Now, here is Daniel’s original post:
“Umm, altho there are verses in the OT which accept slavery;compared to the slavery which was prevelant in the times, the Jewish practice was very liberal. There were all sorts of limitations set upon the owners, far more than in any other period society. Slaves were to be set free after only 6 years of service (1)(and when they left, they did not go empty handed, they had to be given means to make a living, eg. “thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock”)(2), they were not to be mistreated, etc.(3) The term “indentured servant” far better defines Isrealite 'slavery”. In many ways, the Isrealites were strongly anti-slavery."
(1) Incorrect
(2) Incorrect
** 3)** well, it wasn’t “nice” to beat your slaves, but look at Exod 20:20-1 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.” I think I can argue that slaves were very likely mistreated, given that there is apparently no secular punishment for beating a slave so severely that he could not get up for a couple days.
Now, given the quality of his original post, and also the fact that I have frequently (and quite recently) caught him in factual errors, I tend to want some references before I accept as valid every statement that leaves his keyboard. So in his next post, he says “The isrealites of some 3000 years ago were far more liberal & humanitarian to their “servants” than any other culture, and indeed to our very own USA as little as 130 years ago.” Interesting, I think. But is it true? So I ask for some cite to back it up. And I ask, and ask, and ask again. These are my comments to Daniel WRT this topic in the thread:
NOW, the meat of this gripe. Danny-boy is crowing about how he got me to “concede” the point:
I never disputed it! I just asked him to back it up! And along the way, Daniel made several other factual errors, stating that gentile slaves were freed at Jubilee (wrong), stating that Exod 20:20-1 referred to the slave being punished, not the master (also wrong), stating that gentile slaves were “made Jewish” by circumcision and were thus set free after 6 years (again wrong), that the Code of Hammurabi had no laws regarding the fair treatment of slaves (wrong-o, Dan)…is it any blasted wonder I asked him to back his statements up when so many of them are wrong?
Look at his weasel words here: he states that slaves were freed after six years, right? When proven wrong about this, he says “And how does that make me “WRONG” for saying a servant is to be freed after 6 years- i quoted numerous verses to support it? You mean that because those verses, and my statement applies to only some servant, but not all, my statement is WRONG? Come on now, you are being obtuse. The bast you can say is that my statement was overly generalized, and was incorrect when applied to all circumstances. Thus, it was right- just not in every circumstances. I did not say EVERY servant, now did I? You have to play fair too, you know.”
“It is true “slaves were freed after 6 years”- since only 2 slaves being freed by Hebrew Law would make my ststement LITERALLY true- there is no error.”
Suuuure. If I say “cats have no fur,” and it is pointed out to me that cats do indeed have fur, I can just say “oh, I didn’t say every cat. There are a few bald cats, so my statement was correct.” :rolleyes:
ARRRGH!!! Sorry that I am so damn long-winded (it’s the GD training) and lacking obscenity, but I am genuinely irritated by this guy right now. Daniel, you piss me off! Don’t post bad facts in GD! Don’t weasel! Back up your statements! Stop posting like you actually know what you’re talking about when you don’t! Stop misreading every single thing you see! And don’t tell me to be nice!
