Slavery. The Bible and Quran.

[Mousetrap]

Modern archeology does not attempt to deny anything.  It just provides evidence of what occurred in the past.  For example, there is no evidence of Jewish pottery designs or any other activities in Egypt.  There ARE some suggestions that the Jews spent time in Persia.  The Persian evidence is in the pottery the Jews made when they left. 

They just didn't know where they were, LOL!

Simply because there were no Jews in Egypt.
The people that were in Egypt were Hebrews, who became Israel 400 years after entering Egypt, and who became Israel in 1000 Bc, who became Israel and Judah in 920BC, of who Israel was set in captivity in 721 BC who according to archaeology, never returned, and Judah was taken captive in 605 Bc, out of which only 32 600 returned to Jerusalem 70 years later.
These people became what we call Jews today, who has a lot of Persian, Arab, and Judean cultural influences.
Funny that the archaeologists who dont like the Biblical history, needed the Bible to discover thousands of facts in support to what I just gave you now.

But this for another time.
It would be necessary for me to note that in 1798, Napoleon could find only 23 mentioned cities of the Bible.
And this made the Atheist world shout on how the Bible was a mere story book.
in 1948, over 3 000 topographical places, more than 27 ancient kings, which no one but the Bible knew about, Temple seals, letters on ostracha, inscriptions in mines in Egypt, and thousands more archaeological facts was discovered just as was described in the Bible.

As I said, just for some interesting information.

[Jason78]

Anyway, what I want to know is, if I decide to sell my daughter as described in Exodus 21:7, and she displeases her master (Exodus 21:8);

Do I have to give the money back?

[Baruch]

Anyway, what I want to know is, if I decide to sell my daughter as described in Exodus 21:7, and she displeases her master (Exodus 21:8);

Do I have to give the money back?

If the master makes her pregnant, and he doesn't like the child, then you have to take both of them back ;-)

[Hydra009]

It would be necessary for me to note that in 1798, Napoleon could find only 23 mentioned cities of the Bible.
And this made the Atheist world shout on how the Bible was a mere story book.
in 1948, over 3 000 topographical places, more than 27 ancient kings, which no one but the Bible knew about

If you think that's something, you'd love Marvel comics.  These stories are set in thousands of real places and refer to untold numbers of actual people!

[Mousetrap]

Anyway, what I want to know is, if I decide to sell my daughter as described in Exodus 21:7, and she displeases her master (Exodus 21:8);

Do I have to give the money back?

Well, if the intend was that she were sold to her master with the intend to marry him, or his son, and she does not please him for some or another reason, she is sent back to her father without any compensation to the person who bought her.

And note that all the laws of Israel are still applicable to her, such as if she gets raped, the rapist will be executed, she must remain a virgin, she can not be sold to other nations, she will be free at the year of sabbath.

I do not see any human rights violations here, except that she was sold as a bondwoman with intend of marriage.
Your mind wants to change it into the purchase of a sex slave.

Why?

Do you see how bias you are?
If I were to do that, you would call me a liar!
So, what right do you have to act in this manner?

To prove my point, you did not even read the posts at the beginning of this thread where I already discussed this verse.

Why?

[Mousetrap]

If you think that's something, you'd love Marvel comics.  These stories are set in thousands of real places and refer to untold numbers of actual people!

With this difference.
Marvel are referring to places that exists, which we all know exists.
The Biblical references was the only one, except perhaps Josephus, that mentioned people, cities, villages that was forgotten during the ages.
Your pre-existing atheist Bible criticizers had a field day over the past 150 years, where they claimed many unsupported references as evidence that the Bible was incorrect.
They were all silenced as archaeology unearthed evidence of thousands of places and people.
For one that studied the archaeological discoveries, and Biblical criticism, it looks like a slaughter-field with the corpses of Bible criticizers exposed over 200 years.

Your Marvel argument is also evidence on how you NEED TO PROVE SOMETHING.
Again, Atheism has less credibility than Superman anyhow.

At least Superman is a figment of imagination of a human with powers making him a Super Human.
Some sort of Greek god you would like to compare with YHWH.

The decade old argument atheists uses as a straw man in an attempt to place mythology equal to Christian theism.
what they completely deny, is the fact that I also do not believe in such a god.

Atheists are actually soothing their conscience in this representation.
Ignoring everything History, archaeology, the Biblical authority, and science shows about the origins of everything.
There are libraries filled with information, evidences, and philosophical publications containing descriptions of who this YHWH really is, yet, the Atheist will steer clear from such discussions, and will use the Mythology, Marvel comics, fairy tale argument.

Silly indeed.

[Hydra009]

The Biblical references was the only one, except perhaps Josephus, that mentioned people, cities, villages that was forgotten during the ages.

Lol.  Nice hedging.  Only one - except perhaps another.  I wonder how much further you'd hedge if I wasted more of my time and really delved into the nitty gritty of this claim.

Your pre-existing atheist Bible criticizers had a field day over the past 150 years, where they claimed many unsupported references as evidence that the Bible was incorrect.

Yep.  My Bible criticizers.  Sure, they all croaked long before I was born and we may or may not have had much in common, but the important part is not to address individuals and individual claims but to categorize everyone in Team God or Team Satan and treat the whole thing as an Us vs Them war.

For one that studied the archaeological discoveries, and Biblical criticism, it looks like a slaughter-field with the corpses of Bible criticizers exposed over 200 years.

I'm sure you'd like to believe that.  And thus you do.

Your Marvel argument is also evidence on how you NEED TO PROVE SOMETHING.

And your NEED TO USE ALL CAPS to give the appearance of PROFUNDITY to what would otherwise look like utter bollocks says a lot about you.

Again, Atheism has less credibility than Superman anyhow.

Superman is DC, you uncultured barbarian!

At least Superman is a figment of imagination of a human with powers making him a Super Human.
Some sort of Greek god you would like to compare with YHWH.

Come to think of it, there actually are some parallels.  Dies and comes back to life.  Powerset and characterization that varies depending on the writer.  White for some inexplicable reason.  Boring, yet wildly popular.  I'm sure there are other parallels that I'm missing.

The decade old argument atheists uses as a straw man in an attempt to place mythology equal to Christian theism.

Mythology compared to mythology.  How devious and unfair of me.

There are libraries filled with information, evidences, and philosophical publications containing descriptions of who this YHWH really is, yet, the Atheist will steer clear from such discussions, and will use the Mythology, Marvel comics, fairy tale argument.

I love how your constant refrain is that "the atheist" is some sort of moron who denies the obvious truth of the Bible.  It must be nice to have such a simplistic view of the world.

[Blackleaf]

This guy thinks that the strawman fallacy means "any arguments I don't like." No, that's not what it means. A strawman is when you put words in your opponent's mouth by arguing against a claim your opponent hasn't and wouldn't make. Like a man made of straw, this claim you make up is easily toppled over, making your position seem superior. The fact that I have to explain what a strawman fallacy is shows how inept you really are, Mousedroppings.

[Mousetrap]

This guy thinks that the strawman fallacy means "any arguments I don't like." No, that's not what it means. A strawman is when you put words in your opponent's mouth by arguing against a claim your opponent hasn't and wouldn't make. Like a man made of straw, this claim you make up is easily toppled over, making your position seem superior. The fact that I have to explain what a strawman fallacy is shows how inept you really are, Mousedroppings.

Yes, such as taking a comic and pasting it inside a Bible cover.

STRAWMAN! (Cap locks for appearance of PROFUNDITY)

[Jason78]

I do not see any human rights violations here, except that she was sold as a bondwoman with intend of marriage.

Really?  Is this the way you or your daughter would enjoy being treated?

Your mind wants to change it into the purchase of a sex slave.

Why?

Do you see how bias you are?
If I were to do that, you would call me a liar!
So, what right do you have to act in this manner?

I've got a problem with people being sold as property full stop.   I didn't mention sex. 

And I'm pretty much an expert on what's going on in my own mind and I can assure you that my mind didn't change it to anything.

I don't have to apologise for my behaviour in a fantasy that is happening in your imagination.

To prove my point, you did not even read the posts at the beginning of this thread where I already discussed this verse.

Why?

I did read them.

The bible is still condoning slavery.  And so are you.

[Cavebear]

Really?  Is this the way you or your daughter would enjoy being treated?

I've got a problem with people being sold as property full stop.   I didn't mention sex. 

And I'm pretty much an expert on what's going on in my own mind and I can assure you that my mind didn't change it to anything.

I don't have to apologise for my behaviour in a fantasy that is happening in your imagination.

I did read them.

The bible is still condoning slavery.  And so are you.

I agree.  The bible hasn't been changed about slavery.  Or most of its other nonsense either.

[Baruch]

I agree.  The bible hasn't been changed about slavery.  Or most of its other nonsense either.

The original US Constitution supported slavery.  Burn it.  The amendments from the Civil War were obtained thru duress, they are invalid.

[Cavebear]

The original US Constitution supported slavery.  Burn it.  The amendments from the Civil War were obtained thru duress, they are invalid.

You forget we changed it.  13th Amendment and all that.  When is the last time your bible changed in that way? Yeah, New Testament.  But christians still thought it supported slavery.  And most take it to be literal to this day. 

[Baruch]

You forget we changed it.  13th Amendment and all that.  When is the last time your bible changed in that way? Yeah, New Testament.  But christians still thought it supported slavery.  And most take it to be literal to this day.

We didn't.  New England Hell Spawn did.  Not me, not you ... we weren't alive back then.  I feel no obligation to continue the mistakes of my ancestors ... like revolting against King George III.

[Cavebear]

We didn't.  New England Hell Spawn did.  Not me, not you ... we weren't alive back then.  I feel no obligation to continue the mistakes of my ancestors ... like revolting against King George III.

Are you talking about slavery in the Constitution or slavery in the bible?  You really do have to TRY to be precise in such situations.