81 replies to this topic

[BaseJester]

brvheart, on 20 May 2012 - 06:35 PM, said:

The Bible doesn't say anything about a ton of stuff that is against the law or morally wrong. It's not exhaustive. It's meant to teach you how to fish, not provide the fish.

The Bible is extremely detailed on a lot of issues. I find it incredible that "Don't own people," is intentionally left as an exercise for the reader to work out.

Quote

As for the beating of the slaves, God makes the rules. Who am I to question the creator of the universe on some of his minor policies and ordinances? It's not like everyone wanted to kill their slaves, since then they wouldn't have a slave anymore. This happened like twice, and I'm in no position to comment on the state of the Jewish culture from 2000 BC to 1500 BC.

Obviously, once you accept that a religious text from thousands of years ago is the unquestionable word of God, it carries weight. The point is that it's absurd to believe this, given "God's" position on slavery in the religious text.

[brvheart]

BaseJester, on 21 May 2012 - 04:10 AM, said:

The Bible is extremely detailed on a lot of issues. I find it incredible that "Don't own people," is intentionally left as an exercise for the reader to work out.

Maybe it's because it wasn't as big of a deal then as it is now. Many people sold themselves or family members into slavery in order to provide food for themselves or others. There wasn't social security. Individual freedoms are not guaranteed by the Bible.Also, I disagree with your conclusion based on the little information given to us.

[brvheart]

fighter, on 20 May 2012 - 08:33 PM, said:

So you object to me saying that slavery is fine.However you don't object to me saying 'god thought it fit for us to own slaves as long as you treated them with gentleness, love, and forgiveness'.So the problem with my first post is that it brushed too wide of a stroke? That only certain types of slavery are moral?

The Bible doesn't talk about the morality of slavery. It talks about heart issues in relation to the ongoing practice of slavery.

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on 20 May 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

The OT has pretty clear rules on treatment of slaves and a whole bunch of other things that were going on when it was written in like 1500 BC. What's even crazier is that people still bought and sold humans like 150 years ago, which is more than 3000 years after Exodus was written.However, the NEW testament is very specific on slavery, and has many sections, including the entire book of Philemon, written on how to treat slaves with gentleness, love, and forgiveness.

Cannot decide between facepalm and spit-take.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on 21 May 2012 - 07:13 AM, said:

Cannot decide between facepalm and spit-take.

Sorry.

[DJ Vu]

Slavery totally wouldn't even be a problem if you would just be nice to them.

[brvheart]

DJ Vu, on 21 May 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

Slavery totally wouldn't even be a problem if you would just be nice to them.

I actually don't think "slavery" would be that terrible if we lived in a world where all parties loved each other. Pretty much every single character in "Downton Abbey" is a slave, since they all live on premises serving the Duke or whatever. If people could pay for US citizenship through indentured servitude or slavery, even in the "real" world, I'm sure that millions of people (maybe a billion?) would sign up right now. (And the real world is far from anything resembling love in the employer-employee or slave-master relationships)

[JubilantLankyLad]

And thus many months of sensible sick thread postings were undone in mere moments.

[Essay21]

i've been trying to tell people brvy is insane for years now.

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on 21 May 2012 - 08:49 AM, said:

I actually don't think "slavery" would be that terrible if we lived in a world where all parties loved each other. Pretty much every single character in "Downton Abbey" is a slave, since they all live on premises serving the Duke or whatever. If people could pay for US citizenship through indentured servitude or slavery, even in the "real" world, I'm sure that millions of people (maybe a billion?) would sign up right now. (And the real world is far from anything resembling love in the employer-employee or slave-master relationships)

Ok, fine, you get both.

[brvheart]

Essay21, on 21 May 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

i've been trying to tell people brvy is insane for years now.

But I'm one of those lovable crazies, right? Right, Suited?I think you guys drastically underestimate how many people in Detroit would like to work for a boss that was loving/nice to them while providing them with housing/education/food/healthcare/other stuff around a rich person's house. That isn't even considering the millions of people starving and dying from various diseases around the world.Don't even try to say that I'm suggesting that I'm pro-slavery, because I'm not. I'm simply pointing out that with the premise that the master is loving and gentle (in other words, not reality), millions of people would sign up today to have all their basic needs provided to them in exchange for working for some rich dude.

[vbnautilus]

If they are signing up by choice, then its not slavery.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on 21 May 2012 - 10:34 AM, said:

If they are signing up by choice, then its not slavery.

Historically speaking, that is inaccurate.(I'm off to make sure that the Greek language backs me up on that point.)

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on 21 May 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

Historically speaking, that is inaccurate.(I'm off to make sure that the Greek language backs me up on that point.)

Not sure what you think slavery is if the slaves are free to work or not as they please.

[brvheart]

Indentured servants weren't free to work or not either, and it was a choice they made.

[DJ Vu]

vbnautilus, on 17 March 2011 - 03:08 PM, said:

It's funny because we were just talking about this at our atheist meeting the other day. Someone was reading a passage from Mein Kampf about the true meaning of slavery and after we all nodded thoughtfully in agreement Randy pointed out that Christianity was probably the biggest enslavement in history. But we kind of got cut off from the discussion because there was a knock at the door, and crow had to quickly hit the button that automatically flips over all the Mao posters to Dawkins posters. Turned out it was just the cleaning guy, haha, but we never really regained that train of thought.

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on 21 May 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Indentured servants weren't free to work or not either, and it was a choice they made.

Which is what distinguishes them from slaves.

DJ Vu, on 21 May 2012 - 11:45 AM, said:

Haha. That was a good post.

[phlegm]

DJ Vu, on 21 May 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

Slavery totally wouldn't even be a problem if you would just be nice to them.

Finally, someone gets it. Better to eat in slavery than starve in freedom.

[fighter]

phlegm, on 21 May 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Finally, someone gets it. Better to eat in slavery than starve in freedom.

Yep, better to live on your knees then die on your feet.

[phlegm]

fighter, on 21 May 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:

Yep, better to live on your knees then die on your feet.

How the hell does this work?