Original Sin?

Quote: FrGamble

The entire Bible reads like an anti-slavery epic.

Yeah, no.

"They asked who could question the Word of God when it said, "slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling" (Ephesians 6:5), or "tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect" (Titus 2:9)."

'Slavery was a common practice in antiquity. The Bible stipulates the treatment of slaves, especially in the Old Testament. There are also references to slavery in the New Testament. Male Israelite slaves were to be offered release after seven years of service, with some conditions. Foreign slaves and their posterity became the perpetual property of the owner's family.'

It was a slave driven culture, that's why Jesus
never spoke against it. Pretending the Bible
is an anti-slave epic is patently ridiculous and
silly. It's anything but.

Okay I've taken off the rose-colored glasses and it has helped me to see the problem here.

The concept of slavery immediately invokes the idea of cruelty, injustice, kidnapping, and the mistreatment of human beings solely because they are different and judged inferior. That type of slavery has no place in the Bible as Exodus 21:16 makes painfully clear, "A kidnapper, whether he sells the person or the person is found in his possession shall be put to death." An injunction that is emphasized in the New Testament as well through 1 Tim 1:9-10, "with the understanding the law is meant not for the righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their father or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, sodomites, kidnappers ( andrapodistais aka slave traders), liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching," In fact the disgusting type of slavery we think of, especially as Americans, was not at all common in Jesus' day. The confusion between the meaning of doulous in Greek and ebed in Hebrew is proof of that - it is often translated as slave but also used to denote servant. Some forms of "slavery" are still permitted today, most notably prison. We have all seen the orange jumpers on the side of the road cleaning up the roadways as part of their punishment for crimes. We don't condemn that just as we don't condemn a judge's decision that someone who owes money has to pay, maybe even have their wages garnished.

The form of slavery we see in the Scriptures and in our own day is regulated by the Bible so that those who serve are treated with dignity and respect. This was an important role of the Bible to avoid the very things we all fear; the abuse of power and the relegation of slaves to property. When Job for example is examining his conscience he wonders if this suffering is because of how he has or has not treated his "slaves" : "Had I refused justice to my manservant or to my maidsevrant, when they had a complaint against me, What then should I do when God rises up? What could I answer when He demands an account? Did not He who made me in the belly make him? Did not the some One fashion us in the womb?" (Job 31:13-15)
Deuteronomy has rules talking about slaves/servants which show great compassion, the same type of rules found in the NT that some of you use as proof that the Bible supports slavery (again a misconception about the nature of slavery colored by our current view). Dt. 15:16-17 talks about what to do after your servant has paid their debt or punishment and desires to stay as a part of your family. Dt. 23:15-16 talks about making sure that if a servant escapes from their master, assuming cruelty, you are not to sent them back. There are many more examples of guidelines and rules reminding the Jewish people that they were once slaves and to treat those who find themselves in servitude with compassion and understanding.

Finally in the NT many of these rules are still in place and repeated, but a shift of mentality is already happening because of Christ and His teaching. The entire book of Philemon is an example as is many other passages my favorite being Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there is not male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Padre, would you also concede that taking "God's name in vain" is interpreted incorrectly…

As "God" would not be "God's" name but merely a designation of humans as an entity…? God-damnit! would not be taking God's name in vain as it is not a name but merely a designation

Also, did not taking God's name in vain actually apply to contracts — meaning that contracts made back in B.C. were promised "in the name of God" and failure to perform pursuant thereto would actually be taking God's name in vain by making a promise to do something in God's name and not doing it.

Quote: aceofspades

ANTI-slavery??? Surely you are wearing your rose-colored glasses

"...and we have always been at war with East Asia."

Quote: Nareed

"...and we have always been at war with East Asia."

I thought we were always allies with East Asia
LOLOLOL

Quote: FrGamble

The concept of slavery immediately invokes the idea of cruelty, injustice,

No it doesn't. Even most black slaves were
treated relatively well, unless they tried to
run away. Sick and beaten people don't
make very good workers.

Slavery was a way of life in Biblical times.
It was so ingrained into society it was accepted
without thought. There is no commandment
about it because 'god' was only as smart
as the times he lived in, in the minds of his followers.
There is no commandment about washing your
hands before cooking or eating either. Imagine
the lives that would have saved. How could the
god in peoples imagination in Moses time have
known that, it's impossible. God is only as smart
as the people who invent him.

Quote: Evenbob

No it doesn't.

It should.

Quote:

Even most black slaves were
treated relatively well, unless they tried to
run away. Sick and beaten people don't
make very good workers.

Bob they were forcibly taken from their homeland and families and sold into slavery, all of which is explicitly forbidden by the Bible. You are again making the mistake of thinking this horrific form of slavery is the same as those who were forced to serve as punishment or to pay debts.

Quote:

Slavery was a way of life in Biblical times.
It was so ingrained into society it was accepted
without thought. There is no commandment
about it because 'god' was only as smart
as the times he lived in, in the minds of his followers.
There is no commandment about washing your
hands before cooking or eating either. Imagine
the lives that would have saved. How could the
god in peoples imagination in Moses time have
known that, it's impossible. God is only as smart
as the people who invent him.

Actually there were many commandments about hand washings as there were against eating shellfish and pork and generally doing other things that would make one sick. I have heard many arguments denying Jesus' divinity but this is the first time I have ever heard someone say that because Jesus didn't discover penicillin or build an airplane He must not be God and a mere invention of the minds of the times. What is it that you would like Him to do to show you He was divine - how about raise the dead or heal the sick?

Quote: aceofspades

Padre, would you also concede that taking "God's name in vain" is interpreted incorrectly…

As "God" would not be "God's" name but merely a designation of humans as an entity…? God-damnit! would not be taking God's name in vain as it is not a name but merely a designation

Also, did not taking God's name in vain actually apply to contracts — meaning that contracts made back in B.C. were promised "in the name of God" and failure to perform pursuant thereto would actually be taking God's name in vain by making a promise to do something in God's name and not doing it.

Interesting question and I'm not quite sure I've heard it before. God is indeed a designation we employ as humans to describe the Almighty and is not technically the name of God. YHWH would be the name of God as revealed in the OT who is gradually revealed to be Trinity. The Incarnate 2nd person of the Most Holy Trinity is Jesus. So using these two proper names in vain is certainly breaking that commandment. However, I would also extend it to the more general noun of God as well because it is a general term to mean the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - as least for Christians.

Quote: FrGamble

Interesting question and I'm not quite sure I've heard it before. God is indeed a designation we employ as humans to describe the Almighty and is not technically the name of God. YHWH would be the name of God as revealed in the OT who is gradually revealed to be Trinity. The Incarnate 2nd person of the Most Holy Trinity is Jesus. So using these two proper names in vain is certainly breaking that commandment. However, I would also extend it to the more general noun of God as well because it is a general term to mean the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - as least for Christians.

so you, as a human, extend it - there you go thinking for God again :)
What about my contractual argument?

You got me. If you are referring to God by using the word God and you use it in vain then you are breaking the commandment.

About the contractual thing, which I am not sure I completely understand your question, I will refer you to Jesus who advises, "All you need to say is simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." Mt. 5:37