How about this one, can you
using the bible show scripturally the bible condemn rape and slavery?
Spoiler alert you cannot. They are not treated as moral issues. that is
your bible there buddy, pretty sick for being the highest level of
morality man has...
Here
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102011251
Let's see what the WT says in the last couple of paragraphs:
The End of Slavery
As is the case with every
Bible-related question, the issue of slavery must be considered in
context. A careful examination of the Scriptures reveals that God
deplores the mistreatment of humans.
Such an examination also reveals
that the kind of slavery practiced by God’s people in the Bible is not
the cruel and abusive slavery that is envisioned by most people today.
And the Bible shows that God will deliver us from all forms of slavery
in due time. Then, all mankind will enjoy true freedom
So let's take that one by one:
the issue of slavery must be considered in
context
The WT bullet point in the article says:
- The maximum time that any Israelite would have to serve as a slave was six years.
Below is an example of context that the WT leaves out. If a person got married whilst he was a slave and had children, he could go free in the 7th year but his wife and children would remain slaves. If he wanted to stay with his family then he would be a slave.
Forever.
Hmmm...either split up the family or be in slavery forever. Why don't the WT highlight that?
Exodus 21: 1-6
1 These are the judicial decisions that you are to convey to them:
2 “If you buy a Hebrew slave,+ he will serve as a slave for six years, but in the seventh year, he will be set free without paying anything.+ 3 If he came by himself, he will go out by himself. If he is the husband of a wife, then his wife must go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children will become her master’s, and he will go out by himself.+ 5 But if the slave should insist and say, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my sons; I do not want to be set free,’+ 6 his master must bring him before the true God. Then he will bring him up against the door or the doorpost, and his master will pierce his ear through with an awl, and he will be his slave for life.
Not very nice is it?
They also leave out the next bit of Exodus 21:7-11.
Why do they? Maybe because if shows how a female:
- Could be sold into slavery by her Dad
- Wouldn't go free after 6 years
- Could be made a concubine (clue - for sex)
- Could be sold on
- Could be given to the master's son as a wife
- Could be taken by the master as another wife.
7 “If a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not go free the same way that a slave man does. 8 If her master is not pleased with her and he does not designate her as a concubine but causes her to be purchased by someone else,* he will not be entitled to sell her to foreigners, for he has betrayed her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he is to grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he takes another wife for himself, the sustenance, the clothing, and the marriage due+ of the first wife are not to be diminished. 11 If he will not render these three things to her, then she is to go free without paying any money.
This is absolutely misogynistic. The girl (that's what we're talking about here - probably about your age A Believer) has no say about being sold into slavery, being made a concubine, sold on, given to his son, taken by the master as a wife.
This is wrong. We know that treating people like this is wrong. That's the context that is missing here.
Let's take a look at another statement in that article:
the kind of slavery practiced by God’s people in the Bible is not
the cruel and abusive slavery that is envisioned by most people today
Another passage they didn't mention.
If you beat your slave and they die there and then, you get punished. But if you beat them and they die a few days later they are not to be avenged - why? Because the slave was brought with the owners money.
Exodus 21:20
20. “If a man strikes his slave man or his slave girl with a stick and that one dies by his hand, that one must be avenged.+ 21 However, if he survives for one or two days, he is not to be avenged, because he is someone bought with his owner’s money.
This is utterley wrong for two reasons.
1. God is allowing beatings. This is acceptable to him. This is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Why is it that we're more imperfect than ever yet know beating a fellow human is wrong. But back then God didn't say beating a fellow human was wrong.
2. Beating someone and they subsequently die after a few days is ok...as they were bought with the owner's money.
Lastly, here's a cheery reminder of how some slaves were acquired by Israel.
By force.
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
10 “If you approach a city to fight against it, you should also announce to it terms of peace.+ 11 If it gives a peaceful answer to you and opens up to you, all the people found there will become yours for forced labor, and they will serve you.+ 12 But if it refuses to make peace with you and instead goes to war with you, you should besiege it, 13 and Jehovah your God will certainly give it into your hand, and you must strike down every male in it with the sword. 14 However, the women, the children, the livestock, and everything that is in the city, all its spoil, you may plunder for yourself,+ and you will eat the spoil of your enemies, which Jehovah your God has given to you.
So they can give this city 2 options.
Option 1:
Open the doors and be our forced labour voluntarily.
Option 2:
Besiege the city. Kill all males and take the women, children and livestoock as plunder.
So A Believer - still feel that the WT gives a balanced view of slavery with all the context?
