Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI did not claim that it does not record forced labour, what i actually said is that it contains a different type of servitude than that practiced by the Romans and the British, voluntary servitude, no tricks, no sleaze ball tactics.
[b]under Biblical standards someone could choose to enter servitude voluntarily, this is something completely different to the forced capture of slaves practiced by the Romans and the British. Once again its a battle against ignorance.
This is a half-truth at best. RC is up to his usual tricks.
The fact of the matter is that the Bible also condo ...[text shortened]... make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly." (NIV)[/b]
Again I have not said that it does not contain hereditary possession in the case of slavery, but that it is also intrinsically different than that practiced by the Romans and the British no tricks, no sleaze ball tactics
Originally posted by stellspalfieit depends, for example, gayness is an anomaly to nature not because its so rare even though only 3 percent practice it but because of the physiology of the human body and it therefore depends on specific criteria, it need not be that rare, for example red hair is not that common, but common enough, or green eyes.
so you define things as unnatural if they are anomalies. how do you calculate what is an anomaly? how rare must something be?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
22 Jan 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobiethis is all sounding vary vague. how rare must something be to be a natural anomaly?
yes, like gayness is an anomaly to nature, it need not be that rare, it depends upon specifics. For example red hair is not that common, but common enough, or green eyes.
would i be correct that we are also talking about two different types of anomalies. anomalies of nature and anomalies to nature?
Originally posted by stellspalfieits hard to say, it need not only be rare there may be other criteria as i have pointed an evaluation must be made in order to find out if its an anomaly to nature. An anomaly is an anomaly, why complicate it?
this is all sounding vary vague. how rare must something be to be a natural anomaly?
would i be correct that we are also talking about two different types of anomalies. anomalies of nature and anomalies to nature?
22 Jan 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRC has gone into denial mode as usual. The fact is that he told what is a half-truth at best in an attempt to defend the slavery condoned in the Bible.
I did not claim that it does not record forced labour, what i actually said is that it contains a different type of servitude than that practiced by the Romans and the British, voluntary servitude, no tricks, no sleaze ball tactics.
Again I have not said that it does not contain hereditary possession in the case of slavery, but that it is also int ...[text shortened]... ly different than that practiced by the Romans and the British no tricks, no sleaze ball tactics
Let's review RC's discussion with Stellspalfie:
S: so you are happy to step forward and condemn the slavery referred to in the bible and gods support of that slavery. good man, well done for speaking out against the big guy.
RC: No Biblical slavery was not the same as slavery practiced by the Romans or the British, no condemnation of the Most High God.
S:'no slavery is slavery'............except when its not
RC: under Biblical standards someone could choose to enter servitude voluntarily, this is something completely different to the forced capture of slaves practiced by the Romans and the British.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIt is something entirely different as I stated, No tricks, no sleaze ball tactics 😀
RC has gone into denial mode as usual. The fact is that he told what is a half-truth at best in an attempt to defend the slavery condoned in the Bible.
Let's review RC's discussion with Stellspalfie:
S: so you are happy to step forward and condemn the slavery referred to in the bible and gods support of that slavery. good man, well done for speakin ...[text shortened]... ng completely different to the forced capture of slaves practiced by the Romans and the British.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
22 Jan 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobiewhat kind of evaluation? you mentioned red hair. take me through your evaluation process to ascertain if red hair is an anomaly or not.
its hard to say, it need not only be rare there may be other criteria as i have pointed an evaluation must be made in order to find out if its an anomaly to nature. An anomaly is an anomaly, why complicate it?
22 Jan 14
Originally posted by stellspalfieit occurs naturally and is common enough to be considered as perfectly normal, now if someone was born with shocking pink hair, that would be naturally occurring but outrageously rare and a true anomaly.
what kind of evaluation? you mentioned red hair. take me through your evaluation process to ascertain if red hair is an anomaly or not.
Originally posted by stellspalfiebecause they wanted to maybe because there master was awesome. Its a different type of cultural phenomena, they became like household a manger, if you read the story of Joseph you will see that Joseph was appointed as the head of Potiphers house and was still a slave but essentially ran the whole operation, its an eastern thing, like a Vizier
why did biblical slaves volunteer to become slaves?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobiewhat are your parameters for 'common'? or were you just guessing that it was common?
it occurs naturally and is common enough to be considered as perfectly normal, now if someone was born with shocking pink hair, that would be naturally occurring but outrageously rare and a true anomaly.
its starting to look like you have no system and just guess at what is an anomaly.