Why didn't Jesus condemn slavery?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes the God of the Bible permitted slavery, what of it? its hardly a moral dilemma,
considering that slaves were to be granted rights, indeed, one could even voluntarily
become a slave, hardly a slave in the sense that you are attempting to depict is it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes the God of the Bible permitted slavery, what of it? its hardly a moral dilemma,
considering that slaves were to be granted rights, indeed, one could even voluntarily
become a slave, hardly a slave in the sense that you are attempting to depict is it.

Ok you heard it here folks... slavery "...hardly a moral dilemma..."

Say hello to modern Christian values and morality.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes the God of the Bible permitted slavery, what of it? its hardly a moral dilemma,
considering that slaves were to be granted rights, indeed, one could even voluntarily
become a slave, hardly a slave in the sense that you are attempting to depict is it.

you should be in politics, you even manage to put a positive spin on slavery.

you should also hang your head in shame.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[b]Yes the God of the Bible permitted slavery, what of it? its hardly a moral dilemma,
considering that slaves were to be granted rights, indeed, one could even voluntarily
become a slave, hardly a slave in the sense that you are attempting to depict is it.

Ok you heard it here folks... slavery "...hardly a moral dilemma..."

Say hello to modern Christian values and morality.[/b]

LOL, such sensationalistic tabloid journalism, in the context of the nation of Israel, it
was not a moral dilemma as is evidenced by the provision for a person to sell
themselves into slavery voluntarily, perhaps this escaped your notice and as has been
pointed out, we are no longer under the mosaic law your comments therefore with
regard to modern Christianity are unfounded at best, is this really the best you can do?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
you should be in politics, you even manage to put a positive spin on slavery.

you should also hang your head in shame.

why should i hang myself in shame, because i stated that within the context of the
Mosaic Law that slavery was not a moral dilemma, no way, its true and i wont have
you people take it out of context with your sensationalistic tabloid journalism.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
... we are no longer under the mosaic law ...

AND?

So what if we 'are no longer under mosaic law'?

It was still YOUR god that said Slavery was ok (including as I have pointed out the ability
to beat a slave to death as long as they didn't die right away) and I will say it again...

NOWHERE in the bible old or NEW testaments does it condemn or ban slavery.


Your god (according to the bible) either still does or once did not only condone but promote
slavery.

There is no point in history or context that EVER justifies slavery or makes it morally acceptable.

All you are doing is demonstrating your complete lack of morality and the lack of morality in your religion.

And your doing that really well this morning.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
why should i hang myself in shame, because i stated that within the context of the
Mosaic Law that slavery was not a moral dilemma, no way, its true and i wont have
you people take it out of context with your sensationalistic tabloid journalism.

There is NO CONTEXT that justifies slavery you amoral cretin.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
why should i hang myself in shame, because i stated that within the context of the
Mosaic Law that slavery was not a moral dilemma, no way, its true and i wont have
you people take it out of context with your sensationalistic tabloid journalism.

whoa!! i didnt say hang yourself robbie!!!

you admit that the bible supports slavery, great!!! on step on the road to recovery. but you use one example of slavery to support your argument knowing full well that there is also much worse slavery that also existed. seems a bit shallow to ignore these facts to win an argument. thats why i think you should 'hang your head in shame'.

Originally posted by googlefudge
There is NO CONTEXT that justifies slavery you amoral cretin.

I say there is whether you accept it or not, no moral dilemma.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
whoa!! i didnt say hang yourself robbie!!!

you admit that the bible supports slavery, great!!! on step on the road to recovery. but you use one example of slavery to support your argument knowing full well that there is also much worse slavery that also existed. seems a bit shallow to ignore these facts to win an argument. thats why i think you should 'hang your head in shame'.

much worse slavery? what do you know about it stellspalfie, much worse among the
Christians or the Israelites or the Romans, which one was much worse and why was it
much worse.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I say there is whether you accept it or not, no moral dilemma.

And this is why I say your morality is warped and bankrupt. Whether you accept it or not.


You are right there is no moral dilemma.

Slavery is morally wrong and always has been and always will be.

That you can't see that is deeply telling about your morality and that of your religion.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
much worse slavery? what do you know about it stellspalfie, much worse among the
Christians or the Israelites or the Romans, which one was much worse and why was it
much worse.

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)


"...When a man sells his daughter as a slave..."
"...If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again..."
"...And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl,..."

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)

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)


Yes the slavery in the bible is definitely the warm and fluffy kind of slavery...

Cretin.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
much worse slavery? what do you know about it stellspalfie, much worse among the
Christians or the Israelites or the Romans, which one was much worse and why was it
much worse.

are we back on to the romans!!! there are hundreds of examples of societies that used slavery in various different forms. they all happend on gods watch and god condones it, we are not having a 'who had the worst slavery' competition or a 'my slavery wasnt as bad as yours' discussion. you always seem eager to take the debate away from your god. like i say your style of debate is very much that of a politician. you try your hardest not to get pinned to a point, when in danger shift the debate...back onto romans this time.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
are we back on to the romans!!! there are hundreds of examples of societies that used slavery in various different forms. they all happend on gods watch and god condones it, we are not having a 'who had the worst slavery' competition or a 'my slavery wasnt as bad as yours' discussion. you always seem eager to take the debate away from your god. like i s ...[text shortened]... not to get pinned to a point, when in danger shift the debate...back onto romans this time.

no the reasons that the Mosiac law was more humane is simply because of Laws
designed to protect the rights of a slave, in Rome a slave had no rights whatsoever and
could at the whim of his owner be subject to all manner of cruelty, this fact escapes the
notice of the anti religionists and soundly refutes their anti Biblical claims, for clearly
the two forms are not one and the same.

Originally posted by googlefudge
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry hi ...[text shortened]... e slavery in the bible is definitely the warm and fluffy kind of slavery...

Cretin.

It carries with it a moral obligation on the part of the owner, can you think of any other
system of slavery which does that, no neither can I, thanks for demonstrating this fact,
couldn't have done it without you.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no the reasons that the Mosaic law was more humane is simply because of Laws
designed to protect the rights of a slave, in Rome a slave had no rights whatsoever and
could at the whim of his owner be subject to all manner of cruelty, this fact escapes the
notice of the anti religionists and soundly refutes their anti Biblical claims, for clearly
the two forms are not one and the same.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no the reasons that the Mosaic law was more humane is simply because of Laws
designed to protect the rights of a slave, in Rome a slave had no rights whatsoever and
could at the whim of his owner be subject to all manner of cruelty, this fact escapes the
notice of the anti religionists and soundly refutes their anti Biblical claims, for clearly
the two forms are not one and the same.

WOW your stupidity knows no bounds.

Your 'more humane' laws allow for the slave to be beaten to death as long as they die slowly.

And as long as they don't die you can beat them as much as you like.

Also you can by a slave girl for sex.

Whether or not the rules for keeping slaves were more or lass 'humane' than the Romans were
is utterly irrelevant to the question as to whether the laws were objectively moral or humane.


The fact that you could OWN a HUMAN and force them to work for you and BEAT THEM and RAPE THEM
means that no Mosaic law is NOT humane or moral and can't be justified in any context.


How deep a hole do you want to dig yourself into today?