@Dafunkdoc_Unlimited, why do you condone slavery in the bible?

[QamYasharahla]

the point is that it still had slavery and it does not say that it is out right wrong

Shut up bytch.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Just say you condone slavery and be done with it.

Coulda sworn I said I didn't........several times. The problem is YOUR definition of slavery is not what is used in the text you cite.
​

Referring to white supremacist reviews of ancient documents of SLAVES isn't helping you

https://books.google.com/books/abou...t_Near_Eastern_Law.html?id=y3chSwAACAAJ&hl=en​

The first comprehensive survey of the world's oldest known legal systems, this collaborative work of twenty-two scholars covers over 3,000 years of legal history of the Ancient Near East. Each of the book's chapters represents a review of the law of a particular period and region, e.g. the Egyptian Old Kingdom, by a specialist in that area. Within each chapter, the material is organized under standardized legal categories (e.g. constitutional law, family law) that make for easy cross-referencing. The chapters are arranged chronologically by millennium and within each millennium by the three major politico-cultural spheres of the region: Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Anatolia and the Levant. An introduction by the editor discusses the general character of Ancient Near Eastern Law.

Which of the twenty-two scholars is a 'White Supremacist'?

​

 

[Ghost_In_A_Shell]

Coulda sworn I said I didn't........several times. The problem is YOUR definition of slavery is not what is used in the text you cite.
​

https://books.google.com/books/abou...t_Near_Eastern_Law.html?id=y3chSwAACAAJ&hl=en​

Which of the twenty-two scholars is a 'White Supremacist'?

​

in both cases ,it still is ownership of another human being is it not?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

in both cases ,it still is ownership of another human being is it not?

No, not in 'both' cases. As I posted earlier, 'slave' was a term in the Ancient Near East which didn't necessarily entail ownership of another human being.

In Colonial America, that's ALL it meant.​

 

[resurrection]

Yeah, except Christians don't follow Mosaic Law. It 'expired' (for them) when Jesus was executed. That's the meaning behind this.......

John 19:30

When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

​

Uh right. Matthew 5:17

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Ephesians 6:5-8

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

1 Timothy 6:1-2

All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered. 2 Those who have believing masters should not show them disrespect just because they are fellow believers. Instead, they should serve them even better because their masters are dear to them as fellow believers and are devoted to the welfare of their slaves.

Luke 12:42-47

42 The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.

47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

Uh yeah, you can't win this one, pal @Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

 

[Standing on business]

I believe in god but damn the bible does looking funny n the light

 

[resurrection]

Besides, if you read that entire chapter, John 19, it is a fukking NARRATIVE.

The Death of Jesus

28 Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” 29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. 30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Breh, @Dafunkdoc_Unlimited , there is absolutely no context here whatsoever to suggest that Jesus was being symbolic about the law. My quote was as direct as it comes. This is talking about finishing a glass of wine. Do better, dude

 

[Ghost_In_A_Shell]

No, not in 'both' cases. As I posted earlier, 'slave' was a term in the Ancient Near East which didn't necessarily entail ownership of another human being.

In Colonial America, that's ALL it meant.​

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)



How is this not an example of "entail" or entailment?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Uh right. Matthew 5:17


Ephesians 6:5-8


1 Timothy 6:1-2


Luke 12:42-47


Uh yeah, you can't win this one, pal @Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Besides, if you read that entire chapter, John 19, it is a fukking NARRATIVE.

The Death of Jesus


Breh, @Dafunkdoc_Unlimited , there is absolutely no context here whatsoever to suggest that Jesus was being symbolic about the law. My quote was as direct as it comes. This is talking about finishing a glass of wine. Do better, dude

I can destroy this criticism very easily. Focus your attention to the following verses......​

Deut. 9:15

So I turned and came down from the mount, and the mount burned with fire: and the two tables of the covenant were in my two hands.​

This is when Moses first received the Ten Commandments and the Nation of Israel was brought under the Mosaic Law.

1 Kings 8:21

And I have set there a place for the ark, wherein is the covenant of the LORD, which he made with our fathers, when he brought them out of the land of Egypt.

This is when King Solomon finished the First Temple in Israel.

Now, turn your attention to......

Galatians 3: 23-25

But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

This is made even more apparent when reading Hebrews.......

Hebrews 8:6-13

But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Jesus' death is how the 'new Covenant' was signed for Christians. The reason you couldn't understand was because you have neither read the entire text nor have you read it in-context.

​

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)



How is this not an example of "entail" or entailment?

Christians are not under Mosaic Law.

​

 

[Ghost_In_A_Shell]

Christians are not under Mosaic Law.

​

you did not answer my question, how was what I posted not an example of entailment in the bible? and yes mosaic law was used as an justification:




Another newspaper correspondent referred to this passage and then insisted that the law of Moses was written "by the finger of the Almighty." This had to be believed or else "flatly deny the whole of the Bible."8 It is thus clearly implied that God himself not only approved but commanded the possession and buying of slaves. Congressman John C. Weems of Maryland insisted that this passage proved God recognized the "right of [slave] property by purchase."9 Genesis 17:12-13, 27 with its reference to servants "bought with money" was used to further this interpretation. In the midst of the debate over Missouri, one proslavery Missourian used this passage to draw a parallel between slaveholders and the Israelites. The Southern people, he wrote, move like patriarchs of old, at the head of their children and grandchildren, their flocks and their herds, their "bondmen" and "bond maids" to be an inheritance for their children after them," to be "their bond men forever." They cannot go where they are to hold this property by an uncertain tenure.10 To make certain no one missed the point, one pamphleteer explicitly linked the Mosaic law to the Africans. He contended that it was "highly probably that the Africans we enslave are descendants of the very same Heathen that were round about the Israelites." Since these Africans still remained unconverted and since the whites were "at least descended" from the Israelites, then the latter could enslave the former. "Will it be denied," he argued, "that we are entitled to the liberty of enslaving the Africans and the Heathen round about us also?"11


http://www.kingscollege.net/gbrodie/The religious justification of slavery before 1830.pdf

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Coulda sworn I said I didn't........several times. The problem is YOUR definition of slavery is not what is used in the text you cite.
​

https://books.google.com/books/abou...t_Near_Eastern_Law.html?id=y3chSwAACAAJ&hl=en​

Which of the twenty-two scholars is a 'White Supremacist'?

​

And what does this have to do with beating them, organizing how they SOLD, and maintaining them as PROPERTY?

You're not getting the point here you little shytstain

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

you did not answer my question, how was what I posted not an example of entailment in the bible?

Oh, because that was how they structured adoptions and marriages as well as servants.

​

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I believe in god but damn the bible does looking funny n the light

the problem is that motherfukkas aint reading the fukking book.

they go to church, recite like 5 feel good passages and call it day

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Uh right. Matthew 5:17


Ephesians 6:5-8


1 Timothy 6:1-2


Luke 12:42-47


Uh yeah, you can't win this one, pal @Dafunkdoc_Unlimited