"Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God"

Originally posted by @romans1009
I don’t know.

Well think about it.

How much debt justifies permenant servitude?

Originally posted by @divegeester
Well think about it.

How much debt justifies permenant servitude?

Who says the indentured servitude had to be permanent? I don’t know what the going wage was for a day’s labor in Biblical times, but you’d also have to know and factor in the age of the indentured servant to answer your question.

Come on, kiddo. Put on your thinking cap.

Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20:

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20:

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

From gotquestions.org

“Slavery has been a fact of human existence for almost as long as the human race has been in existence. Physical punishment to enforce compliance has been part of slavery for just as long. Corporal punishment has also been used in situations other than slavery. For example, physical chastisements were commonly employed as punishment for crimes committed and for the enforcing of discipline in the military. We are not so far removed from the time when brutal physical punishment was administered and accepted by almost everyone as legitimate. In the British Navy, flogging for disobedience or insubordination was common until the mid-19th century, and caning was used until the mid-20th century. In some places, such as Singapore, caning is still an official form of punishment for certain crimes.

The Bible does not forbid slavery, nor does it demand that every slave owner who wants to please God must immediately emancipate his slaves. Instead, the Bible at every turn calls for a treatment of slaves that would have been more humane than any found in the culture at large. The very idea that a master could be punished in any way for killing a slave would have been scandalous at the time Moses gave the Law. The culture at large made no attempt to grant slaves any rights. Slaves in Egypt or Moab, for example, were afforded no such protection.

Earlier in the same chapter, kidnapping for the purpose of slavery is condemned and the death penalty enjoined: “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession” (Exodus 21:16). (Ironically, the death penalty is another area where modern people assume their moral sensitivity is superior to God’s!) Furthermore, we must not make the mistake of equating slavery in ancient Israel with antebellum slavery in the United States. If the biblical dictates regarding slavery, including the regulations found in Exodus 21:16, 20–21, had been enforced in Western nations in the 1800s, then slavery in the United States would have been very different.

The regulations regarding slaves in Exodus 21, far from being inhumane, would have been far more humane and protective of the slave in Israel than in any of the surrounding nations.”

Incidentally, the KJV uses the terms “servant” and “maid.”

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20:

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Let’s see how your non-stop trolling of God works out for you when you kick the bucket.

Originally posted by @romans1009
Let’s see how your non-stop trolling of God works out for you when you kick the bucket.

Sorry, but how is providing a relevant biblical passage trolling? And instead of a trademark copy and paste, why not address the passage yourself?

Consider, "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."

Trying to be objective for a moment, if those words were taken out of their biblical context (and were not the word of God) and you encountered them in some other publication, would you not find them abhorrent? - That it's not okay to kill your slave, but if, after a beating, he gets up after a day or two, well that's perfectly fine. (You own him after all).

Originally posted by @romans1009
The regulations regarding slaves in Exodus 21, far from being inhumane, would have been far more humane and protective of the slave in Israel than in any of the surrounding nations.”

What is the basis - in terms of historical evidence - for this assertion?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Sorry, but how is providing a relevant biblical passage trolling? And instead of a trademark copy and paste, why not address the passage yourself?

Consider, "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the ...[text shortened]... r a beating, he gets up after a day or two, well that's perfectly fine. (You own him after all).

Your intent is trolling, and I hardly ever copy-and-paste unless it’s a relevant Biblical verse or passage.

And I have addressed this. Slaves in Biblical times were, to my understanding, more accurately indentured servants - people who owed debts they were unable to pay and so became unpaid servants to the people to whom they owed money. That is far different than slavery as most people think of it (such as existed in America in the 1700s and first half of the 1800s.)

That said, I think God was working within the existing social structure. God gave man free will and autonomy. The fact man chose to have slaves and indentured servants can hardly be blamed on God.

Originally posted by @fmf
What is the basis - in terms of historical evidence - for this assertion?

I didn’t write the article and am not interested enough to find out.

Originally posted by @romans1009
Your intent is trolling, and I hardly ever copy-and-paste unless it’s a relevant Biblical verse or passage.

And I have addressed this. Slaves in Biblical times were, to my understanding, more accurately indentured servants - people who owed debts they were unable to pay and so became unpaid servants to the people to whom they owed money. That is far d ...[text shortened]... autonomy. The fact man chose to have slaves and indentured servants can hardly be blamed on God.

Sorry, but that still doesn't address the following:

'If those words were taken out of their biblical context (and were not the word of God) and you encountered them in some other publication, would you not find them abhorrent? - That it's not okay to kill your slave, but if, after a beating, he gets up after a day or two, well that's perfectly fine. (You own him after all).'

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Sorry, but that still doesn't address the following:

'If those words were taken out of their biblical context (and were not the word of God) and you encountered them in some other publication, would you not find them abhorrent? - That it's not okay to kill your slave, but if, after a beating, he gets up after a day or two, well that's perfectly fine. (You own him after all).'

Are you talking about a publication from Biblical times or a present-day publication?

Originally posted by @romans1009
Are you talking about a publication from Biblical times or a present-day publication?

You said that, 'The fact man chose to have slaves and indentured servants can hardly be blamed on God.'

That much is true. However, we are still left with a biblical verse (attributed to God) that tells us, "...he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.'

Irrespective of whether God is speaking to ancient or modern man, are those really the words you want attributed to your righteous deity?

Originally posted by @romans1009
Slaves in Biblical times were, to my understanding, more accurately indentured servants - people who owed debts they were unable to pay and so became unpaid servants to the people to whom they owed money. That is far different than slavery as most people think of it (such as existed in America in the 1700s and first half of the 1800s.)

What guidance did the Bible give to the kind of slaves there were in 1700s and 1800s America in terms of the duty to rebel and the morally correct nature of that rebellion?

Originally posted by @fmf
What guidance did the Bible give to the kind of slaves there were in 1700s and 1800s America in terms of the duty to rebel and the morally correct nature of that rebellion?

I honestly have no idea.