, I will give you an example of what I wrote to Yusuf Ismail from the islamic Propagation Centre International in Durban RSA.
Together with a few more Christian apologists who he attacked upon slavery, he had to hide from view on the accusations he made.
Now who better to argue against than the foremost Islamic scholars who is an Advocate, and an international presence in Islam on the forum of Comparitive religious studies.
Now, If you were to paste a few verses here thinking you somehow won some argument, why not go through my open letter I sent to Yusuf Ismail.
Then you think why this man refuses to debate the topic again with Usama Dakdok or me for that matter.
Up untill now he could not answer the Christian apologists in South Africa on what I wrote.
Now, I am not a writer, and you might find some grammatical errors in my letter, but get to the facts and then come back to me on your accusation that the Bible was the source of slavery.
or at least come and tell me if I am a liar or not.