Multiple Topics - Pick One

*beating slaves*"While this may seem scandalous to our modern Western mindset, Until quite recently, Corporal punishment was the norm, Even in the military for those who were insubordinate to authority. There may have been times when discipline of a disobedient, Lazy, Or rebellious slave was considered necessary, And physical force may have been used. However, If the slave owner did permanent damage (i. E. Damaged an eye or tooth), The slave walked away free, So there was certainly incentive for a master to not be overly harsh in his punishment. . . . It was God putting a limit on mankind’s evil propensities and punishing cruelty and greed, Not God condoning slavery. "https://answersingenesis. Org/bible-questions/feedback-does-bible-encourage-masters-beat-their-slaves/So no, It was not slavery and they were not severely beaten. *boring ears*I explained why in my previous argument. You completely ignored what I said. *passing them on*"Before the Civil War, Slaves and indentured servants were considered personal property, And they or their descendants could be. . . Inherited like any other personalty. "https://memory. Loc. Gov/ammem/awhhtml/awlaw3/slavery. HtmlSo they COULD be inherited. Sure, Christians have owned slaves, But that does not mean that the Bible condoned it. Christians have lied (myself included) but we all know that the Bible doesn't condone that. "Where does it say that, Specifically? "It was implied. Again, These were limits for what they COULD do. The six year service is to give the servants enough time to get back on their feet as well, But at the same time to make it so that they are not trapped in service for life. "Women don't get a 6 year service""If thou buy an Hebrew servant, Six years he shall serve"Yes, It does. It says servant, Not distinguishing between genders like it does in the scripture you're referring to. The "he" simply refers to the human race, Not specifically a man. In the one you're referring to, That is a woman put into the service by her parents. That is different. "They and their offspring belong to the master"Because she was in the master's service when she got married to the man, So she is still in service. I already said this and you ignored it. "Redeemed does not mean freed. Redeemed means her value can be redeemed to her master by selling her to someone else for coin. Forcing a child to work today is not in any way the same thing as a father selling his daughters into slavery or betrothing them for money. "KJV: "her be redeemed"MSG: "her family must buy her back"NIV: "her be redeemed"AMP: "her be redeemed [by her family]"That's just a few translations, But none say she is sold to whomever. The Bible trumps simple commentary. "You don't know where I got the sex thing from, It's from the word betrothed. "Betroth: enter into a formal agreement to marry. They have not been married yet. I have explained below (in the rape section) how sex before marriage was frowned upon, So this means you simply pulled the sex thing out of nowhere because of your own presuppositions. I would also like to point out that the source YOU gave agreed with my point on this. It simply said that by not pleased, He didn't want to marry her. You argued against your point with that one. "daughters part*You gave no evidence of such, So I will ignore this point. "I've looked this up now from several different translations and I do not see anything supporting what you said. It is saying she will be freed as a slave, But released without payment for her services. "KJV: "she go out free without money. "AMP: "then shall she leave free, Without payment of money. "NIV: "she is to go free, Without any payment of money. "MSG: "she goes free, For nothing. "The MSG version here is the clearest one, The others can be interpreted either way. However, This shows that her family didn't have to pay to get her back. "The verse speaks for itself. What do you think smiting with a rod is, Exactly? This say's he can beat the sh*t out of him or her as long as they don't die within a couple days, Because they are his property, His money. "I already proved with the above how this is not true. "Here is an English translation from a Bible site and it's exactly how I read it in KJV, Too. You're wrong. "Deuteronomy 22:28KJV: "If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, Which is not betrothed, And lay hold on her, And lie with her, And they be found. "You're either mistaken or straight up lying. That is the KJV version, Copied and pasted, And it does not mention rape at all. I encourage readers to look it up for yourself to settle the dispute. I can't paste it, But AMP says the same. Deuteronomy 22:25KJV: "But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, And the man force her, And lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die"This specifically mentions FORCE, And then it says that the man ONLY must be killed. So no, In 28 it was not rape and only sex before marriage. **CAPITAL CRIME** "Can you provide any source to support this is ONLY for capital crimes? It doesn't say that. "Of course it doesn't say that, the term "capital crime" did not exist in that time. It says they were brought for trial, Meaning that a committee determined if what they did or did not do was a capital crime and worth punishment. They weren't simply handing out stonings like candy, That would be absurd and there is no indication of that. https://answersingenesis. Org/bible-questions/doesnt-bible-condone-killing-ones-rebellious-child/And AGAIN, This was NOT a commandment, So it does NOT affect society today. "How can God know what will happen before hand if it's not pre-destined to happen? "Pre-determined: determined in advance by divine will or fate. Determine: cause (something) to occur in a particular wayGod does not cause them to do it, So therefore it is not pre-destined. Just because he knows that it will happen does not mean that he causes it. "You can't have free will and know the future. "No one ever said that humans know the future. . . If you're saying that free will can't exist, I just explained above how that is not true. **ANGEL FLOOD**Again, You have failed to respond to the evidence I provided. I never said it was true, I simply said it was a possibility. "What purpose would one have to "not sin", If sin doesn't matter and is forgiven no matter what? "Dodging the consequences of sinning. Duh. No one ever said sin doesn't matter. *Christianity influencing*Your implied end goal is that we must get rid of Christianity to stop those influences. My point is that if we stop Christianity, We must therefore stop ALL other influences because they ALL influencing people. Anything can be interpreted to reader's presuppositions. The President of the United States does that every day with the news. Does that mean we should get rid of the news? No. Should we get rid of Christianity because some people interpret it in a way that suits them? No. Liam Neeson was told that a friend of his was raped by a black man, So he went out looking for a black man to kill. Does that mean we need to stop people from telling their friends they were raped? No. The actions of a few do not determine the mindset of the many. "Why is it unfair for NASA to ask what a person knows? "It is illegal to ask one's religion in an interview. That's common knowledge. "Someone who doesn't believe in radio active decay, Speed of light, Etc should not be on a team of phycisits designing rockets and satellites that other peoples lives depend on"Literally nowhere in the Bible does it say that these are false. "Or a doctor who believes in magic and thinks the majority consensus of science is wrong? "Again, You have not shown how the Bible rejects the majority of science, And it most certainly does not. ". . . Those are by definition magic. "Then everything is magic, because Christians believe that everything was caused by God. You have not shown any obstructions to society, And I have disproved all of your claims, So I therefore have won the debate.