Zone1 Another GARBAGE translation is why people believe the LIE that God endorses slavery

[luiza]

Why do you exude hatred? Do you believe in Jesus?

Stupid question . Like asking whether you believe in a fact .
The question is whether you believe in the yarn that is pushed out that he was the Son of the Universe and other associated drivel .

A lovely imaginary yarn and if cultists wish to continue believing , so be it . It does little harm and keeps the Cult largely productive -- they tend to pay taxes and do not overtly sin a great deal .

 

[norwegen]

That's why I'm saying, it's a mistranslation. Most English Bibles are GARBAGE.

Leviticus 25:44-46​

​

Young's Literal Translation​

​

​

44 `And thy man-servant and thy handmaid whom thou hast [are] of the nations who [are] round about you; of them ye buy man-servant and handmaid,
45 and also of the sons of the settlers who are sojourning with you, of them ye buy, and of their families who [are] with you, which they have begotten in your land, and they have been to you for a possession;
46 and ye have taken them for inheritance to your sons after you, to occupy [for] a possession; to the age ye lay service upon them, but upon your brethren, the sons of Israel, one with another, thou dost not rule over him with rigour.

Man-servants and handmaids to possess. That's slavery.

The Israelites owned slaves. Simple truth.

 

[rightwinger]

God wrote the Ten Commandments and never found room for…..Thou shall not hold others in bondage

He found room for honoring himself, coveting your neighbors goods, lying

But slavery did not make the cut

 

[Jessica-stormlover]

I hate to say it but the entire book is opinion from man and was thrown together based on it. Rather it is from a god or not that is the cold truth.

To base any political will on other people based on it is the most insane thing going on in our world today. Slavery is just wrong. There really shouldn't be debate but rich and powerful people that wrote this book chose to throw such evil into it out of their own greed and disrespect for entire groups of people.

 

[K9Buck]

The Israelites owned slaves. Simple truth.

I'm not disputing that but those that did were, apparently, in violation of God's law.

Exodus 21:16

Young's Literal Translation
​

16 `And he who stealeth a man, and hath sold him, and he hath been found in his hand, is certainly put to death.

 

[K9Buck]

God wrote the Ten Commandments and never found room for…..Thou shall not hold others in bondage

He found room for honoring himself, coveting your neighbors goods, lying

But slavery did not make the cut

Thou shall not steal.

 

[Meriweather]

God wrote the Ten Commandments and never found room for…..Thou shall not hold others in bondage

Did you have to be told not to hold others in bondage? If you did have to be told, how surprised were you?

I would also argue it is in the Commandments: Thou shalt not steal.

 

[excalibur]

... buy man-servant and handmaid ... of them ye buy... and ye have taken them for inheritance to your sons after you, to occupy [for] a possession;​

Well, tbh, if you are buying a person what else is it?

And if you leave them as an inheritance they are property.

 

[K9Buck]

I hate to say it but the entire book is opinion from man and was thrown together based on it. Rather it is from a god or not that is the cold truth.

To base any political will on other people based on it is the most insane thing going on in our world today. Slavery is just wrong. There really shouldn't be debate but rich and powerful people that wrote this book chose to throw such evil into it out of their own greed and disrespect for entire groups of people.

There are definite mistranslations but my question is WHY? My guess is $$$$$$.

 

[norwegen]

I'm not disputing that but those that did were, apparently, in violation of God's law.

Exodus 21:16​

​

Young's Literal Translation​

​

16 `And he who stealeth a man, and hath sold him, and he hath been found in his hand, is certainly put to death.

Again, slavery. Stealing a man. Stealing a possession. Slavery. It was Israel's law.

 

[Meriweather]

Well, tbh, if you are buying a person what else is it?

The person would have to sell him/herself. And even then, wouldn't it be indentured servitude?

 

[K9Buck]

Well, tbh, if you are buying a person what else is it?

And if you leave them as an inheritance they are property.

A person who sold themselves into servitude would be required to continue that servitude on behalf of the heir if the person they were serving died before the term of servitude was finished, is my understanding.

 

[K9Buck]

Again, slavery. Stealing a man. Stealing a possession. Slavery. It was Israel's law.

Going by the modern definition of slavery, can you cite evidence that slavery was legal in Israel?

 

[excalibur]

A person who sold themselves into servitude would be required to continue that servitude on behalf of the heir if the person they were serving died before the term of servitude was finished, is my understanding.

A possession. Thus a form of slavery.

However, not chattel slavery as many preachers in the South argued in the antebellum South.

 

[norwegen]

Going by the modern definition of slavery, can you cite evidence that slavery was legal in Israel?

You already cited it.

 

[ReinyDays]

So why did they use the word "slave"? There's a MASSIVE difference between a slave and a servant.

There you are mistaken ... at least in the 16th and 17th Centuries in Western Europe ... servants were part of the real estate ... if you "bought" a 50,000 acre farmstead, you'd have "purchased" the land, the buildings AND the workers who labored in the fields and at the crafts needed to run the fiefdom ... the Manorial (or Feudal) system ...

"Slave" is more of a social class ... and has the exact equilvalance as "servant" ... less than a gentleman freeholder, more than a common hooker ...

 

[K9Buck]

A possession. Thus a form of slavery.

However, not chattel slavery as many preachers in the South argued in the antebellum South.

By that definition every employee in the world is a slave.

 

[K9Buck]

There you are mistaken ... at least in the 16th and 17th Centuries in Western Europe ... servants were part of the real estate ... if you "bought" a 50,000 acre farmstead, you'd have "purchased" the land, the buildings AND the workers who labored in the fields and at the crafts needed to run the fiefdom ... the Manorial (or Feudal) system ...

"Slave" is more of a social class ... and has the exact equilvalance as "servant" ... less than a gentleman freeholder, more than a common hooker ...

Thanks for sharing.

 

[excalibur]

By that definition every employee in the world is a slave.

Ever hear the term 'wage slave'?

But a wage slave can leave anytime they want.

 

[K9Buck]

Ever hear the term 'wage slave'?

But a wage slave can leave anytime they want.

We are all slaves to sin. Have you heard that?