100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Do you think that.... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
So msharmony, it appears that some people don't know how to objectively evaluate the evidence at hand. Still don't know the difference between objective and subjective, I see. There is no such a thing as an objective evaluation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
similar to how war cannot be labeled inherently 'bad'(morally speaking), it is a reality of our culture and our times I'm not understanding here... So you claim that because war and slavery are part of reality, of our culture and our times they cannot be 'good' or 'bad'? What does it take then, for something to be 'good or bad'? not exactly, I am not claiming that war and slavery CANT be good or bad, IM claiming that there needs to be something MORE than the label of slavery or war to 'assign' them such a moral attribute Slavery can be bad, IF the behaviors are bad or if people are abused or killed or not given an option of freedom at all slavery can be good, if the behaviors are rooted in caretaking, respect, and trust (that is actually a major root of the BDSM lifestyle that people dont often know about) likewise war can be BETTER than the alternative(perhaps never achieving being GOOD), if it minimizes the loss of life that would otherwise occur it can be BAD if it serves mainly to INCREASE the loss of life |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
anyhow, this debate has strung WAY out of the field of where the OP began it and it is continuing to go nowhere really
I hope someone gets it back to the original discussion,,,, does having a religious faith cause people to be disingenous in some way? my answer is, it might cause SOME people to be, but it does not REQUIRE anyone to be, so it doesnt HAVE to cause them to be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In discussing slavery, the OP is being enacted, imo.
Let's continue upon exactly what else is necessary for slavery to be 'bad' Ms. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Msharmony: Slavery can be bad, IF the behaviors are bad or if people are abused or killed or not given an option of freedom at all The Bible describes slavery which satisfies that criterion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fact, God commands it in Numbers along with the killing of innocent women and children. Killing an innocent is called murder where I'm from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I find it rather curious that when the conversation is getting to the place where the facts must be faced for what they are, those who do not wish to face them change the subject or stop conversing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Msharmony: Slavery can be bad, IF the behaviors are bad or if people are abused or killed or not given an option of freedom at all The Bible describes slavery which satisfies that criterion. No, it doesn't. As I've posted several times, runaway slaves were not returned to their masters and were considered free. Not happy being a slave? Run away! That's the option for freedom whenever you want. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see. So, when God told Moses to wipe out the Midianites except for the virgins whom he told Moses to enslave, he was doing nothing different than what the Dept. of Health and Human Services does under Democratic presidents every day? Just a little 'government regulation'? I am sure that God wanted as little bloodshed as possible to achieve the goal of freeing Canaan from the societies that controlled the place. The problem wasn't the people per se, it was the societies. The societies where human sacrifice was a normal practice and special prostitutes existed who were hired to get pregnant and carry to baby full term and then the child was taken and placed into an idol of Ba'al where it was cooked alive. This was a brutal society ruled by the strong and violent. I'm pretty sure that those girls were better off alive as Hebrew slaves than dead or even alive in their own culture. Alive, they were considered a part of the extended Hebrew family and had to be given decent food, a wage, lodging and protected from the elements, wild animals and human sacrifice. If a Hebrew man wanted to marry one of the girls, he had to first free her and then she had to declare that she wanted to marry him. If she didn't, then she was free to go. If one of the girls were married, her husband wasn't allowed to divorce her for any reason. If she was unhappy being a slave and she didn't want to marry a Hebrew she could run away and was considered a free woman. All in all, that sounds a lot better than to be killed or growing up in a culture that practiced human sacrifice or gang-raped strangers. I don't care how you justify the slaughter of unarmed, helpless captives, were it done today it would be considered a war crime. And it was done on the most trumped-up justifications. The Israelites themselves were whoring it up with some Moabite women, so allegedly, God sends a plague upon them. When God spots an Israelite spearing to death a fellow Isrealite and his Midianite g/f, suddenly God stops the plague and tells Moses to exterminate the Midianites instead. Supposedly, they were in cahoots with the Moabites, but who knows? And it's just UNBELIEVABLE that said victims of said war crime would find life as unwilling slaves tolerable to the very people who slaughtered their kinfolk and fellow countrypersons. ESPECIALLY for a 'crime' committed by ANOTHER tribe! -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So msharmony, it appears that some people don't know how to objectively evaluate the evidence at hand. Still don't know the difference between objective and subjective, I see. There is no such a thing as an objective evaluation. Still don't recognise sarcasm, I see. You are still gonna insist you know what the Hebrews meant. You still are not going to look it up yourself. Prove me wrong, look it up... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Again, the very conversations are lending support to the OP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Msharmony: Slavery can be bad, IF the behaviors are bad or if people are abused or killed or not given an option of freedom at all The Bible describes slavery which satisfies that criterion. yes, and those would be BAD situations, just like some men are rapists and raping is bad, but being a man is not |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see. So, when God told Moses to wipe out the Midianites except for the virgins whom he told Moses to enslave, he was doing nothing different than what the Dept. of Health and Human Services does under Democratic presidents every day? Just a little 'government regulation'? I am sure that God wanted as little bloodshed as possible to achieve the goal of freeing Canaan from the societies that controlled the place. The problem wasn't the people per se, it was the societies. The societies where human sacrifice was a normal practice and special prostitutes existed who were hired to get pregnant and carry to baby full term and then the child was taken and placed into an idol of Ba'al where it was cooked alive. This was a brutal society ruled by the strong and violent. I'm pretty sure that those girls were better off alive as Hebrew slaves than dead or even alive in their own culture. Alive, they were considered a part of the extended Hebrew family and had to be given decent food, a wage, lodging and protected from the elements, wild animals and human sacrifice. If a Hebrew man wanted to marry one of the girls, he had to first free her and then she had to declare that she wanted to marry him. If she didn't, then she was free to go. If one of the girls were married, her husband wasn't allowed to divorce her for any reason. If she was unhappy being a slave and she didn't want to marry a Hebrew she could run away and was considered a free woman. All in all, that sounds a lot better than to be killed or growing up in a culture that practiced human sacrifice or gang-raped strangers. I don't care how you justify the slaughter of unarmed, helpless captives, were it done today it would be considered a war crime. And it was done on the most trumped-up justifications. The Israelites themselves were whoring it up with some Moabite women, so allegedly, God sends a plague upon them. When God spots an Israelite spearing to death a fellow Isrealite and his Midianite g/f, suddenly God stops the plague and tells Moses to exterminate the Midianites instead. Supposedly, they were in cahoots with the Moabites, but who knows? And it's just UNBELIEVABLE that said victims of said war crime would find life as unwilling slaves tolerable to the very people who slaughtered their kinfolk and fellow countrypersons. ESPECIALLY for a 'crime' committed by ANOTHER tribe! -Kerry O. I agree , will has much to do with it. There were WILLING slave arrangements and FORCED. I am opposed to those which were FORCED with no option for freedom. I am not opposed to those which were CONSENTED to, provided they were treated with care and not misused. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spider you're not making any sense here. Using your definition... Your claiming that God did not regard/treat slavery as acceptable? He commanded it. That is a fact. Tell me, exactly how does God command slavery without regarding/treating slavery as acceptable? God did not command slavery. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 01/18/11 06:47 PM
|
|
I find it rather curious that when the conversation is getting to the place where the facts must be faced for what they are, those who do not wish to face them change the subject or stop conversing. I dont wish to CHANGE the subject personally, I just wish to get it back in line with the OP question about being DISINGENOUS in ones personal relationships due to religious faith a question this current line of debate seems to have little relevance to Im not even sure how this current topic of the relevance or significance of the biblical representation of slavery and whether it implied approval of something that was inherently 'bad', began people come from their own experience and education and if one believes a context of a term cant and doesnt change it will serve no purpose except wasting space and breath to try to convince them of the other contexts in which the term can apply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are still gonna insist you know what the Hebrews meant. You still are not going to look it up yourself. No, I actually leave what the Hebrews of biblical times meant to those who've acquired the knowledge of both classical and 'modern' Hebrew. You know, the people who understand the language? You have no idea what you're talking about Pan. The wealth of data that is avaliable on Hebrew slavery is immense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care how you justify the slaughter of unarmed, helpless captives, were it done today it would be considered a war crime. And it was done on the most trumped-up justifications. The Israelites themselves were whoring it up with some Moabite women, so allegedly, God sends a plague upon them. When God spots an Israelite spearing to death a fellow Isrealite and his Midianite g/f, suddenly God stops the plague and tells Moses to exterminate the Midianites instead. Supposedly, they were in cahoots with the Moabites, but who knows? And it's just UNBELIEVABLE that said victims of said war crime would find life as unwilling slaves tolerable to the very people who slaughtered their kinfolk and fellow countrypersons. ESPECIALLY for a 'crime' committed by ANOTHER tribe! Numbers 31:15-16 reveals that the Midianite and Moabite women worked together to entice the Hebrews into sexual immorality. This was the plan devised by Balaam to bring God's wrath upon the Israelites. The Midianites were not innocent in this, they actively took part, including their princess seducing a Hebrew prince. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The wealth of data that is avaliable on Hebrew slavery is immense. Yes, it is. So why do you ignore it? The majority of Hebrew slaves were willing. Those who weren't were being punished for crimes. All Hebrew slaves were released after 6 years of service, unless the slave wanted to continue being a slave. The majority of non-Hebrew "slaves" were actually "vassels". They were forced to pay tribute to their captors, but were otherwise free to live as they choose. Read all about it... ...Does God condone slavery in the Bible? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God did not command slavery. Guess those aforementioned virgins that were deliberately saved from the slaughter as plunder and were divided up as spoils of that which God commanded Moses to enact were not sexual slaves.  Funny how you've already defended the fact that they were. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Going back to the OP, I see that this whole digression has nothing to do with Christianity. Jesus never condoned slavery. Some Christians tried to defend slavery using the Bible, but their arguments are obviously fallacious to anyone who takes an honest look at the Bible in context. As previously noted Jesus did away with the civil and ceremonial laws. Even if Jesus hadn't, stealing people into slavery WAS AGAINST THE LAWS IN THE BIBLE. So Christians who captured slaves or bought captured slaves were breaking the laws of the Bible even anyone wants to claim that they were following them. Similarly, Christians aren't called upon to kill anyone, except in self defense. Some Christians, like Cowboy, don't even believe in self defense. So the whole discussion is a strawman in relation to Christianity.
|
|
|
|
|
