This verse seems very, very clear to me:

Leviticus: 25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.

The slave owners were allowed to OWN other people and let their children INHERIT those people, they were the slave owners POSSESSION FOREVER (until the slaves died I suppose...) But the people of Israel were to be treated differently, better (not with rigor) they were set apart by God from all other people.

It’s about slavery, it is supposed to be divine inspired as it is written in the Bible, so it was/is God’s opinion and was the law for many generations.

Did God say this as slavery was common in the days of old, and if He would outlaw it the people would ignore all other laws?
Well, but so was homosexuality, sleeping around with other women and picking up sticks on a Sabbath, and God did dare to make very strict rules about all that, usually you got stoned to death for such things.
But then He clearly condones slavery while He could have created strict laws outlawing slavery as well, so if people used God’s law as a guide they would know that slavery would be wrong.
And that the Mosaic laws are not valid today does not help us, as God clearly condoned slavery for many generations, even if that might not be the case today any longer. Humans can change their minds, but Gods rarely do.

So if even God seems to condone slavery, why should we be against slavery? Why would anyone stop treating innocent people as property?
And if I would have been a slave owner not that long ago, I would not feel like a sinner one bit, as God obviously agreed with what I would be doing: the colored slaves were obviously not Israelites, so no problem there. White slaves would have been OK as well, by the way, just no Israelites.



The main point remains God’s opinion about slavery.



This leads me to the following chain of thoughts:

First a few assumptions to start with, similar to those I used a while earlier:
God took the effort to inspire people to write down His message; He must have thought this was important or else He would not even have bothered at all.
The authors of the Bible were willing followers who wanted to know God’s message.
God is all powerful, so He could assist the fallible but willing people to write down His message correctly, and prevent false writings from entering the Bible, as that would destroy His initial effort of sending the people His message and make no sense whatsoever.
The freewill of humans was not violated, as the authors wanted to know God’s Message out of free will.


Is slavery good or bad?

If we assume slavery is bad, we have a conflict as Leviticus: 25:46 agrees with slavery in clear wordings. We need to doubt a few of our earlier assumptions.

Is God all powerful, but not good?
That could explain the verse. God is OK with slavery and inspired the people to write down the verse about slavery. But we think slavery is bad, so God is bad. But than God is not worth worshiping at all and needs to be feared only.

Is God good, but not all powerful?
That could explain the verse. God is against slavery but the verse slipped in beyond God’s control, perhaps sneaked in by a slave owner. Perhaps we could still worship an imperfect but good God, but we surely would need to think for ourselves now, as God can be wrong about things and certainly not everything in the Bible needs to be true as at least one verse is wrong.

How can God be good, AND all powerful, AND the verse divine inspired?
That does not seem to be possible?

God can be all powerful, but then He can’t be good.
God can be good, but then He can’t be all powerful.

If God is good, He is obviously not powerful enough to get His message through correctly and completely or else that verse about slavery would not have ended up in the Bible.
Then how do we know what other verses in the Bible are divine inspired and what verses not?
Is only that single verse wrong?
Is only part of the Bible divine inspired?
But if only part is divine inspired, how do we know what part? As God didn’t manage to inspire His message correctly, He might also not be powerful enough to guide the readers of today with His Holy Spirit?
So how will we ever be able to learn the true God?

Or is perhaps nothing in the Bible divine inspired?
Does the Bible only reflect the culture and opinion of the people who wrote it?
If the Bible is not divine inspired, what reasons are left to assume the existence of the God mentioned in that Bible?


Or God exists, is good AND all powerful, THUS slavery must be good?
And we are simply wrong?

One last explanation could be that the verse is to be taken as a metaphor, but what metaphor should that be in that case? And would you not agree that this verse, even if it would be meant to be a metaphor, gives a very strong misleading impression of supporting slavery, leading to abuse? So that would still mean that God would not have been able to convey His message correctly, OR that God would be bad and had done so on purpose?


So I end up with three explanations:

Slavery is bad and God is all powerful but bad.
At least one part of the Bible is divine inspired, but not everything needs to be divine inspired depending on the decisions of God. An evil God might decide to leave a few things up to the people themselves just for the fun of confusion and/or inspire to write untrue verses. There is nothing left for us to do but fear this evil God and hope He will not torture us for His fun.

Slavery is bad, God is good but not all powerful.
At least one part of the Bible is NOT divine inspired and perhaps nothing at all is divine inspired. But this will make the idea of God as creator of all a bit shaky, as God was able to create a tremendous universe with 70 trillion stars in it, managed to design our bodies, brains and all, but fails to be able to communicate properly with us. And if God could not communicate at the time of the creation of the Bible, why should He be able to guide us now, reading that same flawed Bible?

Slavery is good, God is good and all powerful.
The Bible is completely divine inspired and we falsely think slavery is wrong. By the way, this will lead to an avalanche of other conclusions besides the ‘slavery is good’ one.


Where do I go wrong here?

I don't see many reactions to this one, so maybe everybody agrees?
Or perhaps there is just too much to read, so here again the short version:

Leviticus: 25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.


Is slavery good or bad?


Slavery is bad and God is all powerful but bad.
At least one part of the Bible is divine inspired, but not everything needs to be divine inspired depending on the decisions of God. An evil God might decide to leave a few things up to the people themselves just for the fun of confusion and/or inspire to write untrue verses. There is nothing left for us to do but fear this evil God and hope He will not torture us for His fun.

Slavery is bad, God is good but not all powerful.
At least one part of the Bible is NOT divine inspired and perhaps nothing at all is divine inspired. But this will make the idea of God as creator of all a bit shaky, as God was able to create a tremendous universe with 70 trillion stars in it, managed to design our bodies, brains and all, but fails to be able to communicate properly with us. And if God could not communicate at the time of the creation of the Bible, why should He be able to guide us now, reading that same flawed Bible?

Slavery is good, God is good and all powerful.
The Bible is completely divine inspired and we falsely think slavery is wrong. By the way, this will lead to an avalanche of other conclusions besides the ‘slavery is good’ one.


Where do I go wrong here?

One last attempt with a short-short version:

Leviticus: 25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.


If God is all powerful and good, than obviously slavery is good.

If slavery is not good, than God can't be good, OR God can't be all powerful.



What are your thoughts?

Harrie wrote (View Post): › Where do I go wrong here?

Don't jump into conclusions. Read in context. Take account of cultural context as applicable.

Do you know what the positives and negatives were (of being a slave) in that setting? can you think of any positives?

The horse has bolted. However, God regulated this man-made situation, what/how?

You seem to champion science... good! Now take your emotions out of the equation and objectively re-read the whole chapter and book (if possible).

Thanks for responding Oxy, I nearly gave up.

Quote: › “Don't jump into conclusions. Read in context. Take account of cultural context as applicable.”

That I have explained already in my very first post: “Did God say this as slavery was common in the days of old, and if He would outlaw it the people would ignore all other laws?
Well, but so was homosexuality, sleeping around with other women and picking up sticks on a Sabbath, and God DID dare to make very strict rules about all that, usually you got stoned to death for such things.
But then He clearly condones slavery while He could have created strict laws outlawing slavery as well, so if people used God’s law as a guide they would know that slavery would be wrong.
And that the Mosaic laws are not valid today does not help us, as God clearly condoned slavery for many generations, even if that might not be the case today any longer. Humans can change their minds, but Gods rarely do.”

Quote: › “Do you know what the positives and negatives were (of being a slave) in that setting? can you think of any positives?’

I’m not discussing here if slavery is good or bad, only the consequences of those two views in the light of the Bible.

It is actually quite simple: do YOU consider slavery good or bad?

Keep in mind that ‘slavery’ here does mean being owned by someone else:

“(...) And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever(...)”


My question still stands: where do I go wrong and why?

Harrie,

Quote: › My question still stands: where do I go wrong and why?

By not understanding the cultural norms of that time. You are clearly ignoring the benefits of slavery as outlined in the bible and are judging that by what you have seen in colonial America and around the world in these times.

Quote: › “By not understanding the cultural norms of that time.”

And all that I have explained already in my very first post and in my reply to oxy as well: “Did God say this as slavery was common in the days of old,”

I might ad: why would God inspire people to write down something that simply confirms the culture of the time and place?
And why would God confirm something if He thought it was wrong, even if that would be normal in that culture?
If God thought slavery would be wrong, would He ever had made a law as the one I quoted?
Isn’t God’s message meant to be a guidance?

So the main question is: do you agree that God tells us in this verse that slavery is no problem at all? That you may take slaves as a possession? Can we agree on that?

Quote: › “You are clearly ignoring the benefits of slavery as outlined in the bible and are judging that by what you have seen in colonial America and around the world in these times.”

I am talking about humans, being the property of another human:

Quote: › “(...) And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever(...)”

Do you desire to be someone’s property forever, an inheritance for the slave owner children? I can’t see any benefit in being somebody else his property, EVER, but that is not my point this time. I do want to make sure we are talking about the same definition of slavery: being the property of someone. Do we agree about that?


And the next question I ask you is if you think slavery is good or bad?

But I think I distilled your position: you seem to agree with slavery? (“You are clearly ignoring the benefits of slavery as outlined in the bible”)

And that is indeed the only position that does not lead to questioning God’s all powerfulness or goodness. I guess I simply don’t understand how slavery can ever be right, but at this moment that is not the point.

Slavery is good and I am wrong in thinking slavery is bad, don’t you agree?

Harrie,

Quote: › “Did God say this as slavery was common in the days of old,”

There Harrie, I took your bait.

Yes God sought to reform the practice by giving strict laws that took care of the slave.

Quote: › why would God inspire people to write down something that simply confirms the culture of the time and place?

I don't think it confirms the culture but tries to REFORM the practice.

Quote: › So the main question is: do you agree that God tells us in this verse that slavery is no problem at all? That you may take slaves as a possession? Can we agree on that?

Slavery in the bible is NOT what you think it was. Most people sold themselves into slavery because they were poor.

Manstealers were to be stoned to death if caught. See Exodus 21:16

16 “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.

Quote: › I am talking about humans, being the property of another human:

We are all just social animals Harrie. Do you own a dog?

Quote: › Do you desire to be someone’s property forever, an inheritance for the slave owner children?

You never had a devotion to anyone?

A devotion strong enough to commit yourself to that person?

Quote: › I do want to make sure we are talking about the same definition of slavery: being the property of someone. Do we agree about that?

No, we are not in agreement.

Many, many slaves sold themselves into slavery.

You seem to believe that these people were stolen or taken against their will. Most were not.

Quote: › But I think I distilled your position: you seem to agree with slavery? (“You are clearly ignoring the benefits of slavery as outlined in the bible”)

Distill it all you want. There were many benefits to slavery as described in the bible.

You are just ignoring them because you think that slavery in the bible was the same thing as slavery in colonial America. It most definitely was not.

Quote: › Slavery is good and I am wrong in thinking slavery is bad, don’t you agree?

HARRIE, slavery had its benefits. Why do you insist it was so totally wrong? You don't even understand how slavery was conducted then.

And BTW, servitude is a better translation of the word. No one was forced to become a slave by another in ancient Israel.

Try this site:

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html

Harrie wrote (View Post): › “Did God say this as slavery was common in the days of old, and if He would outlaw it the people would ignore all other laws? Well, but so was homosexuality, sleeping around with other women and picking up sticks on a Sabbath, and God DID dare to make very strict rules about all that, usually you got stoned to death for such things. But then He clearly condones slavery while He could have created strict laws outlawing slavery as well, so if people used God’s law as a guide they would know that slavery would be wrong.

I have already answered this actually. I said that it was a man-made situation, but that God regulated it. You should read Leviticus with the suggested method, I don't believe you have.

You might care to consider transposing the situation to today's cultural values, we still have both, human rights and slavery in downtown America. I could suggest that the recent economic downturn was partly the result of people enslaving themselves to the banks.

Rerun and Oxy:

I hope you don’t mind I combine my response as you had similar posts?
If you still like to see some specific questions answered I will do so.

You both claim again that God simply regulated common practices of the culture of the day. Then why did God explicitly outlaw several other common practices like homosexual behavior and numerous other practices and even picking up sticks on a Sabbath, but did NOT do so regarding slavery?
What is more important: picking up sticks on a Sabbath for a fire, OR slavery?
Isn’t the Bible supposed to be a guide?
How will people ever learn they do something wrong if God is strict about all those other practices to the point of stoning, but tells the people they may own slaves?
And I don’t think the excuse used for slavery (race, color, belief, political view, nation or tribe, whatever) is important, what matters is that human beings were considered the PROPERTY of someone else:

“Leviticus: 25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.”

Some rhetorical questions first:

What does the word ‘take’ mean?
What does the word ‘inheritance’ mean?
What does the word ‘possession’ mean?
What does the word ‘bondmen’ mean?
What does the word ‘for ever’ mean?

Sure, there might have been a few masochistic slaves who got off on this, but do you think in general and in all honesty, that the people in the above described situation were volunteers and free to leave if they wanted? In other words: is that a job description or about slavery?

My question, slightly reworded to get to the core of it:

Do you think it is good or bad, if YOU would be somebody else his property for ever and to be an inheritance for the children of YOUR owner? A simple ‘good’ or ‘bad’ would do...

Rerun appears to tentatively lean towards ‘good,’ but I’m still not sure about it as we do not seem to agree about the definition of slavery.

And again: I’m not planning to discus the morality in itself of that view this time, only the consequences of the two possible views.

How about it gentlemen?

Harrie wrote (View Post): › You both claim again that God simply regulated common practices of the culture of the day. Then why did God explicitly outlaw several other common practices like homosexual behavior and numerous other practices and even picking up sticks on a Sabbath, but did NOT do so regarding slavery? What is more important: picking up sticks on a Sabbath for a fire, OR slavery?

Slavery exists because it is an economic condition nevertheless the relationship between master and slave is not without moral guidelines. The slave cannot survive without the master, and the master has enough that he can take on a slave. It is possible for the slave to become rich, and it is possible for the slave to choose to remain a slave despite the choice for freedom.

Regarding working on the Sabbath, even slaves are not exempt from this day of rest. That's good isn't it? Here God commands rather than regulates. That is His choice and wisdom. Not only do Humans needs a day of rest in a week, but it also acknowledges God. How? read Genesis 1 & 2. When someone in the camp disregard this day of rest, what does it do? how does it affect the others? and what is the attitude towards God that is being shown by it? Isn't it disregard? Isn't it disrespect? Isn't it disbelief? Doesn't it pull your neigbour to do the same thing? Doesn't it endanger your neigbour also? The disobedience is public for everyone to see.

Harrie wrote (View Post): › What does the word ‘for ever’ mean?

Its a literary device, so how do you think it is being used here?

I wish my slave hard-drive would last forever.

Harrie wrote (View Post): › Do you think it is good or bad, if YOU would be somebody else his property for ever and to be an inheritance for the children of YOUR owner? A simple ‘good’ or ‘bad’ would do...

Since the conditions of the arrangement is such that I am not at liberty to say, then... Good.

That is pretty clear:

You both think it is good to be some other human his property for ever and to be the inheritance of your owners children.

And that is indeed the only correct position if God is all powerful.


If God is good and all powerful, then slavery MUST indeed be good.


Although I personally would like to add that I would hate to be the property of another human being and that I have always assumed, to this day, that all other people would hate that too. I still assume that most people do NOT like to be owned by others, and that is why I am still opposed to slavery. I think slavery is wrong: a human being must be free to decide to work for someone or not. I think human beings should never be somebody else's possession.
And therefore I think that if God exists and He is all powerful, then He must be bad. If He exists and is truly good, than He can not be all powerful.


Now, from there we can explore further, if we want to.

For example:

God thinks that women are worth less than men and must submit to men, so that MUST be good too.
God thinks you must beat fools and children, so that MUST be good.
God thinks you may sell your daughter to be a slave, so that MUST be good.

Etc...

Harrie wrote (View Post): › That is pretty clear: Etc...

Pretty shallow thinking Harrie.

is it correct or not?