The Bible Advocates Slavery

Side note 1: Interesting. Side note 2: i thought i already discussed a bit of the NT. I mean, isnt the section where i quoted Jesus, part of the NT? As for my opponents definition for slaver... I agree completely. The word "Slave", has many meanings. But heres the sad part. I also agree that the word "Gay" has multiple meanings too. And this is what my opponent fails to see. Let me just tackle down my opponents many defintions of Slave. I actually did read the article my opponent provided, but alas i fear i do not have enough space to write a proper counter-article. Therefore, i shall address my opponents arguments directly. First, here is an excerpt of Exodus 32:13 from the KJV bible: "Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them..." Where is the term "Slave"? Is the topic of this discussion, "The bible advocates Servants"? Id call my maid a servant. Infact, the definition of Servant, is "A person employed by another"(1). Here is an excerpt from 1 Samuel 17:8: "...[am] not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me." Here is an excerpt from Numbers 32:25: "...saying, Thy servants will do as my lord commandeth." Here is an excerpt from Ruth 3:9: "Who [art] thou? And she answered, I [am] Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou [art] a near kinsman." Here is an excerpt from 1 samuel 28:2: "And David said to Achish, Surely thou shalt know what thy servant can do." Again, the word "Slave" is curiously missing. Is my opponent trying to jumble together the word "Servant", and the word "Slave"? No one here is denying that people, in the old testament, existed, who were under the payment and service of others. "Our agreement on the definition of ‘slave' is: a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another. As you can see, these are completely different views of how slaves were perceived then and now." I agree, since the term "Slave" is missing from these passages. So clearly, these servants were not slaves, as they were addressed as Servants! "OT- Not the case. It was designed to serve the poor. (Lev 25:35-43)" One verse to rule them all, one verse to Trump them: Deuteronomy 20:14. In other words, Slavery wasnt JUST designed to serve the poor. It was also okay to enslave people who you won through warfare. "Slavery was often voluntary and varied (Deut 15:12-15)." I suppose the keyword here is "Often". "Most were limited to 6 years in length" Actually, no. Only hebrew slaves were limited to 6 years in length. Exodus 21:2: "If thou buy an HEBREW servant, six years he shall serve:" Let us not forget Exodus 21:4: "If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's" Lev 25:43 Is god talking about Not enslaving people you Hire. My opponent has utterly failed with this verse: Lev 25:40 "[But] as an hired servant...shall serve thee unto the year of jubile" Lev 25:41 "And [then] shall he depart from thee" Lev 25:42 "For they [are] my servants... they shall not be sold" Lev 25:43 "Thou shalt not rule over him with rigour" As for Lev 25:46, again, utter failure of understanding: "but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour." Only talking about those which are of your bretheren, or in other words, those from Israel. Id like to think that the only human beings who were alive, were Israelites, but i just cant. Im sorry. :( Deut 15:18 has already been answered, bondsmen who were to serve for only 6 years were fellow Hebrews only. As for Ex 21:20,26-27, why did you leave out 21:21? "Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he [is] his money." Exodus 21:21 I rest my case. Again, Deut 15:13 clearly talks about Hebrews: "[And] if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman" Deuteronomy 15:12 What does Lev 25:23 have anything to do with servants being part of god? "The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land [is] mine; for ye [are] strangers and sojourners with me. " Lev 25:23 Where is the word "Slave"? Lev 25:39 is in accordance with Hebrew slavery laws, that is, you cannot kidnap a hebrew to become a slave, you cannot force him to stay after 6 years, etc. Ditto for Lev 25:14, Ex 21:18, and lev 25:49, 53. "Slaves could have own property" Source please? "could prosper and buy own freedom" Only those who sold themselves into slavery. Again, do you have any sources regarding those won in warfare, for example? "maintained any family/property they had before entering into servitude arrangement." Again, source please? A quick note on 2 Samuel 19:17. The word used here is "Servant", strictly because the original Hebrew used wasnt even ebed, or Servant slave. Infact, it was Na'ar, which is translated only to Servant or retainer, someone who is hired. As for Lev 25:47, my argument stands. Those who sold themselves can redeem themselves. The part about obtaining freedom, again, i agree, those who were hebrews, or children of israel, or sold themselves to slavery could easily be freed after a couple years work of service. 1a. Gal 3:11 So, we dont have to follow the ten commandments? Gal 3:19 If the law allows us to recognize sin, how are we recognizing it now, without the law, and furthermore, if it could be done without the law, why wasnt it done before? 1b. http://www.blueletterbible.org... Already posted the source for the original hebrew wording. 1c. God is calling them guests, because the israelites were wrongfully enslaved. 1d. Nope. The word used here is ger, and the strict definition here is either a temporary inhabitant, or an outsider with conceded rights.(2) 1e. Already addressed. 2a. Ive already agreed that there are specific rules that apply to treating a slave. 2b. You havent answered my question. I shall address this after you answer my question. 3c. Okay. 3d. The exact word that is used here, is of one that STEALS a slave, and then sells it. Stealing someone for the explicit purpose of slavery is forbidden as a law. This is why they are being condemned. Not because they are selling slaves, or trading slaves.(3) 3e. "You specifically claimed that Jesus "told the slave to work even harder for his master" in the book of Philemon, which is not true." Thats interesting, because when i read my quote, i couldnt find the word "Pihlemon" at all. Could you possibly highlight were i mention the Book of Philemon? Or have i implied it somewhere? Also, the question you have failed to answer, and i am still waiting on, is the following: Does my opponent consider what the African Americans who were brought to the USA in the 1800s to work in the cotton feilds with no visible freedoms, as slaves? And by slaves, i mean, the definition we both agreed on, to which we are currently debating whether the bible condones it or not. Please, answer it. It is a simple yes or no question. Thank you. Source: 1. http://dictionary.reference.com... 2. http://www.blueletterbible.org... 3. http://www.blueletterbible.org...