There's enough already to support the bible being a load of afterbirth not worthy of allowing any morality claims without imaging one little non-existent {¿}
Exodus 21 *explicitly allows slavery* For example. Note what happens to the women in 21:4-9. Stealing (“kidnapping” loads additional meaning that is not supported by the Hebrew) a man would not cover 1) men who were your property 2) men taken in battle 3) children born into slavery Genesis 14:14 Exodus 21:4-5 Leviticus 22:10-11, 25:45-46 Jeremiah 2:14 (metaphorically) Ecclesiastes 2:7
This was so crazy, I had to check the source. Unsurprisingly, Stewart says nothing about diacritics or transliteration. He does say that ish refers to any individual regardless of class/age etc which of course does fail to take into consideration that it is always context dependent. But not quite as crazy as IAM has made his argument out to be. So he's just seen Stewart use a transliteration, and then assumed that was what the argument was based on.
I'm so confused, why's he drawing so much attention to the shin in hebrew? 😭 I mean yeah it's a cool looking letter but Jesus he seems to be in love with it or something lmao.
The passage prohibits kidnapping as means of obtaining slaves. Tge idea is that there were bandits or pirates who made money by kidnapping people and selling them into slavery. This was eventually outlawed in many ancient societies so that the only legal means of obtaining slaves was breeding, conquest, purchase or a legal decision.
@@kamilgregor That makes sense. I noticed some translations render the passage "steal a man" so do you know if the Hebrew supports "man stealing" or "person stealing"? If the passage was gender specific then I guess that stealing a man was a worse offense than stealing a woman or child? I think male slaves were "worth more" according to somewhere in Leviticus but I'll have to look up the reference.
Kidnapping was outlawed in America before slavery was, its hardly an argument that the israelites did away with slavery. It is interesting to learn that the word used means or at least implies Israelite man and not just any man
Huh? This is just so bizarre I don't even know how to process it... So I guess according to this 'special character' thingy Leviticus 20:13 prohibits all non-lesbian sex? 🤔
I didn't realize Hebrew was a tonal language. Those accents are indeed in the Masoretic reading tradition (i.e. not original) but they make it sound like Mandarin where the tonal syllable, depending how you speak it, can change the whole word. That said, one thing we are generally not taught when studying Hebrew is about the para-materials that are much like a critical apparatus in eclectic editions. I am sceptical that this verse points to an expansion that would make Stuart's point, and I don't have my own copy of the Masorah, but it's possible there is an alternate reading that would shed clarity here. Even if that HIGHLY unlikely scenario pans out, it is still not the canonical text.
To be clear, I do not think k there is any chance in hell that Douglas Stuart is making the argument PIA has attributed to him here. It is almost certain that he is either just badly misreading/miscomprehend8ng an actual, valid point that Stuart is trying to make, or he is just making it up.
@@cygnusustus You should read the text that I added to the video, but I will spell this out for you. 1. There is no diacritic above the šin in the Hebrew text. 2. The "Š" to which he is drawing attention is a letter in the phonetic alphabet, used to indicate the "sh" sound. It has absolutely no effect on the meaning of the Hebrew text, ever. 3. The word appearing in Exod 21:16 means "a man." That's all. We know it was applied only to Hebrew men because of how this passage was translated by the LXX, and how it was rewritten in Deuteronomy.
ATTENTIO!! We can not hide our sins from God. Where will you go when you die, Heaven or Hell? Jesus Christ loves you and He died for our sins, three days later, He arose from the grave... Jesus is alive... REPENT and put your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior today, we are not guaranteed tomorrow. ACTS 2:38 “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Christians today can't wrap their little heads around the fact that Torah wasn't written for the global population. Hebrews made laws that only concerned them. Slavery was fine as long as it benefitted *them*.
ATTENTIO!! We can not hide our sins from God. Where will you go when you die, Heaven or Hell? Jesus Christ loves you and He died for our sins, three days later, He arose from the grave... Jesus is alive... REPENT and put your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior today, we are not guaranteed tomorrow. ACTS 2:38 “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
@@DrKippDavis Oh... I only heard y'all's Prime Menstrual, while not busy getting his promised reach around from Xi Jinping, was illegitimately using emergency authorization to oppress a “fringe" minority. I suppose the Taliban feel “pretty free" now too since the pull out. I suppose perspective is the consensus here, eh?.. ... I hang my PHD(PostHoleDigger)on the wall too.
Š-eet apologists phone it in...
It's still owning people as property.
You know who else makes excuses for obvious immoral behaviour. Domestic violence spouses. ..
Christianity is morally bankrupt
This is one of those "no further questions, your honor" moments.
Using letters to say the Bible didn't support some form of slavery is just strange sounding.
There's enough already to support the bible being a load of afterbirth not worthy of allowing any morality claims without imaging one little non-existent {¿}
I think the most painful-to-hear statement here is that the ban on kidnapping is also a ban on chattel slavery.
Exodus 21 *explicitly allows slavery* For example. Note what happens to the women in 21:4-9.
Stealing (“kidnapping” loads additional meaning that is not supported by the Hebrew) a man would not cover
1) men who were your property
2) men taken in battle
3) children born into slavery
Genesis 14:14
Exodus 21:4-5
Leviticus 22:10-11, 25:45-46
Jeremiah 2:14 (metaphorically)
Ecclesiastes 2:7
This was so crazy, I had to check the source. Unsurprisingly, Stewart says nothing about diacritics or transliteration. He does say that ish refers to any individual regardless of class/age etc which of course does fail to take into consideration that it is always context dependent. But not quite as crazy as IAM has made his argument out to be. So he's just seen Stewart use a transliteration, and then assumed that was what the argument was based on.
... did... did he just try to say that slavery couldn't happen because the Roman transliteration has a caron-s mark?
What did I just hear?
Wow pseudo linguistics at its finest
I'm so confused, why's he drawing so much attention to the shin in hebrew? 😭 I mean yeah it's a cool looking letter but Jesus he seems to be in love with it or something lmao.
Praise 'educating' Dr. Davis is deliciously ironic.
Thanks for exposing "Moron I am"!!
"Diacritics mean slavery is wrong" just made me dumber.
I love how this dumpster fire inspired the name "Diablocritics"! ❤️❤️❤️
YES! Right?
You can only "steal" a person if that person is the property of someone else. So is the passage referring to stealing someone else's slave?
The passage prohibits kidnapping as means of obtaining slaves. Tge idea is that there were bandits or pirates who made money by kidnapping people and selling them into slavery. This was eventually outlawed in many ancient societies so that the only legal means of obtaining slaves was breeding, conquest, purchase or a legal decision.
@@kamilgregor When are you going to start making your own videos on the subject?! 🙏
@@tangerinetangerine4400 When my younger kid goes to kindergarten and I have a room to record in
@@kamilgregor Glad to hear there's a plan! 😁
@@kamilgregor That makes sense. I noticed some translations render the passage "steal a man" so do you know if the Hebrew supports "man stealing" or "person stealing"? If the passage was gender specific then I guess that stealing a man was a worse offense than stealing a woman or child? I think male slaves were "worth more" according to somewhere in Leviticus but I'll have to look up the reference.
In the Biblical Incompetence Hierarchy, who is higher up:
Falk or Praise? 🤔
Praise, but only because even Falk would never confuse the phonetic alphabet for an actual point. It is a VERY low bar.
*Isn't this scale inverted?*
@@DrKippDavishe would be in good company with WLC then... 🙄
They're grasping for straws. Desparation is never pretty.
Kidnapping was outlawed in America before slavery was, its hardly an argument that the israelites did away with slavery. It is interesting to learn that the word used means or at least implies Israelite man and not just any man
Thanks much.
Thanks for exposing the lies of missionaries. I have also heard missionaries claiming that God never wanted polygamy... absurd claims.
Huh? This is just so bizarre I don't even know how to process it... So I guess according to this 'special character' thingy Leviticus 20:13 prohibits all non-lesbian sex? 🤔
The public needs more Hebrew literacy videos from Biblical scholars
Steals a person…
Truly 'diacritical thinking'...
I'm pretty sure you weren't allowed to kidnap slaves in the American South either, so Praise is, as usual, being entirely irrelevant.
No human trafficking or slavery
I didn't realize Hebrew was a tonal language. Those accents are indeed in the Masoretic reading tradition (i.e. not original) but they make it sound like Mandarin where the tonal syllable, depending how you speak it, can change the whole word.
That said, one thing we are generally not taught when studying Hebrew is about the para-materials that are much like a critical apparatus in eclectic editions. I am sceptical that this verse points to an expansion that would make Stuart's point, and I don't have my own copy of the Masorah, but it's possible there is an alternate reading that would shed clarity here. Even if that HIGHLY unlikely scenario pans out, it is still not the canonical text.
I'm sorry, you study Hebrew but don't know whether it's tonal or not?
@@SoelengaaerbagAaseneed No, I know better, but I was trying to point out subtly that this video is based on unfounded assumptions.
Is Douglas Stewart just a bad scholar? Or he just isn't knowledgeable enough in Hebrew?
To be clear, I do not think k there is any chance in hell that Douglas Stuart is making the argument PIA has attributed to him here. It is almost certain that he is either just badly misreading/miscomprehend8ng an actual, valid point that Stuart is trying to make, or he is just making it up.
@@DrKippDavis Does the "8" in "miscomprehend8ng" indicate a different definition of that term? 😀
@@DrKippDavis PIA? . . . OH! Praise I Am not the other thing!
Uhm.... so what is your rebuttal?
My rebuttal to what? There isn't an argument here.
@Kipp Davis
Rebuttal to his claim that the diacritic indicates it applied to all men.
@@cygnusustus You should read the text that I added to the video, but I will spell this out for you.
1. There is no diacritic above the šin in the Hebrew text.
2. The "Š" to which he is drawing attention is a letter in the phonetic alphabet, used to indicate the "sh" sound. It has absolutely no effect on the meaning of the Hebrew text, ever.
3. The word appearing in Exod 21:16 means "a man." That's all. We know it was applied only to Hebrew men because of how this passage was translated by the LXX, and how it was rewritten in Deuteronomy.
@@DrKippDavis
Thanks. I was reading the screenshots PIA included and did not notice your text below the video.
@@PraiseIAmThatIAm
What's your latest lie?
Do you feel educated now?
ATTENTIO!! We can not hide our sins from God. Where will you go when you die, Heaven or Hell? Jesus Christ loves you and He died for our sins, three days later, He arose from the grave... Jesus is alive... REPENT and put your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior today, we are not guaranteed tomorrow.
ACTS 2:38 “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Are these guys for real?
Yes, we all know you couldn't enslave a fellow hebrew... but everyone else was fair game and you lot are just going to have to deal with it.
You could also enslave fellow Hebrews but had to limit it to 7years (but then there is the loophole)
@@stultusvenator3233
True - I was keeping it simple.
@@andrewholdaway813
Cool !
Sometimes you have to, I get that. 😄
Christians today can't wrap their little heads around the fact that Torah wasn't written for the global population. Hebrews made laws that only concerned them. Slavery was fine as long as it benefitted *them*.
ATTENTIO!! We can not hide our sins from God. Where will you go when you die, Heaven or Hell? Jesus Christ loves you and He died for our sins, three days later, He arose from the grave... Jesus is alive... REPENT and put your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior today, we are not guaranteed tomorrow.
ACTS 2:38 “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
How free does Canada feel right now???
Pretty free? What am I missing? I am sure as hell in no hurry to move away from Canada.
@@DrKippDavis
Oh... I only heard y'all's Prime Menstrual, while not busy getting his promised reach around from Xi Jinping, was illegitimately using emergency authorization to oppress a “fringe" minority.
I suppose the Taliban feel “pretty free" now too since the pull out. I suppose perspective is the consensus here, eh?..
... I hang my PHD(PostHoleDigger)on the wall too.