Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Exodus 21
20 “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged.
21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money."
-------------------------------------------
Since you're determined to be deliberately obtuse I'll spell it out for you, which of those laws is claimed to be from a being with limitless knowledge and power?
Now which of them in any objective sense tries to eradicate slavery?
Try to address the content now instead of using ad hominem and dishonest non-sequiturs, I'm sure you have something approaching intellectual objectivity in you if you really try. I'll bullet point it for you...
1. Either God endorsed slavery and beating them to death in the bible.
2. Or God made a mistake in the bible (though how you can trust any of it then is hard to see)
3 Or humans misrepresented God and the again it's hard to see how any of it can be trusted (as representative of an omniscient deity).
4 Or there is no God and biblical errancy and moral turpitude is simply indicative of the fallibility of evolved apes, and their first attempts at morality and 'science'.
Occam's razor might be useful here if you understood it, and had enough objectivity to apply it.
"looks like your constitution doesn't quite ban slavery in all cases. It's right there in your text. There exists an exception."
"My constitution"? I don't live in the USA, and I clearly played no part in writing the 13th amendment to the constitution. Now I know you love to deliberately and dishonestly miss the point, whilst you endlessly "EXPLAIN" what the bible means, in direct contradiction of what it actually says.
However the point of my post was how easy it was for mere humans to write a law eradicating slavery, and yet religious apologists like yourself twist and turn and tap dance trying to pretend that laws given by an omniscient omnipotent deity could only manage to endorse buying and owning other humans, and beating them as long as they didn't die within 48 hours, as if this is the best we can expect in laws purportedly given directly to humans by a deity with limitless knowledge and power, that you claim wants universal love, and a moratorium on slavery.
You simply must have lower moral expectations and standards than me I'm afraid. As i would be appalled at human laws that endorsed slavery so blatantly, let alone coming as christians claim they do from a deity with limitless knowledge and power.
I'd have some respect if you showed some angst, and a little cognitive dissonance, or maybe the occasional I simply don't know why the bible endorses slavery. Sadly all you've got is the same tired old line in sententious flimflam, that is as intellectually lazy as it is insulting to anyone with an ounce of objectivity and intelligence.
Exodus 21
20 “When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged.
21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money."
Whatever could God have meant by that? Or are you claiming Mosaic law did not come from God? So the ten commandments are what then? Just archaic human laws, it's a real puzzle alright...
"However the point of my post was how easy it was for mere humans to write a law eradicating slavery,"
The law you pointed to doesn't even eradicate slavery. It regulates its use. Let's tackle your contention with Exodus 21:20-21. Look just a few verses earlier. in Verses 12 to 13. It's exactly like 20 to 21. 12-13 deals with free men. and 20-21 deals with slaves. Strange how they're equivalent. It's almost like God was telling us that slaves and free men have equal rights.
Verse 12-13 . "Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death. But if he did not lie in wait for him, but God let him fall into his hand, then I will appoint for you a place to which he may flee."
Meaning, accidental killing was not punished and the accidental killer would actually be given sanctuary against vengeance from the dead man's relatives.
The key is both verse 13 and 21 deal with accidental killing or accidental injury. Remember the rod mentioned in verse 20 is a common tool used for disciplining and was never meant to be used for lethal purposes. Meaning if a slave did die from the rod, it was intentional and therefore punishment awaited the master.
"The law you pointed to doesn't even eradicate slavery."
It's not perfect, but then humans are not perfect which was my point, it is however a law that stopped humans buying and owning other humans. You are being extremely dishonest in trying to misrepresent the caveat about convicted criminals as a failure. Especially as we can all see that is just an attempt to deflect criticism from the bible's endorsement of slavery, which you seem unable to even acknowledge in any remotely honest way. The fact is that the bible fully endorses slavery, and this is supposed to be laws from a perfectly benevolent deity, with limitless power and knowledge, so it simply doesn't add up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Strange how they're equivalent. It's almost like God was telling us that slaves and free men have equal rights."
No it doesn't, that absurdly stupid sorry, we can also look at the only mention Jesus ever makes of slavery in the bible for context, which is to instruct slaves to obey their masters, if that sound like equal rights to you then you really are muddled. If men can write laws stating plainly that slavery should not be allowed, then we could expect at least that much from a perfectly moral deity, but instead get an emphatic endorsement of slavery.
"Remember the rod mentioned in verse 20 is a common tool used for disciplining and was never meant to be used for lethal purposes. Meaning if a slave did die from the rod, it was intentional and therefore punishment awaited the master."
So you think buying, owning and beating slaves is ok then? I'm afraid I can't agree, and the passages in the bible show it is no use as a moral guide. Your second sentence is a blatantly dishonest misrepresentation of the facts, since the verse was quoted verbatim and says plainly that a slave owner can beat their slaves, even to death as long as they don't die within 48 hours, and what is more it ends by specifically pointing out that the slave owner need not be punished if the slaves dies as the slave is their 'property'.
Here's the quote again for clarity:
" 20"If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21"If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.…"
There is nothing remotely ambiguous there, and it states plainly that slave owner is not to be punished if the slaves survives for a day or two, and again gives the reason quite specifically that the slave is their property. Again if that's your idea of equal rights I shudder to hope you never write or enact any laws.
Which is actually why I tried to put it into context. What is a rod? What was the situation during the time?
The Law in verse 12-13 was simply repeated in 20-21 to apply to slaves, almost as if the author was saying slaves and free men had equal value. Just to clarify, you don't have a problem with verses 12-13?
Re: "Which is actually why I tried to put it into context. What is a rod? What was the situation during the time?"
*grooooooannnnnnn...* Ugh...!
What friggin' DIFFERENCE does it make whether it is a rod... or a whip... or a sledge hammer... or a fly swatter... or even a limp piece of friggin' spaghetti??? And who gives two drops of rat piss about the CONTEXT??? As for the "situation", there is a SLAVE (i.e. A human being who has been taken away from his home and family involuntarily and SOLD to another human being as a piece of property and forced to work without compensation) and that slave is OWNED by a MASTER (i.e. A "human being" who PURCHASED another human being for the purpose of using purchased human being as a piece of property no differently than a piece of farming machinery.)
Two very simple and straightforward questions:
1. Does the bible condone slavery? (YES.)
2. Is slavery wrong? (YES.)
See how easy that is?
"As for the "situation", there is a SLAVE (i.e. A human being who has been taken away from his home and family involuntarily and SOLD to another human being as a piece of property and forced to work without compensation)"
Is this the type of slavery stated in the Bible? Provided there are these cases but slavery was so widespread and acceptable some people actually opted to be sold into slavery. There's evidence of this in the Bible. Some people even opted to remain slaves than go back to their old lives where they'd have a harder time surviving.
This, my friend, is why context matters. Slavery in biblical times is not the slavery of people because of the color of their skin.
Re: JoC - "This, my friend, is why context matters. Slavery in biblical times is not the slavery of people because of the color of their skin."
Aaaaaaand, I rest my case. Still couldn't provide a straightforward answer to two simple questions. You seem like a fairly intelligent guy, JoC, but you're mind is waaaaay too far gone and warped, dude. I'm out. Somebody else please deal with this guy.
Two very simple and straightforward questions:
2. Is slavery wrong? Yes. But it's not intrinsically wrong. If you see our conversation with Sheldon, the US constitution actually as a qualifier for keeping "slavery" with forced labor. We just call it prison.
1. Does the bible condone slavery? It actually doesn't. You've got to read with context in mind. :)
Joc "Does the bible condone slavery? It actually doesn't. "
"" 20"If a man strikes his male or female ****slave*** with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21"If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for ****he is his property.…****""
21 “Here are other laws you must obey:
2 “If you ***buy a*** Hebrew ****slave*** he shall serve only six years and be freed in the seventh year, and need pay nothing to regain his freedom.
4 But if his master gave him a wife while he was a ***slave,*** and they have sons or daughters, the wife and children shall still ***belong to the master,((( and he shall go out by himself free.
6 then his master shall bring him before the judges and shall publicly bore his ear with an awl, and after that he ****will be a slave forever.***
7 “If a man sells his daughter as a ***slave,*** she shall not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.
Ephesians 6
5 ***Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear and sincerity of heart, just as you would show to Christ.
>>>Do behave....
" Is slavery wrong? Yes. But it's not intrinsically wrong. If you see our conversation with Sheldon, the US constitution actually as a qualifier for keeping "slavery" with forced labor. We just call it prison."
Well I disagree, there is no context when slavery is morally acceptable. As I said I must just have higher moral standards. Imprisonment is not slavery either, that's just more mendacious word games. Prisoners are not bought nor are they owned, they have lost their right to freedom because they broke the law. That is not remotely comparable to buying and owning human beings as property, but your deity apparently couldn't even come close to even that, specifically endorsing slavery over and over in the bible.
You're only looking for a context that allows you to ignore what the texts says in favour of what you want it to mean. You have utterly missed my points again, deliberate?
Simple questions...
1. Is there any context where it is ok for one human to buy and own another human?
2. Is there any context where beating a slave is ok WITH ANYTHING?
3. How can laws given by a perfectly moral deity endorse slavery? (nice easy one there)
4. If men can write laws stating plainly that slavery should not exist why can't a message from a supposedly omniscient deity do any better than emphatically endorsing slavery, and beating slaves, even to death with the pathetic caveat they mustn't die within a day or two of the beating?
5. If all this is somehow code that actually means the complete opposite of what it says, why did Jesus endorse slavery by instructing slaves to obey their masters?
6. In what way do contradictory verses alter the fact that the bible specifically endorses slavery in laws supposedly handed to humans from a deity?
@Sheldon Re: Slavery and JoC
Thank you so very much for that. You are my hero, dude. I wish I had your patience to make those type responses, but I can put up with a person's bullshit for only so long before my "Bullshit-o-meter" pegs out in the red and circuits start to blow. After reading several of JoC's debates, however, I have come to something of a conclusion about the guy. As I have already said, it is obvious he is a fairly intelligent person, and he is very well-versed in manipulating conversations and twisting words/statements. That being said, it basically boils down to one of two things (in my opinion). Either,
A. He is a "professional" apologist who truly and sincerely BELIEVES the bullshit he is spewing and will use any means necessary to sustain his beliefs and convince others he is right.
OR,
B. He is somebody whose sense of humor is even more warped than my own, and he intentionally twists the discussions for the sole purpose of annoying the piss out of people.
Therefore, if A. is correct, then the guy is utterly and completely morally corrupt and totally dishonest, and he is so completely submerged in his delusions there is little to no hope of making him see the reason and logic others place before him. In my mind, he would be the type of guy who would strap on a suicide vest and blow himself up in the middle of a crowded shopping mall for the sake of his cherished beliefs. No... wait... that is not entirely accurate. Actually, HE would be the one to convince OTHERS to do that. He loves himself too much and sees himself as being too valuable to "the cause" to actually sacrifice himself.
However, if B. is correct, then the guy is simply an annoying asshole.
JoC, "my friend", either way, you are good. (Not meant as a compliment, by the way. Just in case anybody wondered.)
JoC,
When Yeshua returns he will rule with an iron rod. He's going to beat the crap out of you, torture everyone, destroy the environment, kill all life, and blow up the planet. He doesn't get punished.
*clap-clap-clap-clap-clap-clap-clap*.... Bravo!... Bravo!... *clap-clap-clap-clap-clap*.... *whistle-whistle*.... Bravo!.... *clap-clap-clap-clap*...
Pardon, but I simply could not contain myself any longer. I just spent the last thirty minutes or so reading the discussion between JoC and Sheldon and a couple of others, and - gentlemen - I am so impressed with JoC that it almost makes my funneled hat go "toot-toot". JoC, you are GOOD, my man. Absolutely amazing. I mean, you must take some type of super-duper flexi-yoga judo classes, because I have not seen ducking, dodging, evading, side-stepping, and bending like that since watching Neo dodge bullets in The Matrix. Almost brings a tear to my eyes. (And I HATE that, because they always leave rust spots.) Sorta makes me wish we had you on the Yellow Brick Road when all those flying monkeys came after us. Man! I bet you could have had those winged apes so disoriented they wouldn't know which way was up and which way was down. They would have been flying into trees and rocks and the ground and each other. That would have been awesome! But I digress... Anyway, everybody thought they had you cornered with the whole slavery thing, huh? ("Is slavery (aka: the owning of another human being as property) right or wrong?") Of course, ANYBODY with any common sense and even a touch of human decency knows the answer to that is, "Slavery is WRONG." But you were not gonna get pinned down that easily. No-sir-ee. You are just way to slick for that. Dang, you tap dance so well you make Gregory Hines look like an amateur. Keep up the good fight, Bro! The Christian faith is counting on you!
You should read the thread where JoC defended the Catholic Church's treatment of Galileo. Mental gymnastics at its best!
@Nyarl. Re: JoC and Galileo
Where is that, Nyarl? I'm always up for a good gymnastics display.
Here
Oh. Thanks, Nyar. Obviously I did not go back far enough in the discussion.
On December 6 American black people celebrated their 152nd year of freedom in America even if they didn't observe it with national observances.
I wasn't going to mention it, as it seemed too similar to the kind of tenuous duplicity religious apologists use during all discussions of the biblical endorsement of slavery. However where it endorses beating a slave to death with a rod only as long as it doesn't die within a day or two, did anyone else think how easily those kind southern christian slave owners could dodge this completely and justify it from any pulpit by insisting it only refers to beating with a ROD? So a whip for instance wouldn't have troubled even this appallingly flimsy law "against" beating slaves to death. Again as long as death didn't occurr within one or two days of the beating of course?
I mean it's not as if all the southern slave owners were Christians is it? Or a whip was ever used instead of a rod?
Sheldon,
Speaking of southern christian slave owners did you know that when the Union army liberated the Natchez, Mississippi, area that about 110,000 freed slaves flooded into Natchez from the surrounding plantations. Instead of being free the Union army rounded them up and put them in a concentration camp in the Devil's Punchbowl depressions. Over 20,000 died from smallpox and other diseases. Conditions were so bad there that they wanted to return to slavery instead of staying in false freedom.
I'd not heard that story, no. Though I fail to see the relevance sorry. Is it because the union army were overwhelmingly Christians, is that the point that Christians thought slavery was ok because their bible specifically endorses it?
Pages