Question for Jews, Christians and Muslims

[Autodidact]

What I find shudderingly disturbing about religion, and the sort of thing that horrifies us atheists, is that a person can read a passage like this:

‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life

and not be horrified. Still less continue to endorse a religion that embodies those moral values. Doesn't that passage chill you? Don't you find it utterly unacceptable?

 

[Ben Masada]

Was the slavery of foreigners described in the Tanakh moral, in your view?

Yes, sir. Even a woman taken as a spoil of war, could not be touched until she finished her mourning time for her family. And the requirements to humanly treat a slave would discorage any Israelite from the taking of one.

 

[Autodidact]

Yes, sir. Even a woman taken as a spoil of war, could not be touched until she finished her mourning time for her family. And the requirements to humanly treat a slave would discorage any Israelite from the taking of one.

Wow, just wow. If anyone here has any questions about the morally retarding effect of religion, here you see it. Every atheist in this thread condemns slavery. Ben Masada endorses it.

AnonAmos: You're wrong. Everyone does not think slavery is wrong. Ben Masada thinks it's fine.

 

[Vendetta]

Well, a slave who agrees to be a slave isn't so much a slave as an employee.

So we now define slave as someone who is taken against their will?

 

[Vendetta]

I guess someone who agrees to be a slave is kind of a half-slave, in that they agreed to the situation, but have no way out. They are irrelevant to our discussion, as that is extremely rare, not a problem, and not what is contemplated in the Bible.

Have you ever been to parts of indonesia where employees work nearly 24 hours working for 5 cents a day to make brand name items?

No slavery is still alive today its under the guise of such things as child/human trafficking and for the.more bizarre there are men who fantasize being a slave such as having a dominatrix. Of course the latter has the choice to leave whenever he or she wants but there are people who are sexually immersed in the fantasy of being subject to someone else.

By the way enslavement doesn't have fractions. You are either a slave or not.

 

[Ben Masada]

Wow, just wow. If anyone here has any questions about the morally retarding effect of religion, here you see it. Every atheist in this thread condemns slavery. Ben Masada endorses it.

AnonAmos: You're wrong. Everyone does not think slavery is wrong. Ben Masada thinks it's fine.

What would you have done against slavery by just condemning it? Thomas Jefferson condemned slavery but had a few of his own. At the time when slavery was the style, one would rather be "slave" in Israel than anywhere else. At least, a slave was, by commandment on the owner, to be loved based on the reason that we had been slaves and strangers in Egypt for 430 years. Perhaps you are trying to compare the way Israel treated her slaves with the way America treated hers. Quite a difference right there my friend.

 

[Koldo]

The problem is that some religions regard the OT as being the word of God. The word of God can not be fallible as he is a perfect being according to those very same religions.

Slavery is simply wrong, and this is obvious. If the OT is the word of God then God would have to condemn the slavery. Simple as that.

The simple solution here is that the OT is not the word of God.

 

[Ben Masada]

The problem is that some religions regard the OT as being the word of God. The word of God can not be fallible as he is a perfect being according to those very same religions.

Slavery is simply wrong, and this is obvious. If the OT is the word of God then God would have to condemn the slavery. Simple as that.

The simple solution here is that the OT is not the word of God.

God had nothing to do with slavery. This was a thing of man and not of God. Then, why are you so uptight with slavery? Hasn't slavery been abolished even before you were born? Maybe your forefathers were slave owners. I wonder why I smell the dirty being dug for the venial sins of Israel commited thousands of years ago.

 

[PolyHedral]

God had nothing to do with slavery. This was a thing of man and not of God.

God has everything to do with slavery. He directly endorses it at several points.

 

[Koldo]

God had nothing to do with slavery. This was a thing of man and not of God. Then, why are you so uptight with slavery? Hasn't slavery been abolished even before you were born? Maybe your forefathers were slave owners. I wonder why I smell the dirty being dug for the venial sins of Israel commited thousands of years ago.

I never said God had anything to do with slavery. I am just saying the OT can not be the word of God, because the OT endorses slavery.

Didn't you read the OT passage where God ,supposedly, gives rules on how slavery should happen instead of condemning it?

Here it is:

[Leviticus 25:44-46


44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.]

How do you explain this? It can't be the word of God. God can not endorse slavery.

 

[waitasec]

How do you explain this? It can't be the word of God. God can not endorse slavery.

here's a thought...
you have to define god to think this way. and how does one define god?

why do we (the human species) place ourselves in a position where we think we can actually know the unknowable...isn't that giving ourselves an undue sense of importance to actually assume we know the unknowable?

 

[Koldo]

here's a thought...
you have to define god to think this way. and how does one define god?

why do we (the human species) place ourselves in a position where we think we can actually know the unknowable...isn't that giving ourselves an undue sense of importance to actually assume we know the unknowable?

Regardless of the existence of the real God, the jew/christian/muslim God exists in the minds of each believer. And it is defined by its attributes such as omnipotency and omnibenevolence.

Surely such a being can not contradict itself by endorsing slavery, which is clearly wrong, and being omnibenevolent at the same time.

 

[waitasec]

Regardless of the existence of the real God, the jew/christian/muslim God exists in the minds of each believer. And it is defined by its attributes such as omnipotency and omnibenevolence.

Surely such a being can not contradict itself by endorsing slavery, which is clearly wrong, and being omnibenevolent at the same time.

but that's the question, why do these religions give these attributes to the unknown?

besides these two attributes cannot co-exist in a deity...they are irreconcilable. as i'm sure you agree...
which is another indication that a deity cannot be conformed within any boundary...unless of course we use our free will to question it's very existence within these boundaries.
something the religious faithful (of the abrahamic persuasion) for some reason see as a threat of some sort...

 

[Ben Masada]

I never said God had anything to do with slavery. I am just saying the OT can not be the word of God, because the OT endorses slavery.

Didn't you read the OT passage where God ,supposedly, gives rules on how slavery should happen instead of condemning it?

Here it is:

[Leviticus 25:44-46


44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.]

How do you explain this? It can't be the word of God. God can not endorse slavery.

As I have told you in the post above, God never had anything to do with slavery. These were instructions given by human ledgislators who, to enhance them with the Divine approval, would metaphorically attribute them to God, so as to enhance the feeling that they had been ordained by higher authority. We cannot be that literal with the Scriptures as if God Himself wrote them. It's a pity that even some Jews, who are supposed to enjoy a priviledged mind claim that God is personally responsible for the Scriptures writen in the language of man.

 

[waitasec]

As I have told you in the post above, God never had anything to do with slavery. These were instructions given by human ledgislators who, to enhance them with the Divine approval, would metaphorically attribute them to God, so as to enhance the feeling that they had been ordained by higher authority. We cannot be that literal with the Scriptures as if God Himself wrote them. It's a pity that even some Jews, who are supposed to enjoy a priviledged mind claim that God is personally responsible for the Scriptures writen in the language of man.

so would it be fair to say the entire tradition is based upon the ideal of divine approval? where does one draw the line of what is man and what is god?

 

[Koldo]

but that's the question, why do these religions give these attributes to the unknown?

besides these two attributes cannot co-exist in a deity...they are irreconcilable. as i'm sure you agree...
which is another indication that a deity cannot be conformed within any boundary...unless of course we use our free will to question it's very existence within these boundaries.
something the religious faithful (of the abrahamic persuasion) for some reason see as a threat of some sort...

I really wonder where it all started, where people started thinking of those attributes as belonging to God. We do know that people used to attribute the events of nature as being done by deities as they couldn't explain them in any other way. So maybe when people started being monotheistic it may have felt natural to assume their God could do everything possible.

Those are just some random thoughts of mine though.

Anyway, whether being omnipotent and omnibenevolent at the same time is possible is up to dispute. The POE is still a challenge not to be taken lightly.

 

[waitasec]

I really wonder where it all started, where people started thinking of those attributes as belonging to God. We do know that people used to attribute the events of nature as being done by deities as they couldn't explain them in any other way. So maybe when people started being monotheistic it may have felt natural to assume their God could do everything possible.

Those are just some random thoughts of mine though.

maybe it's because we want to be able to achieve those attributes for ourselves. humans are known to be arrogant.

Anyway, whether being omnipotent and omnibenevolent at the same time is possible is up to dispute. The POE is still a challenge not to be taken lightly.

you are right, just open any history book.

 

[Koldo]

As I have told you in the post above, God never had anything to do with slavery. These were instructions given by human ledgislators who, to enhance them with the Divine approval, would metaphorically attribute them to God, so as to enhance the feeling that they had been ordained by higher authority. We cannot be that literal with the Scriptures as if God Himself wrote them. It's a pity that even some Jews, who are supposed to enjoy a priviledged mind claim that God is personally responsible for the Scriptures writen in the language of man.

Ah, so you don't view the OT as being necessarily in its entirety the word of God. I am glad you see it this way. I really am!

Yet, waitasec made a very important question. How can we properly draw a line between what was made up by man and what comes from God?

maybe it's because we want to be able to achieve those attributes for ourselves. humans are known to be arrogant.

Possible. Many people still think of humans as not being just animals.

you are right, just open any history book.

Ha! Surely some people are gonna arguee that to reach greater good the suffering is needed.

 

[Autodidact]

Have you ever been to parts of indonesia where employees work nearly 24 hours working for 5 cents a day to make brand name items?

No slavery is still alive today its under the guise of such things as child/human trafficking and for the.more bizarre there are men who fantasize being a slave such as having a dominatrix. Of course the latter has the choice to leave whenever he or she wants but there are people who are sexually immersed in the fantasy of being subject to someone else.

By the way enslavement doesn't have fractions. You are either a slave or not.

Uh, o.k. fascinating. Now, back to the Bible that permits people to buy other people as property and make them work against their will, and beat them, as long as they don't damage a tooth or put out an eye. What do you think of the morality of that?

 

[Autodidact]

What would you have done against slavery by just condemning it? Thomas Jefferson condemned slavery but had a few of his own. At the time when slavery was the style, one would rather be "slave" in Israel than anywhere else. At least, a slave was, by commandment on the owner, to be loved based on the reason that we had been slaves and strangers in Egypt for 430 years. Perhaps you are trying to compare the way Israel treated her slaves with the way America treated hers. Quite a difference right there my friend.

I would think if G-d objected to it, He could have simply prohibited it. After all, He had no trouble with prohibiting 613 other things.

I'm not making comparisons. I'm merely saying that if you believe that slavery is wrong, and you worship G-d, you have a contradiction. You don't, because you don't think slavery is wrong.

btw, now that you mention it, I've sent someone to capture and enslave you. I'm sure you don't mind...since slavery is not wrong.