Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook  @actscelerate Google+ 

Alcohol and Slavery
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Nature Boy Florida
Dave Dorsey wrote:
I'm not going to argue with someone who has no clue what he's talking about. There are voluminous scholarly resources available on the difference between biblical slavery and American slavery if you care to educate yourself about it.

Here's an introductory article you can use to get started: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-wrong-say-bible-pro-slavery/


Dave,
I realize you feel you have some type of intellectual and moral superiority over others of us here - for the life of me I can't understand why - but not withstanding your scholarly book you referenced - you would have us believe Moses got angry enough to kill an Egyptian guard - because he was treating his Jewish slave with the utmost care and benevolence.

That seems preposterous to everyone but you.

There were indeed some "moral" slaveowners in biblical times and in Southern US times - and I could pull some examples into a book as well - but to say one form was better than another is idiotic.

And I can already hear your moralizing and feelings of superiority rising to the top - as only a pompous person can do.

But let's face it, you are wrong again.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16338
11/12/19 1:41 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
NBF, I don't think you are the type of person who would intentionally twist and contort my arguments so you could knock down a series of completely unrelated strawmen, so I can only conclude you aren't able to comprehend what I am saying, either because I'm doing a poor job saying it or you're not able to understand it.

Either way, one thing is for sure. If your understanding of my posts in this thread is "Dave thinks Egyptian slavery was cool", there is absolutely no point to me attempting to communicate with you further on this topic. Either you are seriously failing to comprehend or I am seriously failing to communicate, but one of us is making productive conversation impossible. I've made up my mind about who it is and I'm sure you have too.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 12980
11/12/19 1:49 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post THANKS JD! Cojak
I checked and checked I spelled slavery correctly! But then I remember to check the other word, my sister called it Hokyhall. Shocked

'Your' probably not gonna believe this but my face is red. LOL

Yep Bonnie woulda got me! I miss that lady! Wink
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 23039
11/12/19 8:28 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Nature Boy Florida
Dave Dorsey wrote:
NBF, I don't think you are the type of person who would intentionally twist and contort my arguments so you could knock down a series of completely unrelated strawmen, so I can only conclude you aren't able to comprehend what I am saying, either because I'm doing a poor job saying it or you're not able to understand it.

Either way, one thing is for sure. If your understanding of my posts in this thread is "Dave thinks Egyptian slavery was cool", there is absolutely no point to me attempting to communicate with you further on this topic. Either you are seriously failing to comprehend or I am seriously failing to communicate, but one of us is making productive conversation impossible. I've made up my mind about who it is and I'm sure you have too.


Sorry Dave.

Anyone can read the transcripts.

I don't see where I said anywhere that you said Egyptian slavery was cool. Another straw man where you accuse me of being stupid so you can pretend to be the all knowing intellectual here.

You did say slavery in the US was a lot worse than previous forms of slavery. My argument has been that there is nothing new under the sun - slavery and owning other humans has always been just as horrible in all its previous and current incarnations.

I am seriously tired of you treating me like a fool on this forum. You want to put arguments out there - and deride me, and others, when I point out your argument is invalid.

It shouldn't be so.

Let Doyle knw that for many years I enjoyed this forum, but I am tired of YOU and I can not continue here.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16338
11/13/19 6:31 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
NBF, someone once told me that if you give respect you'll get it.

There are many, many areas where I need to grow in grace, but one of them is that I tend to respond in kind. That is not the Christian way. It's not the standard Christ has set for us.

I give you what you give me. I shouldn't do that, because it's not the Christian way, and I acknowledge that as one of many areas where I need to grow. But at a carnal level, that's all I've done in this thread -- and if you can't take it maybe you should take a minute to consider how it feels to others when you give it.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 12980
11/13/19 6:54 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
For the record:

I NEVER said American slavery was worse than previous forms of slavery. That is a total misunderstanding of what I have been saying in this thread. There have been many awful forms of slavery throughout history, some not as bad as American slavery, most as bad or worse.

What I said was that the bondservant slavery that the NT discusses in permissible terms was very different than American chattel slavery. I never said previous slavery was better. I never said Egyptians treated the Hebrew slaves with "the utmost care and benevolence".

If you would take a little time to think through something or ask questions before jumping to conclusions and going on the attack, we might have been able to have a discussion here. Instead you misunderstood my argument and then started launching attacks against me based on your misunderstanding.

Yeah - you're darn right I took serious issue with that and responded in kind.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 12980
11/13/19 8:40 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: THANKS JD! UncleJD
Cojak wrote:
I checked and checked I spelled slavery correctly! But then I remember to check the other word, my sister called it Hokyhall. Shocked

'Your' probably not gonna believe this but my face is red. LOL

Yep Bonnie woulda got me! I miss that lady! Wink


I'd hoped you'd take it well LOL, I miss her to/two/too my friend ... ?
Golf Cart Mafia Capo
Posts: 2705
11/13/19 8:50 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post American slavery .... Mat
American slavery is more in the class of Roman slavery then the "bond servant" we see in the NT. The Romans took captives from the nations they conquered and placed them in generational slavery by force. The bond servant relationship was one of debt and repayment, which we find in the Book of Philemon. In the beginning of the colonization of North America many poor people from England came as bond servants, indentured servitude, to pay off their debts over a period of time. The African slaves were not bond servants, they were made property by force, as were their offspring.

I have one thing to say - "I AM SPARTACUS."

Mat
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1741
11/13/19 8:59 am


View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Link wrote:
I do not believe the Bible teaches that owning slaves was a sin or that Isaac or Philemon were sinners for owning slaves. I know this is not a popular position.

So long as biblical slavery is properly understood, I'm not sure this is actually that unpopular a position. Or unpopular, maybe, but not regarded as incorrect in orthodox circles.

It's when this view of biblical slavery and the permissibility thereof is projected onto a very cruel and different type of slavery that we start to have problems (and I'm not saying that you're doing that; in fact, I'm sure you're not).

Under the Law, antebellum slaveowners would have been put to death (Exodus 21:16, go to the ESV for the most precise translation). I am not advocating for that position, but those who would go to the Bible for support of American chattel slavery will not find themselves on solid ground.


My understanding is that this would apply if someone went off and kidnapped someone, not, like they did back then, if they captured a city in battle and took the slaves or bought slaves from foreign nations. (I'm not sure if Israel would capture male slaves other than the Gibeah incident. Female virgin captives from more distant nations, not part of the seven nations, were allowed.

There were a lot of things about southern slavery that were probably quite different from Biblical scenarios-- like bringing them over for weeks locked into filthy death ships that reaked of dead bodies. US slavery was race based or turned into that. The Torah also freed slaves if the owner injured a slaves eye or tooth.

I haven't heard about southern slave owners going over and kidnapping people from Africa, and I actually haven't heard that there are historical accounts of the English doing it, but I am not expert. My understanding is that they purchased them from slaveowners in Africa.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11180
11/16/19 12:30 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Link wrote:
I do not believe the Bible teaches that owning slaves was a sin or that Isaac or Philemon were sinners for owning slaves. I know this is not a popular position.

So long as biblical slavery is properly understood, I'm not sure this is actually that unpopular a position. Or unpopular, maybe, but not regarded as incorrect in orthodox circles.

It's when this view of biblical slavery and the permissibility thereof is projected onto a very cruel and different type of slavery that we start to have problems (and I'm not saying that you're doing that; in fact, I'm sure you're not).

Under the Law, antebellum slaveowners would have been put to death (Exodus 21:16, go to the ESV for the most precise translation). I am not advocating for that position, but those who would go to the Bible for support of American chattel slavery will not find themselves on solid ground.


My understanding is that this would apply if someone went off and kidnapped someone, not, like they did back then, if they captured a city in battle and took the slaves or bought slaves from foreign nations. (I'm not sure if Israel would capture male slaves other than the Gibeah incident. Female virgin captives from more distant nations, not part of the seven nations, were allowed.

There were a lot of things about southern slavery that were probably quite different from Biblical scenarios-- like bringing them over for weeks locked into filthy death ships that reaked of dead bodies. US slavery was race based or turned into that. The Torah also freed slaves if the owner injured a slaves eye or tooth.

I haven't heard about southern slave owners going over and kidnapping people from Africa, and I actually haven't heard that there are historical accounts of the English doing it, but I am not expert. My understanding is that they purchased them from slaveowners in Africa.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11180
11/16/19 12:30 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
From what I understand of Old Testament law, Hebrew male slaves were held for life. Hebrew male slaves were held for 7 years. Hebrew female slaves were permanently owned. But a man could marry his slave, and then she would be a wife/concubine. (That's an interpretation of concubine, but it seems reasonable.)

A freed male Hebrew slave was to be sent away with some prescribed goods, not empty-handed.

Hebrews could get into the Hebrew slavery system as a way of repaying debt, including debts from stealing that a judge would enforce. Btw, isn't this better than our prison system, since the victim gets compensation and there is a maximum 7 year sentence? Having to work a farm 7 years (max) is less horrifying than some of the horror stories we hear about prison.

A slaveowner could beat a slave, but had to let the slave go free if he knocked out an eye or tooth. A slaveowner could give a Hebrew male slave a female slave as a wife. If he decided to go free after his seven years were up, the master kept his wife and children. I am assuming male Hebrew children would be freed after seven years. If he decided to remain a slave, he could. His master would drive an aul through his ear. That way he could stay with his wife and children. I'd imagine some clever slave-owners would set slaves up with women for this reason.

If I recall correctly, masters were supposed to take redemption money for Hebrew slaves.

Foreign female virgins from distant nations (not the seven nations) could be taken as slaves if their cities were defeated in battle. If a man saw one who was beautiful, he could take her as his wife after a mourning ritual. (Was it forbidden to marry unattractive ones?)

Hebrews were not allowed to turn slaves over harass escaped slaves and drag them back to their masters. I would imagine the masters had to hunt them down like Shimei tried to do and violated his travel restrictions Solomon put on him for cursing David. This is very different from some of the laws in the South.

This provision made slavery almost voluntary in a way.

In the New Testament, Philemon loved the brethren. He was also a slave-owner. Paul wrote to talk him out of one of his slaves who had run away, Philemon.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11180
11/16/19 2:27 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: THANKS JD! Cojak
UncleJD wrote:
... I miss her to/two/too my friend ... ?


Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile

Smiling is good in the best and worst of times. Even in a serious discussion. Funny that, I can remember seeing church members get fighting mad over VERY SERIOUS things like 'women wearing pants or 'trimming' their hair. As a child it was confusing to see & hear Christians 'at each other's throats.

Slavery was/is a VERY SERIOUS subject. It is understandable it can make for heated discussions due to it's effect on our country, but we can still be Christlike, God is good and Christ is our SALVATION. That makes me smile Smile
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 23039
11/16/19 11:14 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Resident Skeptic
Link wrote:
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Link wrote:
I do not believe the Bible teaches that owning slaves was a sin or that Isaac or Philemon were sinners for owning slaves. I know this is not a popular position.

So long as biblical slavery is properly understood, I'm not sure this is actually that unpopular a position. Or unpopular, maybe, but not regarded as incorrect in orthodox circles.

It's when this view of biblical slavery and the permissibility thereof is projected onto a very cruel and different type of slavery that we start to have problems (and I'm not saying that you're doing that; in fact, I'm sure you're not).

Under the Law, antebellum slaveowners would have been put to death (Exodus 21:16, go to the ESV for the most precise translation). I am not advocating for that position, but those who would go to the Bible for support of American chattel slavery will not find themselves on solid ground.


My understanding is that this would apply if someone went off and kidnapped someone, not, like they did back then, if they captured a city in battle and took the slaves or bought slaves from foreign nations. (I'm not sure if Israel would capture male slaves other than the Gibeah incident. Female virgin captives from more distant nations, not part of the seven nations, were allowed.

There were a lot of things about southern slavery that were probably quite different from Biblical scenarios-- like bringing them over for weeks locked into filthy death ships that reaked of dead bodies. US slavery was race based or turned into that. The Torah also freed slaves if the owner injured a slaves eye or tooth.

I haven't heard about southern slave owners going over and kidnapping people from Africa, and I actually haven't heard that there are historical accounts of the English doing it, but I am not expert. My understanding is that they purchased them from slaveowners in Africa.



You are correct. One tribe conquers another tribe, makes slaves of them, sells them. It has been happening since the dawn of history and on every continent. Why slaves in the American south get so much attention is beyond me.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7958
11/16/19 2:21 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Resident Skeptic wrote:
Link wrote:
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Link wrote:
I do not believe the Bible teaches that owning slaves was a sin or that Isaac or Philemon were sinners for owning slaves. I know this is not a popular position.

So long as biblical slavery is properly understood, I'm not sure this is actually that unpopular a position. Or unpopular, maybe, but not regarded as incorrect in orthodox circles.

It's when this view of biblical slavery and the permissibility thereof is projected onto a very cruel and different type of slavery that we start to have problems (and I'm not saying that you're doing that; in fact, I'm sure you're not).

Under the Law, antebellum slaveowners would have been put to death (Exodus 21:16, go to the ESV for the most precise translation). I am not advocating for that position, but those who would go to the Bible for support of American chattel slavery will not find themselves on solid ground.


My understanding is that this would apply if someone went off and kidnapped someone, not, like they did back then, if they captured a city in battle and took the slaves or bought slaves from foreign nations. (I'm not sure if Israel would capture male slaves other than the Gibeah incident. Female virgin captives from more distant nations, not part of the seven nations, were allowed.

There were a lot of things about southern slavery that were probably quite different from Biblical scenarios-- like bringing them over for weeks locked into filthy death ships that reaked of dead bodies. US slavery was race based or turned into that. The Torah also freed slaves if the owner injured a slaves eye or tooth.

I haven't heard about southern slave owners going over and kidnapping people from Africa, and I actually haven't heard that there are historical accounts of the English doing it, but I am not expert. My understanding is that they purchased them from slaveowners in Africa.



You are correct. One tribe conquers another tribe, makes slaves of them, sells them. It has been happening since the dawn of history and on every continent. Why slaves in the American south get so much attention is beyond me.


It's probably because you grew up in the United States and heard a lot of talk about US social issues as opposed to those of other countries.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11180
11/16/19 5:19 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Resident Skeptic
Link wrote:
Resident Skeptic wrote:
Link wrote:
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Link wrote:
I do not believe the Bible teaches that owning slaves was a sin or that Isaac or Philemon were sinners for owning slaves. I know this is not a popular position.

So long as biblical slavery is properly understood, I'm not sure this is actually that unpopular a position. Or unpopular, maybe, but not regarded as incorrect in orthodox circles.

It's when this view of biblical slavery and the permissibility thereof is projected onto a very cruel and different type of slavery that we start to have problems (and I'm not saying that you're doing that; in fact, I'm sure you're not).

Under the Law, antebellum slaveowners would have been put to death (Exodus 21:16, go to the ESV for the most precise translation). I am not advocating for that position, but those who would go to the Bible for support of American chattel slavery will not find themselves on solid ground.


My understanding is that this would apply if someone went off and kidnapped someone, not, like they did back then, if they captured a city in battle and took the slaves or bought slaves from foreign nations. (I'm not sure if Israel would capture male slaves other than the Gibeah incident. Female virgin captives from more distant nations, not part of the seven nations, were allowed.

There were a lot of things about southern slavery that were probably quite different from Biblical scenarios-- like bringing them over for weeks locked into filthy death ships that reaked of dead bodies. US slavery was race based or turned into that. The Torah also freed slaves if the owner injured a slaves eye or tooth.

I haven't heard about southern slave owners going over and kidnapping people from Africa, and I actually haven't heard that there are historical accounts of the English doing it, but I am not expert. My understanding is that they purchased them from slaveowners in Africa.



You are correct. One tribe conquers another tribe, makes slaves of them, sells them. It has been happening since the dawn of history and on every continent. Why slaves in the American south get so much attention is beyond me.


It's probably because you grew up in the United States and heard a lot of talk about US social issues as opposed to those of other countries.


That is understandable. What drives me nuts is depictions on movies like "Roots" being portrayed as the norm. I'm completing my Masters in History next month from a Pentecostal university. We studied slavery. There was no white wash. But in the end, there is no doubt our slavery was the most humane in the western hemisphere. Furthermore, only 6% of all slaves shipped to this hemisphere came to the USA. One thing that surprised me was the bargaining power slaves had with their owners. Often, owners had slaves spy on white overseers and report directly back to them concerning the overseers behavior. Overseers were a despised lot by slave and owner alike. I'm convinced most of the rapes that did occur were at the hands of overseers. But there were also slave women who performed "favors" for more privileges. Human nature is the same in every era.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7958
11/16/19 7:37 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.