Love Thy Neighbor as Yourself

[David M]

Good afternoon David,

I can see why you would want to focus on that verse since it superficially seems to cohere with the teachings of Jesus about love for all people. But it completely fails in that regard. The passage that Rose cited shows that the "strangers that sojourned" amongst the Israelites were most certainly NOT treated equally as the Israelites. They could be bought as slaves and never redeemed, whereas the same law says that Israelites could be redeemed. The strangers and their children were subject to perpetual slavery with no hope of redemption. Such a law reveals nothing like "loving them as yourself."

Therefore, it is perfectly clear that the passage you cited either contradicts the other passages or does not mean what you hoped it would mean. In either case, you have not found a solution to the fact that the teachings of the OT are morally inferior to those of the NT.

All the best,

Richard

Hello Richard
I feel like my posts are getting ping-ponged between you and Rose, never mind I will keep on answering. The verse I quoted is the instruction from God and it says what it says and I said that the God's people did not do as they were instructed, so if the law was not kept you have to blame the people and not God.

Regarding the selling of slaves, in response to Rose, I pointed out that Hebrew men were sold as slaves the same as Hebrew women. In answer to your comment, I would like to point out that Hebrews were bought and sold as slaves and it was not jut foreigners (strangers). The stranger who sojourned (lived temporarily) among the Hebrews was to be treated as one of their own and this would not have involved buying and selling them as slaves. Foreigners who were integrated totally into the Hebrew society were possibly bought and sold as slaves the same as the Hebrews were.

The problem is not the buying and selling of slaves, but how the slaves were treated and under God's rules, the slaves were to be treated with respect as all people should respect one another. I have to keep saying it, the problem is with man and NOT God.

All the best

David

[David M]

Hi David,

Those verses in Leviticus only shows how contradictory the Bible is. Yahweh commanded in the laws given to the Hebrews that women be treated as property, and allowed for people to be owned as slaves...that my friend is not treating your neighbor as yourself. No one wants to be the property of another, and no one wants to be denied their human rights, yet over and over again the biblegod dictates that it be so!

Found in the same book of Leviticus a few chapters earlier, we read the way the Hebrews really "loved their neighbors as themselves" according to Yahweh's law.

Lev.25:44-45 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Hello Rose
The two verses we have quoted from Leviticus are not contradictory, but are inclusive. I just replied to Richard's post and I see my posts are getting ping-ponged between you and Richard.

Regarding the stranger who sojourns (lives temporarily) amongst the Hebrews, they were to be treated as one of their own. I have replied to Richard to say that Hebrews were bought and sold as slaves, so that slavery was not restricted to foreigners only. Foreigners who were permanent residents in the land of the Hebrews could be assimilated into the Hebrew culture. Was it better to be a slave to the Hebrews or slaves to the Egyptians? God gave His chosen people instructions regarding both slaves/servants, whether they be Hebrews or foreigners. Whilst the foreigner due to their nationality makes them different from the Hebrews, it does not mean that as people, they were not treated with respect. God often points out to His people that they had been slaves themselves in Egypt and God delivered them and therefore they were not to forget that they had been slaves and not act as the their Egyptian captors treated them.

The problem about understanding the Bible is that it all has to be taken into account and correctly balanced. You might also like to factor into the situation concerning slaves what is recorded in Leviticus 25:10 And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.

The other nations were not subject to the same laws as the Hebrews and they would not have had to release the slaves in the year of Jubilee, so was it better to be a slave to the Hebrews than a slave to a neighboring people?

What about all the slavery that is taking place in the word today? You would be better off talking out against the slavery that is going on in the world today (under man's rule) than trying to make out God is unfair and unjust by allowing slavery to go on amongst the Hebrews.

As I keep saying, if God's people or people in general do not comply with God's instructions, you have to blame man and NOT God.

All the best,

David



Take care,
Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hello Richard
I feel like my posts are getting ping-ponged between you and Rose, never mind I will keep on answering. The verse I quoted is the instruction from God and it says what it says and I said that the God's people did not do as they were instructed, so if the law was not kept you have to blame the people and not God.

Regarding the selling of slaves, in response to Rose, I pointed out that Hebrew men were sold as slaves the same as Hebrew women. In answer to your comment, I would like to point out that Hebrews were bought and sold as slaves and it was not jut foreigners (strangers). The stranger who sojourned (lived temporarily) among the Hebrews was to be treated as one of their own and this would not have involved buying and selling them as slaves. Foreigners who were integrated totally into the Hebrew society were possibly bought and sold as slaves the same as the Hebrews were.

The problem is not the buying and selling of slaves, but how the slaves were treated and under God's rules, the slaves were to be treated with respect as all people should respect one another. I have to keep saying it, the problem is with man and NOT God.

All the best

David

Good morning David,

You did not address the central issue that Rose and I have brought up. The Bible says that strangers could be bought and then they and all their descendents could be kept in perpetual slavery whereas the Hebrew's could not be abused in this way. Is this not a profound difference? How then could we interpret the command to "love the stranger as thyself" to be anything like a command to truly love them? You cannot permanently enslave someone and call it "love."

All the best,

Richard

[Rose]

Hello Rose
The two verses we have quoted from Leviticus are not contradictory, but are inclusive. I just replied to Richard's post and I see my posts are getting ping-ponged between you and Richard.

Regarding the stranger who sojourns (lives temporarily) amongst the Hebrews, they were to be treated as one of their own. I have replied to Richard to say that Hebrews were bought and sold as slaves, so that slavery was not restricted to foreigners only. Foreigners who were permanent residents in the land of the Hebrews could be assimilated into the Hebrew culture. Was it better to be a slave to the Hebrews or slaves to the Egyptians? God gave His chosen people instructions regarding both slaves/servants, whether they be Hebrews or foreigners. Whilst the foreigner due to their nationality makes them different from the Hebrews, it does not mean that as people, they were not treated with respect. God often points out to His people that they had been slaves themselves in Egypt and God delivered them and therefore they were not to forget that they had been slaves and not act as the their Egyptian captors treated them.

The problem about understanding the Bible is that it all has to be taken into account and correctly balanced. You might also like to factor into the situation concerning slaves what is recorded in Leviticus 25:10 And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.

The other nations were not subject to the same laws as the Hebrews and they would not have had to release the slaves in the year of Jubilee, so was it better to be a slave to the Hebrews than a slave to a neighboring people?

What about all the slavery that is taking place in the word today? You would be better off talking out against the slavery that is going on in the world today (under man's rule) than trying to make out God is unfair and unjust by allowing slavery to go on amongst the Hebrews.

As I keep saying, if God's people or people in general do not comply with God's instructions, you have to blame man and NOT God.

All the best,

David

Hello David,

First off the whole point of an "open forum" is that many voices can respond to one post, so I'm not sure why you're complaining about your posts being responded to "ping-ponged" by Richard and myself, or anyone else who wants to jump into the conversation.

The verse you quoted from Lev.25:10 concerning the releasing of slaves in the year of Jubilee ONLY refers to Hebrew slaves, because the following verses 44-45 explicitly say that the slaves of foreigners that live in the land are to be passed down as an inheritance FOREVER...that is by no means treating them as one of their own.

Lev.25:44-45 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession;they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Either Yahweh is contradicting himself, or when he refers to treating others as yourself he is only referring to the Hebrew brethren. The Hebrews did not disobey God's instructions, because under the law they were allowed to not only have slaves but to pass them and their families down forever to their children. What kind of love is that?

Take care,
Rose

[David M]

Hello David,

First off the whole point of an "open forum" is that many voices can respond to one post, so I'm not sure why you're complaining about your posts being responded to "ping-ponged" by Richard and myself, or anyone else who wants to jump into the conversation.

The verse you quoted from Lev.25:10 concerning the releasing of slaves in the year of Jubilee ONLY refers to Hebrew slaves, because the following verses 44-45 explicitly say that the slaves of foreigners that live in the land are to be passed down as an inheritance FOREVER...that is by no means treating them as one of their own.

Lev.25:44-45 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession;they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Either Yahweh is contradicting himself, or when he refers to treating others as yourself he is only referring to the Hebrew brethren. The Hebrews did not disobey God's instructions, because under the law they were allowed to not only have slaves but to pass them and their families down forever to their children. What kind of love is that?

Take care,
Rose

Hello Rose

It is not really a complaint but I feel that I am answering twice as my replies overlap bits get picked out of my posts with hardly any replies to answers I ask.

I see we are collecting all the relevant verses to this subject and again, we have to balance what is said. We are superimposing our own modern-day thinking on past cultures and we are not in a position to ask the people of the time what they thought about the situation. We are all different and the practices you complain about that are recorded in the Bible are continuing today somewhere in the world and what we do not know about is going unreported.

Were the slaves Hebrew or foreign chained so that they could not run away? Slaves/servants were probably grateful for the fact that they were looked after. The problem is not about whether the person was a slave/servant, but how they were treated and you need to produce evidence that the Hebrews did not treat their slaves with respect. A servant as a person has Human Rights even in their capacity as a slave/servant, not that there was a court of human rights the slave/servant could go to unless they appealed to the king or the judge in the land.

Whilst God gave instructions, it was not like the Hebrews were told to be cruel to their slaves. OK, I concede that the foreign slaves might not have been released in the year of jubilee and of course this brings up another set of questions. It is obvious that a slave did not live for ever and therefore the slave could not be passed down as an inheritance for ever. However, if the slave was allowed to marry, the offspring would be brought up in the Hebrew's household and therefore the slaves offspring would be looked after when the parents died. In this case the offspring continued to work in the Hebrew's household.

There is the other situation which applied to Hebrew slaves in that if the slave did not want to be set free, they would give up all rights to be set free.
Exodus 21
2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.
5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.

The above relates to the Hebrew servant but it does not make much difference for the foreign servant and family to be looked after in the same way and treated kindly.

We all know that in any society there are rebels who do not conform to the rules, and there were those amongst the Hebrews that might not have followed the rules. We know the Hebrews did not carry out God's commands and therefore that is why I say that men have to be blamed if they do things that do not follow God's instructions.

All the best

David

[David M]

Good morning David,

You did not address the central issue that Rose and I have brought up. The Bible says that strangers could be bought and then they and all their descendents could be kept in perpetual slavery whereas the Hebrew's could not be abused in this way. Is this not a profound difference? How then could we interpret the command to "love the stranger as thyself" to be anything like a command to truly love them? You cannot permanently enslave someone and call it "love."

All the best,

Richard

Hello Richard
I have answered this point in my response to Rose's response to me.

David

[Rose]

Hello Rose

It is not really a complaint but I feel that I am answering twice as my replies overlap bits get picked out of my posts with hardly any replies to answers I ask.

I see we are collecting all the relevant verses to this subject and again, we have to balance what is said. We are superimposing our own modern-day thinking on past cultures and we are not in a position to ask the people of the time what they thought about the situation. We are all different and the practices you complain about that are recorded in the Bible are continuing today somewhere in the world and what we do not know about is going unreported.

Were the slaves Hebrew or foreign chained so that they could not run away? Slaves/servants were probably grateful for the fact that they were looked after. The problem is not about whether the person was a slave/servant, but how they were treated and you need to produce evidence that the Hebrews did not treat their slaves with respect. A servant as a person has Human Rights even in their capacity as a slave/servant, not that there was a court of human rights the slave/servant could go to unless they appealed to the king or the judge in the land.

Hello David,

Slaves were kept in the same manner as any slave is kept, whether it be the Hebrews who were enslaved to the Egyptians or slaves in early America. Usually if a slave tried to run away he was captured and beaten.

Exo.21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

I'm surprised that you would say that the slaves were grateful for being taken care of. Have you never read any accounts of former slaves in this country, no one is ever grateful to be a slave. Would you want your freedom taken away and to be owned by another human no matter how well they treated you? I think not.

Whilst God gave instructions, it was not like the Hebrews were told to be cruel to their slaves. OK, I concede that the foreign slaves might not have been released in the year of jubilee and of course this brings up another set of questions. It is obvious that a slave did not live for ever and therefore the slave could not be passed down as an inheritance for ever. However, if the slave was allowed to marry, the offspring would be brought up in the Hebrew's household and therefore the slaves offspring would be looked after when the parents died. In this case the offspring continued to work in the Hebrew's household.

The passage says that if a slave bore children in the land then those children could be passed down as an inheritance, the cycle would continue as long as children were born to parents who were slaves which could continue forever. In this manner children would be born into perpetual bondage, preciously what God railed against the Egyptians for doing to the Hebrews.

Lev.25:44-45 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession;they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

There is the other situation which applied to Hebrew slaves in that if the slave did not want to be set free, they would give up all rights to be set free.
Exodus 21
2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.
5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.

The above relates to the Hebrew servant but it does not make much difference for the foreign servant and family to be looked after in the same way and treated kindly.

That's terrible and certainly not loving, to make an individual give up his family in order to be free. His children were created from his body and his wife's, they belong to him not his master. What right does anyone have owning another human being, and what kind of god would allow the Hebrews to participate in such hard-hearted behavior?

Are you telling me that it's okay to own another human being as long as you treat them kindly? What kind of nonsense is that?

We all know that in any society there are rebels who do not conform to the rules, and there were those amongst the Hebrews that might not have followed the rules. We know the Hebrews did not carry out God's commands and therefore that is why I say that men have to be blamed if they do things that do not follow God's instructions.

All the best

David

You still have not addressed the contradiction where on one hand the Hebrews are told by God to love their neighbors as themselves, and on the other hand they are told that they can own other human beings and their offspring forever! What kind of love is that?

What instructions were the Hebrews suppose to follow, loving their neighbors or owning them? God clearly instructed the Hebrews that they could own slaves and their children in perpetuity.

Take care,
Rose

[David M]

Hello David,

Slaves were kept in the same manner as any slave is kept, whether it be the Hebrews who were enslaved to the Egyptians or slaves in early America. Usually if a slave tried to run away he was captured and beaten.

Exo.21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

I'm surprised that you would say that the slaves were grateful for being taken care of. Have you never read any accounts of former slaves in this country, no one is ever grateful to be a slave. Would you want your freedom taken away and to be owned by another human no matter how well they treated you? I think not.

Hello Rose
We have lots of examples to make our separate points and so both are true. The problem lies with human masters. A God-fearing master who loves his neighbor as himself can have servants (slaves) and treat them with respect. These types of masters will be in the minority, but this is the example set for all to follow. Once again, the problem lies with man and if slaves are treated inhumanely then that is the route cause that must be addressed.
The ideal world will not have masters and slaves, but we are not living in an ideal world, because of the problems humans have brought on themselves.

The passage says that if a slave bore children in the land then those children could be passed down as an inheritance, the cycle would continue as long as children were born to parents who were slaves which could continue forever. In this manner children would be born into perpetual bondage, preciously what God railed against the Egyptians for doing to the Hebrews.

Lev.25:44-45 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession;they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

That's terrible and certainly not loving, to make an individual give up his family in order to be free. His children were created from his body and his wife's, they belong to him not his master. What right does anyone have owning another human being, and what kind of god would allow the Hebrews to participate in such hard-hearted behavior?

Are you telling me that it's okay to own another human being as long as you treat them kindly? What kind of nonsense is that?

When a master has provided for a man's family for years whilst as his slave, then the slave has a debt to the master. If the slave could pay off the debt, then the argument might be different. The male slave clearly has a choice and he is not intentionally being made to give up his family. Freedom is bought for a price. Believers have been freed from the penalty of sin and death by the sacrifice of Jesus (who paid the price). It is a price we cannot afford ourselves, and Jesus has paid the price for us.

The ideal situation would have been not to have had slaves (servants), but that was the system of the time. God introduced laws to make masters look after their servants and treat them as themselves within the context of a master-servant relationship. In this sense, the carrying out of that command cannot apply to every situation for then all slaves/servants could claim their freedom and there would be no servants, so what do you do with those who want to have employment as a slave/servant? Working 9 - 5 in this present age in some cases is a form of slavery and the sweat-shops are examples of this.

God gave instructions concerning master and slaves and this was to deal with a culture and society in which masters and slaves were the accepted norm. This is not the society that will exist in God's Kingdom, so whatever our objection to the way God dealt with the problem, the blame is with man and not God. God is working to change that in future and all the problems we are discussing now will be taken away once Jesus hands back the Kingdom to his Heavenly Father.

You still have not addressed the contradiction where on one hand the Hebrews are told by God to love their neighbors as themselves, and on the other hand they are told that they can own other human beings and their offspring forever! What kind of love is that?

What instructions were the Hebrews suppose to follow, loving their neighbors or owning them? God clearly instructed the Hebrews that they could own slaves and their children in perpetuity.

It is a contradiction and I have explained this as a contradiction that must exist as long as there are masters and servants/slaves. Abolish every situation of a master/slave relationship in the world and then apply the "love thy neighbor as thyself" without the restriction of a slave's freedom. So long as there are masters and slaves, then that rule cannot apply to every possible circumstance otherwise an apparent contradiction must exist. This does not prevent those masters who are God-fearing exercising justice and fairness and "loving thy neighbor as thyself" in the context of the basic rules of a master/servant relationship.

It is the same today except that we have written contracts of employment. Since we are paid a weekly/monthly salary, we are paid for our time and we owe our earthly masters nothing, so whenever we want freedom from our jobs, we simply give our notice and go off and seek further employment (slavery). We enslave ourselves within our society. For example, we enslave ourselves to our mortgages if we want to have "restricted freedom" to own a home. Pay the mortgage payments or else forfeit your home. Work for an employer to earn the money to pay the mortgage payments. Are we free to live in this society the way we want to? We are not free to live as we choose; as dictated by Health and Safety laws.

Man's world is full of contradictions and only when God's kingdom is established on earth will all contradictions be taken away.

All the best,

David

[Rose]

Hello Rose
We have lots of examples to make our separate points and so both are true. The problem lies with human masters. A God-fearing master who loves his neighbor as himself can have servants (slaves) and treat them with respect. These types of masters will be in the minority, but this is the example set for all to follow. Once again, the problem lies with man and if slaves are treated inhumanely then that is the route cause that must be addressed.
The ideal world will not have masters and slaves, but we are not living in an ideal world, because of the problems humans have brought on themselves.

Hello David,

There is no way a man can love his neighbor as himself while owning his neighbor as a slave! A person cannot have full respect for another human if he owns him.Given a choice no one wants to loose their freedom and be the slave of another no matter how kind a master might be, because if a master was truly that compassionate he would not have slaves in the first place, but rather have hired servants instead.

When a master has provided for a man's family for years whilst as his slave, then the slave has a debt to the master. If the slave could pay off the debt, then the argument might be different. The male slave clearly has a choice and he is not intentionally being made to give up his family. Freedom is bought for a price. Believers have been freed from the penalty of sin and death by the sacrifice of Jesus (who paid the price). It is a price we cannot afford ourselves, and Jesus has paid the price for us.

When a master buys a person and owns him/her as a slave he has taken away all that persons rights and ability to care for himself or his family, so the slave does not owe a debt to the master, but rather the master owes a debt to the slave for all the time that slave has served the master with no pay or freedom. Why are you trying to defend the master, when it is the master who owns the slave that is clearly in the wrong. It is always wrong to own another person!

The ideal situation would have been not to have had slaves (servants), but that was the system of the time. God introduced laws to make masters look after their servants and treat them as themselves within the context of a master-servant relationship. In this sense, the carrying out of that command cannot apply to every situation for then all slaves/servants could claim their freedom and there would be no servants, so what do you do with those who want to have employment as a slave/servant? Working 9 - 5 in this present age in some cases is a form of slavery and the sweat-shops are examples of this.

God gave instructions concerning master and slaves and this was to deal with a culture and society in which masters and slaves were the accepted norm. This is not the society that will exist in God's Kingdom, so whatever our objection to the way God dealt with the problem, the blame is with man and not God. God is working to change that in future and all the problems we are discussing now will be taken away once Jesus hands back the Kingdom to his Heavenly Father.

If you believe the Bible is the word of god, then you must assign responsibility to the biblegod for all the laws contained in it. God is the one who allowed the Hebrews to own slaves and treat women as property, and he was the one who gave the laws concerning how women and slaves were to be treated...which most certainly did not include giving them equal human rights. All inequality contained in Biblical laws lie solely at the feet of your biblegod, he is the one who must take full responsibility for all human rights violations contained therein, if you believe that god truly is the author of the Bible.

It is a contradiction and I have explained this as a contradiction that must exist as long as there are masters and servants/slaves. Abolish every situation of a master/slave relationship in the world and then apply the "love thy neighbor as thyself" without the restriction of a slave's freedom. So long as there are masters and slaves, then that rule cannot apply to every possible circumstance otherwise an apparent contradiction must exist. This does not prevent those masters who are God-fearing exercising justice and fairness and "loving thy neighbor as thyself" in the context of the basic rules of a master/servant relationship.

It is the same today except that we have written contracts of employment. Since we are paid a weekly/monthly salary, we are paid for our time and we owe our earthly masters nothing, so whenever we want freedom from our jobs, we simply give our notice and go off and seek further employment (slavery). We enslave ourselves within our society. For example, we enslave ourselves to our mortgages if we want to have "restricted freedom" to own a home. Pay the mortgage payments or else forfeit your home. Work for an employer to earn the money to pay the mortgage payments. Are we free to live in this society the way we want to? We are not free to live as we choose; as dictated by Health and Safety laws.

Man's world is full of contradictions and only when God's kingdom is established on earth will all contradictions be taken away.

All the best,

David

Are you trying to compare slavery with employment contracts? How can you be so insensitive? No one with an ounce of compassion for human equality and freedom would ever try and justify slavery, or make it seem equivalent to employment. Owning another human being is ALWAYS, Always, always WRONG!

You still have not addressed the contradiction of God commanding on one hand to treat your neighbors as yourself and on the other hand allowing the Hebrews to own slaves in perpetuity.

Take care,
Rose

[David M]

You still have not addressed the contradiction of God commanding on one hand to treat your neighbors as yourself and on the other hand allowing the Hebrews to own slaves in perpetuity.

Hello Rose
I think this thread has run its course as far as I am concerned. I have answered your question, but you have failed to recognize the answer. Your expression "in perpetuity" cannot apply to God's chosen people regarding the owing of slaves. The word "forever" as used in the verses quoted from Leviticus cannot mean for eternity. In God's plan things will change and there will be no slavery of any kin in God's Kingdom. The Hebrews/Israelites have not continually lasted as a nation and any slaves as an inheritance would have died out.

Foreign slaves would most likely have come from reprobate nations and there is less likelihood that a foreign slave would conform to the Hebrew way of worship. In dealing with this subject, all these factors have to be taken into account.

At the heart of all these problems is man's motivation. When a person's heart is examined God knows whether that person is acceptable to Him or not. In dealing with man-made problems in the Bible, it would be good if we could know the heart of each person in order to examine their motives. Sometimes the motives are plain to see and at other times we do not know what was in the person's heart; only God' knows and that is why His solution to the problem is best. God's solution for the earth is the only solution that will work and man has proved in the last 6,000 years that he is incapable of ruling himself. God is working out His plan and solution to the problems caused by man and whatever we think will not change God's plan.

Maybe the perfect master/slave relationship can be likened to a marriage. No-one owns another person. Under man's law a person can own another person. When we are united as in marriage the two people function as one. Loving thy neighbour must take place in this type of partnerships or else it is doomed to fail.

In a perfect world where everyone obeys the commands of God, this would not give rise to the problems we are considering. And that is the point; men and women have been disobedient to God from the very beginning and God has had to work around that problem. Unless God is merciful and overlooks our many small acts of disobedience, there would be no hope for anyone.

Rid the world or disobedience to God's commands and then you can have a perfect world.


All the best,

David