The "month to mourn" was *100%* actually just a way to make sure the women weren't carrying the babies of the people they're mourning. It's not even the least bit of sympathy that it comes off as from a modern perspective, it's absolutely just to make sure the women menstruate before "marrying" them.
Actually, no. She is also supposed to let her nails grow and shave her head to make herself less attractive. This was to inspire pity so that she might be released. None of these statements, by the way, have anything to do with "supporting" slavery. Slavery happens to have existed, and war tended to bring on the most animal instincts...Perhaps you are naive about what happens with modern day soldiers and foreign civilians? The Torah is ancient Israel's constitution and regulates what was reality for the ancient world. The laws on the books at one time or another do not suffice to express a complete debate on any subject within any cultural context. Truth is slavery is ubiquitous throughout all of history, and it is most common TODAY in the modern United States. We change the words to "migrant" or "labor trafficking." Obviously, that doesn't mean that most Americans think slavery is right. But it does happen...even when outlawed.
Abrahamic god is such cruel and manipulative psychopath is because entire Bible was written by psychopaths. People, who believe in a good and all-loving God are struggling with Stockholm syndrome.
This is ridiculous. You act as is you understand the scriptures and slander Gods word trying to condemn what you don’t like without reading what is actually applicable today and not seeing the better things. Jesus came to rectify and fulfill the Old Testament by replacing it with the New Testament. How dare you try to make sense of something just to destroy it with your lack of knowledge and intelligence. Your lack of understanding is showing. May God bless you with understanding because it send you have none.
Im sure it's like the time allotted when you get married or have a kid, you're supposed to have 6 months after each off of work to be with them, but I doubt that ever happened. It's just like a "see it's not THAT bad *cough* on paper"
And what about today's world? Do we even give a second thought to all the civilian victims our soldiers ravage and rape? Don't think anyone today is being a better example.
I'm willing to bet they did because they wouldn't want to find out there pregnant with someone else's child after marring them. Which is probably the real reason for the rule.
@@guntherwhite2043I'm afraid quite a lot of people do, though I'm glad you're (presumably) not one of them. A frequent response to the atheist's challenging the morality of certain horrible Bible passages is that the atheist lacks a foundation or moral standard by which to judge them as immoral.
@@guntherwhite2043 there's definitely people that argue that, it's just that now people more frequently go the route of "Well you don't need the Bible to have morals but without God morality is just personal opinion" which honestly is pretty much just the same argument just worded nicer. There's also the alternate argument that God placed objective morality within everyone's hearts, which is self-evidently no true because if it were then humans would never argue about morality in the first place.
@@poopslappa1661 yes, morality is subjective with or without a God. Theists think just saying things like "God is the objective standard of morality" make it so. Any sort of value judgements, which includes morality, are inherently subjective.
Yeah we just genocided the whole city but moderns want to say the forced marriage is bad. So it would be fine if she was killed, but if she was saved from death that's not fine.
This is ridiculous. You act as is you understand the scriptures and slander Gods word trying to condemn what you don’t like without reading what is actually applicable today and not seeing the better things. Jesus came to rectify and fulfill the Old Testament by replacing it with the New Testament. How dare you try to make sense of something just to destroy it with your lack of knowledge and intelligence. Your lack of understanding is showing. May God bless you with understanding because it send you have none.
Also-although perhaps even specifically so-to tell if the baby (if she’s pregnant) had was the Israelite’s so they’re not fathering the slain former husband’s offspring🤒
I unironically saw someone use it as an argument that Christianity/Judaism is better than Islam: cos in Islam you can rape immediately while in Christianity/Judaism you need to wait a month 😂 yeah, how can atheists even be moral without such an excellent guide to ethics, their subjective (because if you choose a holy book as a moral guide, it's objective) morality just can't compare 😂
@@oofles5514that makes a lot of sense, for a moment I thought Old Testament God (aka a bunch of angry ancient goat herders larping as prophets) had a moment of a minor empathy (empathy is the only thing omnipotence doesn't cover) and shed a single tear for murder and rape victims -- nah, we're asking for too much
Both are okay tbh. In the case of slavery I think some empathy should be precognized, and forced marriage should not be done except if there is a good reason to justify it, such as a good protector if the environment is dangerous. But they aren't inherently bad.
@@ExceedtherealmIt's tempting to just call you crazy for defending these things, but I'll accept your sincerity on one condition: you'd be 100% okay with these things as long as YOU weren't a slave or being forced into marriage.
We do, and we do know what it is saying very well. We also know that this behavior in the Old Testament is noting in comparison of what is waiting for most people after they die and end up in real hell, that is a real horror that cannot be fathomed by human mind. Yet God will justify Himself even for the existence of hell.
@@nikokapanen82You sound absolutely terrified. Your God already has demands for you that you can't (or aren't) fulfilling, I'll live my life with integrity and face the music than live these mortal days in fear, and I hope you can someday join me, seriously.
@@nikokapanen82 You might read the Bible but most don't, and even if you do GREAT. You read and believe in fairy tales. Good for you, go ahead and pat yourself on the back.
@@runkus6136have you ever considered how antisemitic it is to declare the history of Israel as fairy tales? Oh, the superior ethics of the atheist. How ironic.
Some comments on that, im not a schollar or anything but i had the time 1.- Deuteronomy was for the tribe of Israel in a specific moment in time, if you are not from Israel this in no way applies to you, specially not today. Its more a historic document now "this is what we used to believe" kinda thing, it informs events that happen later (I know they don't even imply that in the short, but i feel i have to throw it in there) And personally, I think Slavery is definitely horrible and inexcusable, something that shouldn't happend, regardless of time and place, but there is a reason this things are mentioned in this book. This is my interpretation. 2.- True Slavery was normal in that region, it was the norm, an everyday ocurrance, but Israel were called to be different; ► To allow their slaves to run away and live there as citizens (without any kind of oppression from no one in Israel) if they fled their master [Deutoronomy 23:15-16] ► To directly free them each seven years if they were hebrew [Exodus 21:2], if they wanted to do anything to them there were rituals they had to follow (for example; the shaved head and ritual clothes for a month if they wanted marriage, and they couldn't kill them because they were still people rather than objects, so their murders were treated as any other murder, they couldn't be sold) Other religions and tribes around that time in that place didn't have those requirements and rituals. This is similar to that thing about frogs not jumping out of the water if you slowly raise the temperature but they jump out if you put them directly in boiling water. So These rules/rituals seemingly had 2 purposes 1) to make them different from other nations and 2) they were also just a first step towards changing them for the better. 3.- On Deutoronomy 23: They were allowed to leave, and live within their cities as citizens. "15 You shall not give back to his master the slave who has escaped from his master to you. 16 He may dwell with you in your midst, in the place which he chooses within one of your gates, where it seems best to him; you shall not oppress him." Explanation: AFAIK There were 3 types of slaves A) Hebrews that were paying a debt (for example; thieves that had nothing, so they couldn't pay what they had stolen, or just people who had debts that couldn't be paid for lack of money, so they payed with manual labor). In which case a closer concept to it may be that of a buttlers or maids, servants rather than what today we think when we hear the word slaves. B) War captives (excluding people from a specific list of tribes they were to not meddle with) but only if they were presented a peace offer and it was rejected. In other words, they were people from places who wanted war with Israel. Now, think that they'd only reject a peace offer if they thought they were going to win, so they expected to treat Israel's people as slaves, it was a uno reverse card. And even then, all the rest of rituals and requirements still applied to them, even if had Israel lost they wouldn't have the same considerations with them, they could be killed without it being considered a murder. C) Slaves bought from other nations Deutoronomy does not make any difference of which kind of slave they were talking about, a slave was allowed to leave if they fled. Now, language changes through time, words often change their meaning, and lots of things get lost in translation. In this specific instance a different word might convey this meaning more accurately according to our language today. Israel centuries ago and Today's english are really distant things, in space, time, and culture, so they might have had different ideas surounding the concept of "slavery". I mean, Im not versed in america's history but... Could you imagine the law in a preabolishment america indicating that slaves had to be freed at specific times, that their murders were to be investigated as actual murders, or them being legally allowed to live in any part of america as citizens if they fled? Not saying that nothing bad happend there around that time, im sure that like in any other culture and time there had to be people not following the rules as they were writen. People trying to get away with stuff. In fact the old testament is full of that kind of stories. First God gives a rule and then Israel goes and breaks it. Its a pattern thats there for a reason. Something along the lines of "even the people who saw the most and biggest miracles and directly talked to God didn't fully obey, and did as they pleased", I think is there to teach us that there is something wrong with our reliance on man made rules. I guess Humans don't like being told what to do.
Either everything in the bible is god's word or none of it is. You don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to pick and choose. This is just another coup out for Christians to avoid the depravity of their holy scripture.
@@trithos7308 the question is, if there isn't a God, then why is Slavery bad? Then if there is a God, which one is the real one? Since there are over 500 eye witness accounts of His death and resurrection we must assume that the things he said were true and that means that the God of Israel is the Most High God.
Think about it, the most unconditionally LOVING thing a hypothetical god could do Would be to: Allow ALL possibilities TO BE Including the possibility of slavery That god could incarnate as both slave AND master and taste both experiences God is so loving he allows a master to enjoy a slave, and also learn the lesson of keeping a slave God is so loving that he allows a slave to enjoy being a slave, and also learn the lesson of being a toiling slave
That's really fucking stupid. That loving God is NOT allowing all possibilities to be, it's making specific rules about it and giving the slave holders evil ways around having to let them go by making them leave their families or go free.
Theres more slaves now than any time in history outside the Christian world real slaves not modern day slaves nobody cares but innocent white people who stopped and fought to end the international slave trader's all over the world are some how bad nope they changed because they were guided by the bible the rest of the world clearly not
@@heinshaaine8153 you're just a hater like all haters it's easy to feel good looking down on other's you don't care you're far more privaliged by birth than many other people you don't want or have the ability to make something of yourself like basically the left as a whole build nothing just want to take from other's
@@heinshaaine8153 Indentured servitude is slavery. It’s still involuntary labor. And in this case we are talking about sexual slavery which is extremely brutal and amounts to a certain word I’d rather not say on TH-cam.
Continue… Deuteronomy 21:14 “If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.”
Please don’t say, “but that was the Old Testament.” Jesus told many parables about slaves and masters, and they are no better. Maybe worse, because Jesus equates the master, no matter how unjustly he treats the slaves, with god.
Also there is Colossians 3:22-23 in the New Testament: "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters,"
Well that explains why religions caused so many wars and massacres. I was always confused why people would kill and plunder in the name of a God who supposedly said "You shall not kill" and "You shall not steal"
Many explain this by saying that the commandments apply only within the Israelite tribes. So you cannot murder, steal from, or covet the wife of another Jew, but everyone else is fair game. The Bible isn’t a moral guide, it’s an instruction manual of how to keep a strong ethnostate
@@Mattycakes1 the Old Testament is still Christian, and that’s the part of the Bible I was referring to. It doesn’t matter that it was once exclusive to Jews. If the Old Testament is an important part of the Bible, then it’s contents should be judged when considering the morality of the Bible.
@@Mattycakes1 It is not just a “battle.” The Israelites, under the direct command of God via Moses, murder the Midianites (yes murder, as innocent women and children were killed as well) and steal their belongings, two things that God previously told them were forbidden. God told the Jews to not do certain things to certain people (Jews), but commands them to do those exact things to other people (non-Jews). I genuinely don’t know how you can make my point any more clear.
@@Mattycakes1 if you can look at the multiple examples of the Israelites being commanded to slaughter non-Jews (Deuteronomy 20:17, since you asked for more examples), and claim that they are unimportant contradictions, then you are very obviously arguing in bad faith. If one gets their morality from the Bible (the original context of this comment section), then by reading the Bible they will understand that God repeatedly allowed for, or demanded, immoral actions upon certain demographics, while forbidding the same actions towards others. In the scripture, this demographic bias from God is very obviously an ethnic one. I’ll break it down further. If I wrote a book about morality and said that murder and thievery are immoral, and then went on to recount multiple times where I have personally murdered or stolen from left-handed people, would you not leave with the impression that left-handed people are somehow lesser than right-handed people, as they do not have the same rights or deserve the same ethical treatment? Now think about how this metaphor applies to my argument, and really try to understand why this kind of contradiction is very important when considering what the Bible teaches.
@@Liberty5024 We are on a channel centred around discussions about theology and morality. Ain’t exactly a party here. Correcting mistakes that other atheists make about religions is important. Pretty sure Alex would agree with me here.
Atheists and agnostics get their morality from cultural norms and personal preferences. Theists gets their morality from cultural norms and personal preferences as well. The difference is A) we're honest about it and B) we don't pretend we're listening to a magical text to shield us from criticism of our worst beliefs
I think morality is more complicated than that. Many people have strong innate biases toward altruism towards in group members. Those who done are called psychopaths or CEOs.
@@cdog4100altruism is evil just like being a psychopathic murderer is. The sacrificed and the sacrificers are two sides of the same coin. There’s no justification for you to not live your own life for yourself. Don’t be evil, be selfish, choose life. This is your life, live it!
I correct. Most atheists get their morality from secular humanism, which focuses on the well-being of ourselves and others. It has our well-being as its foundation.
@@francescaerreia8859 "...altruism is evil just like being a psychopathic murderer is" That is an extreme position to take. How is helping others (altruism) evil, let alone as evil as murder?
@@jasonspades1265 I correct. Most atheists get their morality from secular humanism, which focuses on the worship of man, anarchy, individualism and whatever capitalism wants to fill the word "human rights" with for their own benefits. Theists get their morality either directly from God, or from values which value overall happiness and growth of the society on the long term. In any case theists got the upper hand.
There are different passages. So yes, there is also a section on indentured servitude. Obviously not the one about women captured from war. Kind of embarrassing that modern people criticize this section without realizing how much our modern military is responsible for ravaging and raping ...and without a second thought, let alone a month.
@@booksquid856 I am not surprised by the misdeeds of any civilization but these authors are allegedly inspired by a divine entity and many continue to worship this entity and these words - and in many cases, frown upon those who don't follow this direction.
@@booksquid856 So, because immoral acts still take place in the modern world, it is embarrassing to criticize the immorality of a book that supposedly offers moral guidance? How does that make any sense? What kind of human being are you?
@@booksquid856 Lol just about everyone knows about the problems of modern military, no need to act like there's some sort of hypocrisy there. Also if it's so embarrasing for "modern" people to criticize this book maybe there shouldn't be billions of people who act as if the bible is truly the word of God
The verse right after this says: „If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.“ Forcing a war captive into marriage was in their understanding different from slavery. However, this implies that the captives who weren’t forced into marriage were indeed taken as slaves. (And of course a good argument can be made that forced marriage should be considered a form of slavery even if ancient people didn‘t view it like that.)
Forced marriage is considered slavery because it is. It's taking a captive of war and telling them she is now married to you. It's not letting someone decide for themselves.
Context that makes it fair: Then God said : Haha, just kidding. Don't kill anyone, don't invade their homes, leave them alone unless they are hurting others, and try to make friends with everyone.
@@tankbuggeru I guess since you haven‘t made it to the 3. class in school, you have a hard time reading the Bible and quoted the mickey mouse book instead
He did give the context, he explained when and how you are allowed to utilize this rule. And what the rule allows. But since you seem to imply you know the bible better, could you provide the missing context that you feel is so important? Instead of just asserting that context is missing and handwaving it away?
@@rogeguggenbuhl6679 Joshua Bowen is a scholar. There’s a full video for u 😂 what context do u need? Here I’ll give it since ur slow: WHO: Hebrews & Israelites (do u know the difference?). WHAT: war with non-Israelites/Hebrews. WHEN: probably written during Babylonian exilic period reminiscing on the kingdom of Judah and perhaps Israel (Hebrew Bible is hilariously poorly dated by tradition; first time the Babylonian sabbatu shows up therefore it’s written post Babylonian influence). WHERE: Canaan later kingdom of Judah (and Israel before destruction) and then yehud medinata. WHY: Yahweh or el or whatever isn’t real so it’s manmade and evil primitive men enslave others.
"If they close their gates and put up a fight" What was the alternative? Here comes the invaders, let's extend them a flowers carpet? Seems to me like a ridiculous way a human hand prescribed how to abduct beautiful women from an invaded city and force them into slave wives. Oh, but the people who believe this book is the inspired, un-erred word of god see two men or two women trying to get married and they wave their book in the air claiming "sanctity of marriage".
Exodus 22: 29-30 You shall not delay to make offerings from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses.[c] “The firstborn of your sons you shall give to me. 30 You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to me. What is this referring to if not child sacrifice?
Yeah this has to be one of the most disingenuous clips. First he is referencing numbers 31 if you read the text you will clearly see this is not a mandate for Christians to do this. Its important to note that the Bible is not just lesson after lesson. It is also a history and prophesy. Just because somthing was done doesnt mean you do that thing. In numbers we learn how the Israelites struggled in the desert. This involved war at times. The people of Midian oppresses the Isrilites. So they fought a blody war as was common back then. In fact all the actions they took were common to war back then and even in more modern eras. I would also add the taking of the women was an act of mercy. Keep in mind the time. If the women were not talken in they would have died. Also note ot never says force yourself on a women it says take her as a bride these are different things. In short he doesnt understand this at all and none of this gives a mandate for Christians to do this like he says.
If God changes his mind, then we should not follow his words, commands, laws or examples. If he has told people to do horrible things for no reason, why should we believe that he's good. Because he said so? It doesn't matter how horrible the times were. He could have changed that, he could have left people alone, but instead he tells people of a certain tribe to do horrible things to a different tribe, for reasons that would not make sense to a god. You can't defend sparing some people, while killing others. What if you were a woman born ugly or scarred by an accident? Then you deserve to starve to death in the desert, while your hot sister is being taken care of? You can't excuse this in a context where a timeless, all-good, all-powerful being controls the world.
@@tankbuggeru Firstly read numbers 31. Second God doesn't change his mind. This is telling a history not setting law, never does it say to do this in any other context. You are also conflating a few things. First God is good people are not. God also gives people free will. Therefore people can act against Him and he won't snap His fingers and make them belive. No idea where the attractive thing comes in that is never said. Only unmarried women were taken because they could still be saved.
@@jameskurk4696 So if he says "X is bad" a few thousand years ago, is it bad today or has it no relevance? Is X only bad for the people he spoke to? Does he have to specify that "you people of the future, don't mind this thing, follow my laws, and ignore what I instructed these people to do"? If yes, do you think that's consistent? Does that sound like the planning of an almighty being? As I asked, how do we know God is good? It seems like a lot his history is wrought with unnecessary pain, death and destruction. He also dishes out punishment collectively, which is not fair. He created Hell, where you face infinite punishment for finite crimes. And one of these crimes is just not being aware of God. How is that reasonable when he leaves that responsibility to humans, and is himself silent? If he gave me a sense of compassion, mercy, empathy and forgiveness, why doesn't he have it himself? And don't bother talking about sacrificing his son. He is his son, and he was never lost, he came home. Why create pain? Humans don't have free will, or at least we can't know that we do. But the funny thing is that IF we do have free will given by God, what benefit is that? So we can question, doubt and judge, and have a chance of going to Hell? If the world is about 30% Christian, Hell is filling up much faster than Heaven. I'd say it would be better not to have that choice. The attractive part comes from that the clip where it's explained that an Israelite man may if he so choses to force a girl of the enemy to marry him, which obviously would exclude the unattractive ones, or those who have been defiled by another man. Haha, it's so funny how silly masculinity can destroy the lives of so many innocent people. Oh, I mean God of course, since he said it, not a bunch of horny, old, greedy dudes.
@@tankbuggeru It seems you don't understand the Bible or the Church very well, I say this not to offend, but because your claims against it don't make much sense. I would say read numbers 31. To adress your first point not every Single word in the Bible is a law. Leviticus is full of them with God telling people how to act. The Text in numbers is clear that what happens in numbers 31 is a response to atrocities done by a different nation not a blanket order. What he says in the video doesn't Show the text well once again just read it. As for free will why were are given it is hard to say there is a lot there that I could go into but it would make the comment way too long so if you really want the Christian explaination look up Mike Winger. Lastly God does speak To us through the Bible and Christian should spread the message to save as many people as they can. God has all that you said once again complicated subject but in short Jesus died so that we can be forgiven. We all sin against God but as long as you have faith alone you are saved that's the only thing you need is faith alone.
@@jameskurk4696 I guess the minds of the religious and the sceptics just aren't compatible when in their respective states. Perhaps it's hard for Christians to judge God and the Bible on the same criteria as everything else if they feel that they constitute the existence of everything, like sawing off the branch your sitting on, perhaps. I think there is not much "divine" logic in the Bible, but if true logic is chaos, true goodness is blind faith and not actions, and God is good because he defines he term, then yes, I suppose we are all just lost and should fall in line and try to convince ourselves of what is preached, but I think that's a bit like 1984.
Or you could watch the whole video for more context. Afterward, you could read Leviticus and Dueteronomy yourself so as not to blindly take what someone else says as true. After all, they're two of the most exciting books in the bible.
@@foreverix1218 since you unironically think that the bible is fine and that slavery can be justified through extreme mental gymnastics: I'm gonna find you, chain you up and sell you off to the highest bidder. Do you object to this? If you object to being enslaved then you will contradict any and every single argument that slavery is fine, exposing you for the hack you are.
actually the Christian was right, this OT passage is not about slavery but how to deal with war captives when they are women you want for yourself. Read the whole passage.
@MG-ot2yr said: " In today's world, its a war crime and you'd go to prison." You my sir, are thoroughly naive. Most are not punished, most are condoned, and everybody (but the victim) walks away without any problem. That is the reality. Today and in the past. It is rare that it is punished.
@@j.p.vanbolhuis8678 And you sir, have an astounding lack of brain cells and no sense of morals and ethics. Whether or not its successfully punished is irrelevant to the moral standard of today that makes it a war crime. Society as a whole doesn't condone it, you must be referring to some Bible toting immoral people who are not representatives of everyone. You should evaluate your own moral standards, you just dishonestly tried to make the claim that its no different now than in biblical times, which is flat out a lie. Now go repent so you can move on to your next sin, wash, rinse, repeat.
When you are genociding an entire people I don't think the fact that you take a few of them as wives is really the great marker of immorality that you think it is.
@@65firered Almost every country in the world is a member of the UN, with the exception of Vatican and Palestine territory, all UN members ratified the Geneva Convention which is the core of international humanitarian laws and outlines conduct of armed conflict and defines war crimes. So I'd say there's universal agreement whether you're a western country or not.
The problem is that they are ignoring the Historical context, Duteronomy is speaking of going to war against an enemy, and the slaves are those who survive after the war is over, they ignore what the fate of a woman would be with out a husband in that era, just as they ignore the culural norms of that time period. even in biblical times not everyone was committed to a religious blief, atheist and agnostics existed, and they were governed by a monarchial type government. no such thing as democracy.and they also had rules as to when captives could be taken in a war against an enemy. you aslo have to consider the voice in which it is writen, is the writer suggesting that God is telling them to take beautiful women as wifes? in reality the only part in which the scripture speaks of god, is to the point that the the losers of the war were delivered to them by god. no where does is suggest that god commanded them to take beautiful captive women as their wives!
We understand the context. We also understand human societies had to realize how wrong this kind of behavior were on their own, with no imput from the allegedly perfect and benevolent God.
@@raistlin3462The Thing is Human societies would not have come to the realization that this kind of behavior was Wrong without the guidance of a perfect and Benevolent god. Religion has always been the precursor to moving humanity's moral compass in the right direction! Humanities Moral evolution has taken centuries to evolve. and not all of Humanity has followed! Consider the difference between the Judeo-Christian world and the Muslim and Chinese worlds when it comes to Morality! we have the Muslim Brother Hood and Hamas Isis who believe that the rape and murder of Jews men women and children are not only acceptable but it is a mandate of their Religion, in contrast, Judeo-Christians believe such actions to be evil, reprehensible, and should be punished, the Chinese who have rejected god, have also stripped their citizens of basic rights such as the right to free speech, they seek to control behavior via a social credit system, as a result, the People have become apathetic they ignore the pain and suffering of others who are not direct family relations, which is why a child can be run over by numerous cars in the street and no one takes action, those who have business pursue wealth at any cost, and their leaders are more like mob bosses extracting bribes to increase their own wealth allowing shotty construction of buildings, etc, to the point that a teen volleyball team ends up being buried in the rubble of a collapsed poorly constructed building! www.reuters.com/world/china/ten-killed-after-school-gymnasium-roof-collapses-china-2023-07-24/#:~:text=BEIJING%2C%20July%2024%20(Reuters),be%20young%20female%20volleyball%20players.
Well, that's because these aren't the passages that speak of slavery. These are pretty clear in what they say and, in many instances, more humane than how most countries would conduct themselves.
Also, they believe that a husband should rule over his wife. The Hebrew text of Genesis 3:16 uses the word "Yim-šāl" to denote a man ruling over his wife, which is the same word as used in Judges 8:23 to denote the Lord Jehovah ruling over the people of Israel.
And you judge them on the basis of the New Testament. Do you take account of the times they lived in, what were the customs of the nations around Israel?
At almost 80, and an atheist for 70 of those years. I'm certainly more familiar with the Bible than most Christians I know. There is simply no excuse for the lack of that one vital but missing Commandment. And there can be few people - especially people of colour - who don't know what that Commandment should have forbidden, had there been the slightest validity to this vile mythology.
Certainly does sound like you have the theological understanding of a 10 year old. You've had seven decades to figure out that a worldly prohibition on slavery was less important than what Jesus came to so, but instead of understanding you probably spent those decades studying justifications so you wouldn't have to go to sunday service anymore
I like learning about this stuff but could you please tag the passage. I don't like taking stuff at face value and need the evidence to back it up before I believe it.
@@sau2949it was plain rational and practiced in 90℅ of ancient world cultures. It was justified by social ierarchy in order to gain and administrate resources for tribes and nation sustainment. This code quoted in the vid is even kinda advanced for "women rights" ,for the times. And even for later times. We live under different circumstances that shaped us into different mindset and values. Also (in the west especially ) thanks to New Testament.
Of course it does. It's two different books written by two different people in two different time periods with two different moralities. Why would anyone expect the entire Bible to agree with itself
@@Veritas231 True. And to be fair if they aren't really people it isn't really murder so I mean, just classify your enemies as sub human and you're fuckin good to go! (biblically)
Everything/anything in the religious texts is classified as ‘out of context’ when it defies their ability to reconcile, being inconsistent, contradictory, or just plain vile.
@@jeffreyhearn8930no, everytime that something actually coming from a different context is cherry picked and judged / misquoted / forced according modern standards. Context is vital to be proper scholars and to be honest. Without context, you just create distortion and malice- wheter if you are "left", "right" or whatever.
@@CosmicSkeptic These captives were not to serve as slaves. That was made clear. "But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her." Meaning, you may take her in to be your wife. But do not later decide to treat her as a slave if you are not satisfied with her.
@@Messianic-Gentiledo not take her as a slave if YOU are not satisfied with HER. Meaning if he is "satisfied with her" he's allowed to keep her as a captive. Fucked up.
Yes, the NT has a different vibe. But it still accepts slavery Colossians 3:22-23 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favour, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men..."
@mailill we also got to keep in mind the different types of slavery that was practiced from the bronze age until the roman empire. Life long slavery wasnt practiced like how we think in the european/ african slave trade. I understand it best as indentured servitude for x amount of time. Quite often there are accounts of ' slaves' being set free and they then living close by ( especially in the Roman Greek world). Tbh, it's something I will read up on more, Thanks for responding anyway.
@@Yoghurtslinger No, lifeong slavery WAS practised in the Middle East. The OT DOES describe exactly that. If you are a Hebrew male slave and your master "gives" you a wife, when your time is up, she stays his slave AND SO DO YOUR KIDS. For life. Slaves can be given to your heirs until the slaves die. They had indentured servitude AND debt slavery AND lifelong slavery! They are explicitly told they can buy slaves from the foreigners.
@archapmangcmg in roman society when the new testament was written things were different. They had left the bronze age, ive read account by prominent historians that said its possible it was practiced how I described.
@@Yoghurtslinger Nope. The Bible itself says that the Israelites practised permanent, chattel slavery as well as debt slavery and indentured servitude. They WERE that horrible. The only objections in the Bible to slavery was when God's FAVOURITES were enslaved, not doing the slaving of others, and then it was only the men, and only some of them, that got special treatment. The Israelites/Hebrews were cruel and barbaric in treating humans as property, in raping girls captured in war and keeping them as sex slaves, in committing genocide against their neighbours. They weren't unique in that but they were still horrible. In Roman times, lifelong slavery was still practised throughout the empire which would include Judea. The Romans, too, were awful people in many ways, merely stronger than most others and thus able to impose themselves and their ways. As much as we love the idea of Rome, we shouldn't lose sight of the things they got wrong. One of which was slavery. It's actually amazing how similar the American slavery was to Biblical slavery but it *makes sense* when you learn *American slavery is deliberately based on Biblical slavery.*
@@elleanna5869 : Of course context is important, but no context in the world makes the horrible things people used to do acceptable, moral, or ethical, especially things done in the name of their gods. That’s the point. Because it was condoned in their holy book, Christians excuse slavery, treating women as chattel, parents being instructed to kill unruly children, everyone being instructed to kill men who have gay sex, and all sorts of other things which were completely obscene. The Bible, like most holy books, has some wisdom in it, but believers have to stop making excuses for the horribly ignorant ideas in their holy books and accept their doctrine for what it is: imperfect.
@@elleanna5869 There is no context for an eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing god. Whatever he has said or done is always the highest standard and is not changed by how life was 100, 1000 or 10000 years ago. If you dispute that, fine, then God is 2000 years outdated, and we have to find out ourselves what our do's and don'ts should be, and not look to the Bible for anything but historical claims.
I think the one they're referencing here is Numbers 31:17-18, but a couple more I keep jotted down are Exodus 21:20-21, Leviticus 19:20-22 and Leviticus 25:44-46
See also: Christian views on slavery The issues surrounding slavery dominated the 19th century in the United States.[41] This created tension between Baptists in northern and southern U.S. states over the issue of manumission. In the two decades after the American Revolution during the Second Great Awakening, northern Baptist preachers (as well as the Quakers and Methodists) increasingly argued that slaves be freed.[42] Although most Baptists in the 19th century south were yeomen farmers and common planters, the Baptists also began to attract major planters among their membership. The southern pastors interpreted the Bible as supporting slavery and encouraged paternalistic practices by slaveholders. They preached to slaves to accept their places and obey their masters, and welcomed slaves and free blacks as members, though whites controlled the churches' leadership, and seating was usually segregated.[42] From the early 19th century, many Baptist preachers in the South also argued in favor of preserving the right of ministers to be slaveholders.[43]
Yes. This was describing protocols of war. If a foreigner was living with the Israelites, they were commanded to treat them fairly and with respect. For example Exodus 22:21, “You must not wrong a resident foreigner nor oppress him, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt". Cheers
@@robertcain3426 Somehow, buying foreigners as *permanent slaves your son can inherit* is not wronging them. Somehow. "Buy your slaves from the foreigners among you and the nations around you." Etc.
@@archapmangcmg Many Israelites became slaves to their fellow Israelites to pay their debts. Only the caveat was that an Israelite had to be released after seven years, if I remember correctly.
You can literally read the verses immediately after it to see the context. 🤦🏻♂️ Deuteronomy 21:11-14 11 if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails 13 and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. 14 If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her. In other words, after you have decimated the tribes that God had brought judgment against (you know for burning their children as a sacrifice to idols), you’re free to take an attractive woman into your home (rather than let her starve to death since she no longer has men to provide for her) and make her your wife. However, if she’s not into it and doesn’t want to be your wife, you are not to treat her as a slave but let her go wherever she wants. This was not encouraging them to kidnap women only permitting them to intermarry women from tribes that were likely participating in idol worship. It’s just insane how wildly out of context you guys took this.
So I'm still reading this as you've killed her husband and forcing her to marry you is somehow an act of mercy. And if it turns out you don't like her after the shagging you can just chuck her out instead of contributing to care for her. Yeah. Go feck yourself.
Oh thank Christ they didn’t HAVE to enslave her, all they did was kidnap them for a month because they were (maybe idk) engaging in something that’s only bad from this specific religious context and also isn’t even close to the crimes committed by any participant on the winning side.
" However, if she’s not into it and doesn’t want to be your wife, you are not to treat her as a slave but let her go wherever she wants." *Oh no, that isn't what it says. It says if the **_guy_** isn't pleased with HER, he can just kick her out. If she isn't pleased, well... that doesn't matter at all.* *This was literally encouraging men to slaughter other tribes to take their women.*
Based on what? As long as you don't count the unborn as human and have a twisted understanding on what human rights are. Name one issue that liberals have been on the right side of human rights issues?
Gotta love the people who criticize the bible without reading it... The very next verses say if the woman is unhappy she's allowed to leave. 😂 But let's avoid that part so we can be social justice warriors 👏
@@makislay8678this was literally true throughout all of history, for every culture buddy, and yet you only criticize the west and children today are considered property as well
This is untrue. I think what you’re referring to is Deuteronomy 21:14. “If YOU are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes.” Her happiness/pleasure is not considered and she’s not “allowed to leave”, it’s the prerogative of the captor to let her go if he’s not happy with her. Just wondering, did you misread this passage, or do you just not really care?
Oh, yeah the good old Deuteronomy 20:10-20 and Deuteronomy 21:10-14. Such loving commandments! Also, 1 Samuel 15:3 is cute, and Isaiah 13:15-17 (God cares so much about the lives of children). Also Psalm 137:9 shares the same sentiment. And Hosea 13: 14-17
God tells us he's not just a God of love he's also a God of wrath. If western Christianity led you to believe this wasn't the case, then yea sure these verses would confuse you
So, I see this sentiment a lot but the slavery in the Bible was pretty standard actually. A quick summary of the laws are, don't go making new slaves as an individual only make new slaves when the tribe goes to war. This is pretty normal as, if any individual went off and tried to ensnared people from within the tribe or from a neighboring tribe it would just cause issues. Internal slaves had more rights than external slaves, all of this is pretty standard for the time.
nobody here is saying slavery didn't exist prior. the entire point of this is how slavery is defended in the bible. where did you get that slavery never existed before the bible?
@@joedatius "...where did you get that slavery never existed before the bible?" Perhaps reading and comprehension would be helpful, if you can. You should detect I AM aware of slavery existing prior to '...the Bible...'. However, I seek clarity if you mean prior to the events recounted in the Bible, or prior to the writing of the Bible? Not that it makes much difference, as slavery was established long before either. Also, one notes slavery as such is rather mitigated from the non-Jewish view of slavery. But this can be determined by reading and study and not from picking and choosing while removing from context sections of the text.
A load of nothing you just said. Point is that at one point in time, for certain people it was permitted to rape, murder, abduct, and enslave. Whether this applies only to some people and only in specific circumstances is quite irrelevant as it should never be permitted for anyone
@@m.a.a.d9275 I think you are misunderstanding the purpose and function of the Torah.If you really are interested, I think this video explains the matter very well. Better than I could however :). th-cam.com/video/93JdjLqBQqE/w-d-xo.html God bless you brother
Why do you think God would allow an imperfect law? I think people are confused about how God could be perfect and loving while also prescribe less than perfect laws for his chosen people.
As a non-religious person, you have to realize western liberals aren't interested in trying to understand. They're only interested in poking holes so that they can justify whatever immoral behavior they desire
This is a bad argument to make. It doesn't work as an internal critique because the Christians have multiple justifications available that are consistent with their worldview. Then it leaves the atheist to try to justify moral claims, good/evil on their own grounds which is shakey at best (see Hume). Not a good line of argumentation.
@@poleve5409 Christians can ground their ethical claims while atheists cannot. This line of argumentation will force atheists into arbitrariness which will end the debate.
you believe we can't ground our morality, but that's a lie We have senses, feelings of our own The god you got your morals from had atrocious morals of his own 1 He drown innocent children for crimes they didn't commit. The flood 2 He interfered with the pharaohs free will, so that he would refuse to release the slaves. He says that to Moses before he sends him in 3 He created Adam and eve without the knowledge of good and evil then expected them to understand it was wrong to disobey him 4 He made a talking snake for no reason, even knowing that it would use the power to speak to trick the humans. That was either his plan all along or it wasn't and he's inept Either his plan was for us to have the knowledge of good and evil in which case it failed Or his plan was for us to get the knowledge of good and evil but punish us for what his plan I can go on. I expect you won't able to refute that these actions are evil Without resorting to a thought terminating cliche
@@drsatan3231 that's not what is in question. The question is how can Christians justify the belief that the source of all morality would allow slavery? To which they have many options "harsh laws for a harsh time", appeal to mystery, "the Hebrew laws regarding slavery were quite progressive for their time and began a series of incremental shifts towards abolition", etc... Now how does the athiest justify the belief that slavery is morally wrong?
The Bible isn't telling you that slavery is ok here, what God is doing is taking the current worldview and telling Isreal that they are to do better. God is continually leading them to become better people throughout the whole Bible. Everytime someone goes to war, God is showing the Israelites that they don't have to be brutal and barbaric like their neighbors. Their neighbors would not have been kind enough to give any time to mourn.
Old Testament that isn't an active calling to this day. I really hate when people do this. It's a deceptive lie meant to make others believe it is an active calling to this day. Not accusing you CS, i just know how often people do this for a stab at Religion in general.
Eh, my comment has little to do with how each Testament aligns (or does not) with each other. It's more on the "Commands to do X" Some will pick a piece of scripture from the Old Testament. One that happens to be a command to do "X" and then not do "X" afterward. (In other words, the command dies with the task being fulfilled) But instead of mentioning that it's an old command that died with the time. They bring it up like that religion is modern-day Aztecs in ideal. As if they will suddenly take up that command again and start offering us all to their respective gods. It's a deceptive thing to do. That is often praised despite the clear manipulation and deceptiveness of such a narrated bit of "propaganda"
@@KalousTheGuy Okay I see what your point is. You're saying the guy in the video is taking an example of what NOT to do and is saying "Look! The Bible says to do this!"lol
@@magneto44 Indeed, so it makes no sense that God would change his mind about things, to ever have less compassion than us, and to command his favorites to dish out vengeance. Fairly petty, irresponsible, angry and unfair, and that's by human standards.
New standards of...not being killed or enslaved? Forgot women were completely fine with being forcibly captured and taken from their homes in the past, silly me.
What bugs me about some people, is the fact that they'll listen to this bible passage and completely ignore it or act like everyone's too stupid to figure it out.
This was describing protocols of war. If a foreigner was living with the Israelites, they were commanded to treat them fairly and with respect. For example Exodus 22:21, “You must not wrong a resident foreigner nor oppress him, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt". Cheers
Deuteronomy 21:10 When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 Take her to your home, where she will shave her head,[a] cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since you forced her to have intercourse with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
This a terrible place for me to say this. I'm subscribed to O'Connor but I am a Christian. I'm subscribed to this channel partly because there are just enumerable(!!!) Christians who do not understand how stupid it is to accept everything (they think) the Bible has to say without question. Anything written by human hands should be subject to extreme scrutiny and it is genuinely embarrassing when I see other Christians who don't know a damn thing about the Bible act like they know what Jesus actually taught. Edit: YES. WE ARE LITERALLY TALKING ABOUT SLAVERY HERE. There are many examples of things written in the Bible where something clearly awful is said and it is entirely unreasonable to assume it was just a translation mistake.
As a Christian you think slavery is bad, just wait till you read what sin does to the mind, body and soul, I’m sure you’ll understand why Christ came down and prioritized the salvation of the soul rather than putting a Band-aid to a symptom but rather taking care of the root of all causes of pain and suffering, but hey I’m not an atheist
You're a Christian yet you fail to release that this is nowhere within the bible? This is the Old Testament whoch is the Torah which is Judaism not Christianity
@@_Kommissar_ dude are you doing a bit? The Old Testament is in the Bible. I literally have a Bible right next to me as I write this. I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is in the Bible. Beside, Judaism and Christianity are both theistic. We have similar values and in a way we worship the same God
@@SKMisaac the New Testament, there are numerous references to the Old Testament, including quotations, allusions, and parallels. The New Testament writers often drew on the Old Testament to support their theological arguments, demonstrate the fulfillment of prophecies, and provide a foundation for Christian beliefs, and I can tell you that one this man said is no-where in the bible and if you are so certain then give me the page you are reading.
“Does God accept this kind of behavior?” No. “It’s written down that this is what you do.” No, it’s written down that this is what the Israelites did. “Then God is ok with this.” No, God punishes the Israelites according to their actions.
“@Skybunny THANKS FINALLY I've recently read the Old Testament and the Bible definitely condemned all of this. The Bible says this is what used to be done or what once happened, NOT what you SHOULD do. I think the Bible even emphasizes that even those who weren't chosen by God found these actions horrible.” They deleted your comment.
@@AnonYmous-yj9ib Mathew “22:34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, 22:36 which is the great commandment in the law? 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. “22:38 This is the first and great commandment. 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. ” Jesus, Christian God says this. I don’t know about you but that doesn’t sound like put people into slavery.
The Vikings, Romans, Muslims and Mongols were no better in their treatment of defeated foes. They had their own God/s also so the idea of deity has always been present in humanity.
The Bible does not prescribe slavery. For someone who is one of the least dishonest atheists I’ve come across I’m sad to see this video. Please refer to the mountains of work on this. Inspiringphilosophy has videos on this and the mosaic law, etc.
So, he completely misrepresented every example in the actual interview? And how does telling someone whose family you just killed she has a month to mourn them because she's now your wife not slavery? And don't point to the verses saying that she can't be treated like a slave. That's a translation where the words don't have the exact same meanings (such as the type of slave meant)
Could you explain yourself why this verse is not about slavery than? How forcing a woman to be someone wife after their mourn their dead relatives for 30 days(and other changes)?
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters," (Colossians 3: 22-23) Also: "10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy[a] them-the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites-as the Lord your God has commanded you. Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.(Deuteronomy 20: 10-20)19 When you lay siege to a city for a long time, fighting against it to capture it, do not destroy its trees by putting an ax to them, because you can eat their fruit. Do not cut them down. Are the trees people, that you should besiege them?[b] However, you may cut down trees that you know are not fruit trees and use them to build siege works until the city at war with you falls."
@@hive_indicator318 This is why it’s so important for people to actually understand the Bible before talking about it. The Old Testament is not long-standing objective moral prescriptions those texts are descriptive (saying what happened) not commands from God. Even Jesus says this when referring to divorce in the New Testament to give you an irrefutable example…
Kinda rich how the Anglo-American establishment, after centuries of subjugating others with horrible practices, the minute their empire ends, they immediately start pointing fingers at god as if to say “well don’t blame us, God was even worse”
We're not saying don't blame us. Western society did something truly horrible. That doesn't give Christianity a pass though. Saying one did it as well does nothing to absolve the other
The difference is christianity, and christendom, did far less terrible things than you did. this mass wave of anglos becoming atheist is nothing more than the pride of you guys expressing itself@@nathanfrancis9376
It's not God, it's religion and it's only one part of the problem. If it's any consolation the problem isn't relegated to one side and it's not a problem that can or should be solved by blaming the people.
God says in this passage, "since you have humiliated her". It's given as the reason the captor cannot then sell the woman as a slave if he ends the marriage after the fun is over, "grows tired of her:" But isn't marriage supposed to be sacred? What kind of marriage ends in humiliation and unilateral abandonment for the bride? A fake marriage, that's what. A forced marriage aka rape. The war bride can also be released from marriage without ANY provision for a possible pregnancy. "Since you have humiliated her" is God's own mens rea or knowledge of guilt and one of the most inculpatory remarks in the entire Bible.
This method of interpretation and application of the Scriptures is an illustration of why the early Christians were not biblicists. They interpreted everything in the OT through Christ. There’s a reason legal slavery disappeared in the heavily Christianized world with the growth and spread of Christian faith.
Religious people get half way there. Times were different then, the world was a savage place. The road to ending slavery was a long hard journey that we still haven't completed. The problem comes when you believe that a god exists who allows and condones all this. The better explanation is that no such god exists. That people created gods who shared their values.
Where exactly in the Bible you have this description? Where is a link between this example from Israel (sounds like some story which can happend in any place hundreds years ago) and the Bible?
And thanks to Dr. Jennifer Bird, I know that he doesn't take her as a WIFE but he just takes her. The concept of Wife, marriage added many hundreds of years later.
I often hear Christians talk about how people back then didn't have the mindset we have now so God had to give them different rules to follow compared to us. But I failed to see how a all powerful God couldn't have raised a compassionate nation to set them apart of everyone else. Like wouldn't that be a huge selling point.
I'm not being polemical yet, but I'm just curious if they interacted with Deut 21:14 in their podcast? Which says "If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her." (NIV)
@@GiubileiFernando yeah. Sounds a bit dodgy if you ask me. "Hey girl... don't wanna be a slave? Stay with me for 30 days, we sleep together and then you're free to go. Technically we didn't break my law - deal?"
@@kiljaeden7663 "I'm gonna rape you for a month then, if I'm not satisfied, I get a guaranteed divorce. What do you mean what if you're not satisfied? You don't get a choice!" Bible's war crimes.
Instead of paraphrases, it sure would be nice to get the specific passage that this discussion references… But if I were to take a guess - they are talking about Deuteronomy 21:10-14 where the 14th verse says “But if you no longer delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her.” Deuteronomy 21:14 ESV Is it “slavery” when the woman is treated as any other Israelite wife?
Doesn’t have anything to do with slavery. In fact if after the month you refuse marriage you must let her go. “But it shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go wherever she wishes; and you certainly shall not sell her for money, you shall not treat her as merchandise, since you have humiliated her.” Deuteronomy 21:14 NASB2020
The "month to mourn" was *100%* actually just a way to make sure the women weren't carrying the babies of the people they're mourning.
It's not even the least bit of sympathy that it comes off as from a modern perspective, it's absolutely just to make sure the women menstruate before "marrying" them.
Actually, no. She is also supposed to let her nails grow and shave her head to make herself less attractive. This was to inspire pity so that she might be released. None of these statements, by the way, have anything to do with "supporting" slavery. Slavery happens to have existed, and war tended to bring on the most animal instincts...Perhaps you are naive about what happens with modern day soldiers and foreign civilians?
The Torah is ancient Israel's constitution and regulates what was reality for the ancient world. The laws on the books at one time or another do not suffice to express a complete debate on any subject within any cultural context. Truth is slavery is ubiquitous throughout all of history, and it is most common TODAY in the modern United States. We change the words to "migrant" or "labor trafficking." Obviously, that doesn't mean that most Americans think slavery is right. But it does happen...even when outlawed.
Wow well done 👏
For comparison, Aaron was mourned a full month. This was a standard timeframe of mourning.
Abrahamic god is such cruel and manipulative psychopath is because entire Bible was written by psychopaths. People, who believe in a good and all-loving God are struggling with Stockholm syndrome.
You don't ever stop mourning until others are mourning you.
You just get better at not letting it show on the outside.
“It’s okay if you murder her family, just be sure to give her a month to mourn” - god
If you serve Satan and hate the Israelites because they serve God, you won't be just killed mercilessly you will go to hell after that.
@@nikokapanen82Why would anyone take such a threat seriously though? Do you think your comment actually carries the weight you think it does?
And if atheists ruled the world that woman would be a man
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@nikokapanen82
Either there is no hell.
Or we both go there
The 30 days is likely to make sure the woman isn’t pregnant
No, actually 30 days is just a standard timeframe of mourning. For example, when Aaron died he was mourned for 30 days.
@@booksquid856 Perhaps, but why not include Shanah for those who lost parents? My understanding is that was standard as well.
This is ridiculous. You act as is you understand the scriptures and slander Gods word trying to condemn what you don’t like without reading what is actually applicable today and not seeing the better things. Jesus came to rectify and fulfill the Old Testament by replacing it with the New Testament. How dare you try to make sense of something just to destroy it with your lack of knowledge and intelligence. Your lack of understanding is showing. May God bless you with understanding because it send you have none.
@@booksquid856Mourning can take years
@@morzanx1 There is the first month and the first year, Different piriods for mourning.
Somehow, I don't think that anyone actually got time allotted to mourn.
“Babe just cuz you’re still mourning doesn’t mean we can’t fuck right? Not like you have a say in the matter but…” fr it’s actual barbarian shit
Im sure it's like the time allotted when you get married or have a kid, you're supposed to have 6 months after each off of work to be with them, but I doubt that ever happened. It's just like a "see it's not THAT bad *cough* on paper"
And what about today's world? Do we even give a second thought to all the civilian victims our soldiers ravage and rape? Don't think anyone today is being a better example.
of course they get time to mourn, god is merciful and has infinite wisdom silly! 😇
I'm willing to bet they did because they wouldn't want to find out there pregnant with someone else's child after marring them. Which is probably the real reason for the rule.
Why has he got a walnut in his ear
it's a peanut
@@Dreedo. ah
Deez nuts
Hearing aid
@@fooslayse3303 peanut
'you need the bible for morality'......
Yeah I rather not..... Thanks
No one argues that
@@guntherwhite2043I'm afraid quite a lot of people do, though I'm glad you're (presumably) not one of them. A frequent response to the atheist's challenging the morality of certain horrible Bible passages is that the atheist lacks a foundation or moral standard by which to judge them as immoral.
@@guntherwhite2043 there's definitely people that argue that, it's just that now people more frequently go the route of "Well you don't need the Bible to have morals but without God morality is just personal opinion" which honestly is pretty much just the same argument just worded nicer. There's also the alternate argument that God placed objective morality within everyone's hearts, which is self-evidently no true because if it were then humans would never argue about morality in the first place.
@Abyzz_Knight what is your response to that? Are you just admitting that your morality is subjective?
@@poopslappa1661 yes, morality is subjective with or without a God. Theists think just saying things like "God is the objective standard of morality" make it so. Any sort of value judgements, which includes morality, are inherently subjective.
Sounds like rape to me
Rape, murder, slavery abduction, all in one.
It is.
Yeah we just genocided the whole city but moderns want to say the forced marriage is bad. So it would be fine if she was killed, but if she was saved from death that's not fine.
This is ridiculous. You act as is you understand the scriptures and slander Gods word trying to condemn what you don’t like without reading what is actually applicable today and not seeing the better things. Jesus came to rectify and fulfill the Old Testament by replacing it with the New Testament. How dare you try to make sense of something just to destroy it with your lack of knowledge and intelligence. Your lack of understanding is showing. May God bless you with understanding because it send you have none.
@efrainjimenez9741 wow imagine thinking your thousand year old funny book is applicable to a completely different civilisation
The Quran is the truth.
Also-although perhaps even specifically so-to tell if the baby (if she’s pregnant) had was the Israelite’s so they’re not fathering the slain former husband’s offspring🤒
@@oofles5514kinda big brain ngl.
I unironically saw someone use it as an argument that Christianity/Judaism is better than Islam: cos in Islam you can rape immediately while in Christianity/Judaism you need to wait a month 😂 yeah, how can atheists even be moral without such an excellent guide to ethics, their subjective (because if you choose a holy book as a moral guide, it's objective) morality just can't compare 😂
@@oofles5514that makes a lot of sense, for a moment I thought Old Testament God (aka a bunch of angry ancient goat herders larping as prophets) had a moment of a minor empathy (empathy is the only thing omnipotence doesn't cover) and shed a single tear for murder and rape victims -- nah, we're asking for too much
You guys will find out soon enough
We're talking about slavery and forced marriage.
Preloaded rape. Marriage is tame
Both are okay tbh. In the case of slavery I think some empathy should be precognized, and forced marriage should not be done except if there is a good reason to justify it, such as a good protector if the environment is dangerous. But they aren't inherently bad.
@@Exceedtherealmyou deserve both
@@Exceedtherealm they both are violating consent, and therefore are psychologically damaging.
@@ExceedtherealmIt's tempting to just call you crazy for defending these things, but I'll accept your sincerity on one condition: you'd be 100% okay with these things as long as YOU weren't a slave or being forced into marriage.
Well here’s the thing. A lot of religious ppl don’t actually read the Bible themselves. They probably don’t even know that the Bible says this.
We do, and we do know what it is saying very well. We also know that this behavior in the Old Testament is noting in comparison of what is waiting for most people after they die and end up in real hell, that is a real horror that cannot be fathomed by human mind.
Yet God will justify Himself even for the existence of hell.
@@nikokapanen82you sound really excited about this hell, are you sure it’s you who’s not going there?
@@nikokapanen82You sound absolutely terrified. Your God already has demands for you that you can't (or aren't) fulfilling, I'll live my life with integrity and face the music than live these mortal days in fear, and I hope you can someday join me, seriously.
@@nikokapanen82
You might read the Bible but most don't, and even if you do GREAT. You read and believe in fairy tales. Good for you, go ahead and pat yourself on the back.
@@runkus6136have you ever considered how antisemitic it is to declare the history of Israel as fairy tales? Oh, the superior ethics of the atheist. How ironic.
Some comments on that, im not a schollar or anything but i had the time
1.- Deuteronomy was for the tribe of Israel in a specific moment in time, if you are not from Israel this in no way applies to you, specially not today. Its more a historic document now "this is what we used to believe" kinda thing, it informs events that happen later (I know they don't even imply that in the short, but i feel i have to throw it in there) And personally, I think Slavery is definitely horrible and inexcusable, something that shouldn't happend, regardless of time and place, but there is a reason this things are mentioned in this book. This is my interpretation.
2.- True Slavery was normal in that region, it was the norm, an everyday ocurrance, but Israel were called to be different;
► To allow their slaves to run away and live there as citizens (without any kind of oppression from no one in Israel) if they fled their master [Deutoronomy 23:15-16]
► To directly free them each seven years if they were hebrew [Exodus 21:2],
if they wanted to do anything to them there were rituals they had to follow (for example; the shaved head and ritual clothes for a month if they wanted marriage, and they couldn't kill them because they were still people rather than objects, so their murders were treated as any other murder, they couldn't be sold)
Other religions and tribes around that time in that place didn't have those requirements and rituals. This is similar to that thing about frogs not jumping out of the water if you slowly raise the temperature but they jump out if you put them directly in boiling water.
So These rules/rituals seemingly had 2 purposes 1) to make them different from other nations and 2) they were also just a first step towards changing them for the better.
3.- On Deutoronomy 23: They were allowed to leave, and live within their cities as citizens.
"15 You shall not give back to his master the slave who has escaped from his master to you. 16 He may dwell with you in your midst, in the place which he chooses within one of your gates, where it seems best to him; you shall not oppress him."
Explanation: AFAIK There were 3 types of slaves
A) Hebrews that were paying a debt (for example; thieves that had nothing, so they couldn't pay what they had stolen, or just people who had debts that couldn't be paid for lack of money, so they payed with manual labor). In which case a closer concept to it may be that of a buttlers or maids, servants rather than what today we think when we hear the word slaves.
B) War captives (excluding people from a specific list of tribes they were to not meddle with) but only if they were presented a peace offer and it was rejected. In other words, they were people from places who wanted war with Israel. Now, think that they'd only reject a peace offer if they thought they were going to win, so they expected to treat Israel's people as slaves, it was a uno reverse card. And even then, all the rest of rituals and requirements still applied to them, even if had Israel lost they wouldn't have the same considerations with them, they could be killed without it being considered a murder.
C) Slaves bought from other nations
Deutoronomy does not make any difference of which kind of slave they were talking about, a slave was allowed to leave if they fled.
Now, language changes through time, words often change their meaning, and lots of things get lost in translation. In this specific instance a different word might convey this meaning more accurately according to our language today. Israel centuries ago and Today's english are really distant things, in space, time, and culture, so they might have had different ideas surounding the concept of "slavery".
I mean, Im not versed in america's history but... Could you imagine the law in a preabolishment america indicating that slaves had to be freed at specific times, that their murders were to be investigated as actual murders, or them being legally allowed to live in any part of america as citizens if they fled?
Not saying that nothing bad happend there around that time, im sure that like in any other culture and time there had to be people not following the rules as they were writen. People trying to get away with stuff.
In fact the old testament is full of that kind of stories. First God gives a rule and then Israel goes and breaks it. Its a pattern thats there for a reason. Something along the lines of "even the people who saw the most and biggest miracles and directly talked to God didn't fully obey, and did as they pleased", I think is there to teach us that there is something wrong with our reliance on man made rules. I guess Humans don't like being told what to do.
That’s a very good explanation
Either everything in the bible is god's word or none of it is. You don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to pick and choose. This is just another coup out for Christians to avoid the depravity of their holy scripture.
You would think a good god would just say that slavery is bad. But if you make a bunch of excuses why it wasn't it might not seem that bad.
@@trithos7308 the question is, if there isn't a God, then why is Slavery bad? Then if there is a God, which one is the real one? Since there are over 500 eye witness accounts of His death and resurrection we must assume that the things he said were true and that means that the God of Israel is the Most High God.
You are blessed by the wisdom of God my friend
... but god is all loving... right?
Think about it, the most unconditionally LOVING thing a hypothetical god could do
Would be to:
Allow ALL possibilities TO BE
Including the possibility of slavery
That god could incarnate as both slave AND master and taste both experiences
God is so loving he allows a master to enjoy a slave, and also learn the lesson of keeping a slave
God is so loving that he allows a slave to enjoy being a slave, and also learn the lesson of being a toiling slave
@@jacksonelmore6227That is fucked up. I hope you will consider that certain parts of scripture are immoral.
That's really fucking stupid. That loving God is NOT allowing all possibilities to be, it's making specific rules about it and giving the slave holders evil ways around having to let them go by making them leave their families or go free.
@@jacksonelmore6227Holy shit what the fuck happened to you, like, I’m unironically horrified with you 😨
@@jacksonelmore6227no, it would not be loving to allow people to be enslaved. This is a great example of how the Bible fosters very twisted morality.
Yep, they don’t internalize the difference between voluntary work and slavery
Theres more slaves now than any time in history outside the Christian world real slaves not modern day slaves nobody cares but innocent white people who stopped and fought to end the international slave trader's all over the world are some how bad nope they changed because they were guided by the bible the rest of the world clearly not
It just indentured servitude... and they never made th3 effort to learn how disgusting even that it
@@heinshaaine8153 you're just a hater like all haters it's easy to feel good looking down on other's you don't care you're far more privaliged by birth than many other people you don't want or have the ability to make something of yourself like basically the left as a whole build nothing just want to take from other's
@@heinshaaine8153 Indentured servitude is slavery. It’s still involuntary labor. And in this case we are talking about sexual slavery which is extremely brutal and amounts to a certain word I’d rather not say on TH-cam.
Not all biblical slavery was voluntary.
Continue…
Deuteronomy 21:14
“If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.”
...and therefore, what?
So if _she's_ not pleased with the marriage, she doesn't get let go? How very ethical.
Please don’t say, “but that was the Old Testament.”
Jesus told many parables about slaves and masters, and they are no better. Maybe worse, because Jesus equates the master, no matter how unjustly he treats the slaves, with god.
He never equates a sinful man with God.
Also there is Colossians 3:22-23 in the New Testament:
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters,"
@@mailillso be a slave and be happy about it or else... all loving god btw, I like it.
In the time and place of Jesus Christ on Earth, slavery was everywhere. Our modern view on slavery is a comparatively recent invention.
@hananokuni2580 That's the thing it was wrong then its now Jesus was wrong end of story.
Well that explains why religions caused so many wars and massacres. I was always confused why people would kill and plunder in the name of a God who supposedly said "You shall not kill" and "You shall not steal"
Many explain this by saying that the commandments apply only within the Israelite tribes. So you cannot murder, steal from, or covet the wife of another Jew, but everyone else is fair game.
The Bible isn’t a moral guide, it’s an instruction manual of how to keep a strong ethnostate
@@Mattycakes1 the Old Testament is still Christian, and that’s the part of the Bible I was referring to. It doesn’t matter that it was once exclusive to Jews. If the Old Testament is an important part of the Bible, then it’s contents should be judged when considering the morality of the Bible.
@@Mattycakes1 Numbers 31
@@Mattycakes1 It is not just a “battle.” The Israelites, under the direct command of God via Moses, murder the Midianites (yes murder, as innocent women and children were killed as well) and steal their belongings, two things that God previously told them were forbidden. God told the Jews to not do certain things to certain people (Jews), but commands them to do those exact things to other people (non-Jews). I genuinely don’t know how you can make my point any more clear.
@@Mattycakes1 if you can look at the multiple examples of the Israelites being commanded to slaughter non-Jews (Deuteronomy 20:17, since you asked for more examples), and claim that they are unimportant contradictions, then you are very obviously arguing in bad faith. If one gets their morality from the Bible (the original context of this comment section), then by reading the Bible they will understand that God repeatedly allowed for, or demanded, immoral actions upon certain demographics, while forbidding the same actions towards others. In the scripture, this demographic bias from God is very obviously an ethnic one.
I’ll break it down further. If I wrote a book about morality and said that murder and thievery are immoral, and then went on to recount multiple times where I have personally murdered or stolen from left-handed people, would you not leave with the impression that left-handed people are somehow lesser than right-handed people, as they do not have the same rights or deserve the same ethical treatment? Now think about how this metaphor applies to my argument, and really try to understand why this kind of contradiction is very important when considering what the Bible teaches.
"Damn Autocorrect"😡
- probably Jesus while writing that part.
If I am not mistaken, even in the most Jesus obsessed sects of Christianity, Jesus is NOT considered to be the one who wrote the bible.
@@Finnboy-ml5jv You must be fun at parties
@@Liberty5024 We are on a channel centred around discussions about theology and morality. Ain’t exactly a party here. Correcting mistakes that other atheists make about religions is important. Pretty sure Alex would agree with me here.
@@Liberty5024dumb comment
@@Finnboy-ml5jv Yeah cool.
The guy who wrote the comment wrote it as a joke. That's all I was saying
Atheists and agnostics get their morality from cultural norms and personal preferences. Theists gets their morality from cultural norms and personal preferences as well. The difference is A) we're honest about it and B) we don't pretend we're listening to a magical text to shield us from criticism of our worst beliefs
I think morality is more complicated than that. Many people have strong innate biases toward altruism towards in group members. Those who done are called psychopaths or CEOs.
@@cdog4100altruism is evil just like being a psychopathic murderer is. The sacrificed and the sacrificers are two sides of the same coin.
There’s no justification for you to not live your own life for yourself. Don’t be evil, be selfish, choose life. This is your life, live it!
I correct. Most atheists get their morality from secular humanism, which focuses on the well-being of ourselves and others. It has our well-being as its foundation.
@@francescaerreia8859 "...altruism is evil just like being a psychopathic murderer is" That is an extreme position to take. How is helping others (altruism) evil, let alone as evil as murder?
@@jasonspades1265
I correct. Most atheists get their morality from secular humanism, which focuses on the worship of man, anarchy, individualism and whatever capitalism wants to fill the word "human rights" with for their own benefits.
Theists get their morality either directly from God, or from values which value overall happiness and growth of the society on the long term. In any case theists got the upper hand.
Clearly, the cornerstone of Western morality
🤔🤨🤨
Hey! Dumbass! Evil people exist in every country…
actually yes, but it's too complicated for you if you are American.
@@elleanna5869
Then please, go ahead and explain, I'm not an American
Dennis Prager's response: "It's indentured servitude!"
There are different passages. So yes, there is also a section on indentured servitude. Obviously not the one about women captured from war. Kind of embarrassing that modern people criticize this section without realizing how much our modern military is responsible for ravaging and raping ...and without a second thought, let alone a month.
@@booksquid856But DP claims that the bible doesn't advocate for slavery. Clearly, it does.
@@booksquid856 I am not surprised by the misdeeds of any civilization but these authors are allegedly inspired by a divine entity and many continue to worship this entity and these words - and in many cases, frown upon those who don't follow this direction.
@@booksquid856 So, because immoral acts still take place in the modern world, it is embarrassing to criticize the immorality of a book that supposedly offers moral guidance? How does that make any sense? What kind of human being are you?
@@booksquid856 Lol just about everyone knows about the problems of modern military, no need to act like there's some sort of hypocrisy there.
Also if it's so embarrasing for "modern" people to criticize this book maybe there shouldn't be billions of people who act as if the bible is truly the word of God
The verse right after this says: „If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.“ Forcing a war captive into marriage was in their understanding different from slavery. However, this implies that the captives who weren’t forced into marriage were indeed taken as slaves.
(And of course a good argument can be made that forced marriage should be considered a form of slavery even if ancient people didn‘t view it like that.)
Good thing we're not ancient people then
How about "if she is not pleased with you , let her go" sounds allot more moral to me
Forced marriage is considered slavery because it is. It's taking a captive of war and telling them she is now married to you. It's not letting someone decide for themselves.
Not all forms of slavery are bad anyway.
@@ExceedtherealmWhat forms aren't, and would you consider being my slave in that form?
Thanks for giving us the context to it! Oh.. wait.. it‘s framing again😄
Context that makes it fair:
Then God said : Haha, just kidding. Don't kill anyone, don't invade their homes, leave them alone unless they are hurting others, and try to make friends with everyone.
@@tankbuggeru I guess since you haven‘t made it to the 3. class in school, you have a hard time reading the Bible and quoted the mickey mouse book instead
He did give the context, he explained when and how you are allowed to utilize this rule. And what the rule allows.
But since you seem to imply you know the bible better, could you provide the missing context that you feel is so important?
Instead of just asserting that context is missing and handwaving it away?
@@rogeguggenbuhl6679 A person who still believes in Santa Claus calling me a child, that's rich :D
@@rogeguggenbuhl6679 Joshua Bowen is a scholar. There’s a full video for u 😂 what context do u need? Here I’ll give it since ur slow: WHO: Hebrews & Israelites (do u know the difference?). WHAT: war with non-Israelites/Hebrews. WHEN: probably written during Babylonian exilic period reminiscing on the kingdom of Judah and perhaps Israel (Hebrew Bible is hilariously poorly dated by tradition; first time the Babylonian sabbatu shows up therefore it’s written post Babylonian influence). WHERE: Canaan later kingdom of Judah (and Israel before destruction) and then yehud medinata. WHY: Yahweh or el or whatever isn’t real so it’s manmade and evil primitive men enslave others.
What book / verse is this?
old testament i assume
@@ThomasHD25yep and it's not a command , it's war code with captives. For the average of ancient world it's even rather liberal
@@elleanna5869 which would be decent if God was a historical, human leader.
"If they close their gates and put up a fight"
What was the alternative? Here comes the invaders, let's extend them a flowers carpet?
Seems to me like a ridiculous way a human hand prescribed how to abduct beautiful women from an invaded city and force them into slave wives.
Oh, but the people who believe this book is the inspired, un-erred word of god see two men or two women trying to get married and they wave their book in the air claiming "sanctity of marriage".
Exodus 22: 29-30 You shall not delay to make offerings from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses.[c]
“The firstborn of your sons you shall give to me. 30 You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to me.
What is this referring to if not child sacrifice?
"Thou shall not Kill"
Also God:
Though shall not think
Also God=skinner
It's "thou shall not murder". God allowing the killing of his own creation isn't the same thing.
@@Nov_Netnice guy this god bloke
Yeah this has to be one of the most disingenuous clips. First he is referencing numbers 31 if you read the text you will clearly see this is not a mandate for Christians to do this. Its important to note that the Bible is not just lesson after lesson. It is also a history and prophesy. Just because somthing was done doesnt mean you do that thing. In numbers we learn how the Israelites struggled in the desert. This involved war at times. The people of Midian oppresses the Isrilites. So they fought a blody war as was common back then. In fact all the actions they took were common to war back then and even in more modern eras. I would also add the taking of the women was an act of mercy. Keep in mind the time. If the women were not talken in they would have died. Also note ot never says force yourself on a women it says take her as a bride these are different things. In short he doesnt understand this at all and none of this gives a mandate for Christians to do this like he says.
If God changes his mind, then we should not follow his words, commands, laws or examples. If he has told people to do horrible things for no reason, why should we believe that he's good. Because he said so? It doesn't matter how horrible the times were. He could have changed that, he could have left people alone, but instead he tells people of a certain tribe to do horrible things to a different tribe, for reasons that would not make sense to a god. You can't defend sparing some people, while killing others. What if you were a woman born ugly or scarred by an accident? Then you deserve to starve to death in the desert, while your hot sister is being taken care of? You can't excuse this in a context where a timeless, all-good, all-powerful being controls the world.
@@tankbuggeru Firstly read numbers 31. Second God doesn't change his mind. This is telling a history not setting law, never does it say to do this in any other context. You are also conflating a few things. First God is good people are not. God also gives people free will. Therefore people can act against Him and he won't snap His fingers and make them belive. No idea where the attractive thing comes in that is never said. Only unmarried women were taken because they could still be saved.
@@jameskurk4696 So if he says "X is bad" a few thousand years ago, is it bad today or has it no relevance? Is X only bad for the people he spoke to? Does he have to specify that "you people of the future, don't mind this thing, follow my laws, and ignore what I instructed these people to do"? If yes, do you think that's consistent? Does that sound like the planning of an almighty being?
As I asked, how do we know God is good? It seems like a lot his history is wrought with unnecessary pain, death and destruction. He also dishes out punishment collectively, which is not fair. He created Hell, where you face infinite punishment for finite crimes. And one of these crimes is just not being aware of God. How is that reasonable when he leaves that responsibility to humans, and is himself silent? If he gave me a sense of compassion, mercy, empathy and forgiveness, why doesn't he have it himself? And don't bother talking about sacrificing his son. He is his son, and he was never lost, he came home. Why create pain?
Humans don't have free will, or at least we can't know that we do. But the funny thing is that IF we do have free will given by God, what benefit is that? So we can question, doubt and judge, and have a chance of going to Hell? If the world is about 30% Christian, Hell is filling up much faster than Heaven. I'd say it would be better not to have that choice.
The attractive part comes from that the clip where it's explained that an Israelite man may if he so choses to force a girl of the enemy to marry him, which obviously would exclude the unattractive ones, or those who have been defiled by another man. Haha, it's so funny how silly masculinity can destroy the lives of so many innocent people. Oh, I mean God of course, since he said it, not a bunch of horny, old, greedy dudes.
@@tankbuggeru It seems you don't understand the Bible or the Church very well, I say this not to offend, but because your claims against it don't make much sense. I would say read numbers 31. To adress your first point not every Single word in the Bible is a law. Leviticus is full of them with God telling people how to act. The Text in numbers is clear that what happens in numbers 31 is a response to atrocities done by a different nation not a blanket order. What he says in the video doesn't Show the text well once again just read it. As for free will why were are given it is hard to say there is a lot there that I could go into but it would make the comment way too long so if you really want the Christian explaination look up Mike Winger. Lastly God does speak To us through the Bible and Christian should spread the message to save as many people as they can. God has all that you said once again complicated subject but in short Jesus died so that we can be forgiven. We all sin against God but as long as you have faith alone you are saved that's the only thing you need is faith alone.
@@jameskurk4696 I guess the minds of the religious and the sceptics just aren't compatible when in their respective states. Perhaps it's hard for Christians to judge God and the Bible on the same criteria as everything else if they feel that they constitute the existence of everything, like sawing off the branch your sitting on, perhaps. I think there is not much "divine" logic in the Bible, but if true logic is chaos, true goodness is blind faith and not actions, and God is good because he defines he term, then yes, I suppose we are all just lost and should fall in line and try to convince ourselves of what is preached, but I think that's a bit like 1984.
It would be good if you put the verse in the description so we can read it ourselves rather than blindly trusting what you or anyone else says
Fair point, but I found it easily searching “Bible verse prisoner of war marry”.
Or you could watch the whole video for more context. Afterward, you could read Leviticus and Dueteronomy yourself so as not to blindly take what someone else says as true. After all, they're two of the most exciting books in the bible.
@@foreverix1218 how about no
@@foreverix1218 if you unironically think that the book of Leviticus is OK, you need psychological help my dude.
@@foreverix1218 since you unironically think that the bible is fine and that slavery can be justified through extreme mental gymnastics:
I'm gonna find you, chain you up and sell you off to the highest bidder.
Do you object to this? If you object to being enslaved then you will contradict any and every single argument that slavery is fine, exposing you for the hack you are.
Amazing how mo followed those verses literally!
I once used this in an "argument" I had with a Christian and was met with the "that's not about slavery, it's about marriage" response.
actually the Christian was right, this OT passage is not about slavery but how to deal with war captives when they are women you want for yourself. Read the whole passage.
@@elleanna5869 I have read the whole passage. It's about taking virgins as sex slaves after murdering their parents.
@@elleanna5869 Also, thank you for being a perfect example of how Christian are intellectually dishonest.
Its kidnapping and sexual slavery, and marrying your captive doesn't make it better. In today's world, its a war crime and you'd go to prison.
@MG-ot2yr said: " In today's world, its a war crime and you'd go to prison."
You my sir, are thoroughly naive. Most are not punished, most are condoned, and everybody (but the victim) walks away without any problem.
That is the reality. Today and in the past.
It is rare that it is punished.
@@j.p.vanbolhuis8678 And you sir, have an astounding lack of brain cells and no sense of morals and ethics. Whether or not its successfully punished is irrelevant to the moral standard of today that makes it a war crime. Society as a whole doesn't condone it, you must be referring to some Bible toting immoral people who are not representatives of everyone. You should evaluate your own moral standards, you just dishonestly tried to make the claim that its no different now than in biblical times, which is flat out a lie. Now go repent so you can move on to your next sin, wash, rinse, repeat.
When you are genociding an entire people I don't think the fact that you take a few of them as wives is really the great marker of immorality that you think it is.
Assuming you were in a Western country. I don't think many countries in the Middle East or Africa agree with that.
@@65firered Almost every country in the world is a member of the UN, with the exception of Vatican and Palestine territory, all UN members ratified the Geneva Convention which is the core of international humanitarian laws and outlines conduct of armed conflict and defines war crimes. So I'd say there's universal agreement whether you're a western country or not.
The problem is that they are ignoring the Historical context, Duteronomy is speaking of going to war against an enemy, and the slaves are those who survive after the war is over, they ignore what the fate of a woman would be with out a husband in that era, just as they ignore the culural norms of that time period. even in biblical times not everyone was committed to a religious blief, atheist and agnostics existed, and they were governed by a monarchial type government. no such thing as democracy.and they also had rules as to when captives could be taken in a war against an enemy. you aslo have to consider the voice in which it is writen, is the writer suggesting that God is telling them to take beautiful women as wifes? in reality the only part in which the scripture speaks of god, is to the point that the the losers of the war were delivered to them by god. no where does is suggest that god commanded them to take beautiful captive women as their wives!
We understand the context.
We also understand human societies had to realize how wrong this kind of behavior were on their own, with no imput from the allegedly perfect and benevolent God.
@@raistlin3462The Thing is Human societies would not have come to the realization that this kind of behavior was Wrong without the guidance of a perfect and Benevolent god. Religion has always been the precursor to moving humanity's moral compass in the right direction! Humanities Moral evolution has taken centuries to evolve. and not all of Humanity has followed! Consider the difference between the Judeo-Christian world and the Muslim and Chinese worlds when it comes to Morality! we have the Muslim Brother Hood and Hamas Isis who believe that the rape and murder of Jews men women and children are not only acceptable but it is a mandate of their Religion, in contrast, Judeo-Christians believe such actions to be evil, reprehensible, and should be punished, the Chinese who have rejected god, have also stripped their citizens of basic rights such as the right to free speech, they seek to control behavior via a social credit system, as a result, the People have become apathetic they ignore the pain and suffering of others who are not direct family relations, which is why a child can be run over by numerous cars in the street and no one takes action, those who have business pursue wealth at any cost, and their leaders are more like mob bosses extracting bribes to increase their own wealth allowing shotty construction of buildings, etc, to the point that a teen volleyball team ends up being buried in the rubble of a collapsed poorly constructed building! www.reuters.com/world/china/ten-killed-after-school-gymnasium-roof-collapses-china-2023-07-24/#:~:text=BEIJING%2C%20July%2024%20(Reuters),be%20young%20female%20volleyball%20players.
Well, that's because these aren't the passages that speak of slavery. These are pretty clear in what they say and, in many instances, more humane than how most countries would conduct themselves.
Also, they believe that a husband should rule over his wife. The Hebrew text of Genesis 3:16 uses the word "Yim-šāl" to denote a man ruling over his wife, which is the same word as used in Judges 8:23 to denote the Lord Jehovah ruling over the people of Israel.
And you judge them on the basis of the New Testament. Do you take account of the times they lived in, what were the customs of the nations around Israel?
@AnonYmous-yj9ib Wrong.
At almost 80, and an atheist for 70 of those years. I'm certainly more familiar with the Bible than most Christians I know.
There is simply no excuse for the lack of that one vital but missing Commandment.
And there can be few people - especially people of colour - who don't know what that Commandment should have forbidden, had there been the slightest validity to this vile mythology.
Certainly does sound like you have the theological understanding of a 10 year old. You've had seven decades to figure out that a worldly prohibition on slavery was less important than what Jesus came to so, but instead of understanding you probably spent those decades studying justifications so you wouldn't have to go to sunday service anymore
@@Crocalu
...ah yes, because an omnipotent being couldn't _possibly_ do _two_ things at once...
@@Crocalu Just proving why your god isn’t worth following
@Crocalu Why are you so bitter and hateful? You don't have to go at people like that because they have a simple criticism of your faith.
@@Crocaluah typical Christian cope
But......they were not supposed to intermarry!!!! But the may if they go to war.......so confusing
I have the same bowtie, Unite!!
Bow ties are cool...
@@joshuakohlmann9731I only have regular ties, I just got the urge to go get a bowtie.
I like learning about this stuff but could you please tag the passage. I don't like taking stuff at face value and need the evidence to back it up before I believe it.
Detueronomy 21:10-14
I like the bananas ritual though, with nail trimming and fashionable new outfits for the traumatised new happy bride. I'm sure that was a lot of fun
Out of context Bible verses as a gotcha to Christians is crazy.
They try so hard and always fail.
What context justifies a man forcing a woman to marry him after killing all her loved ones?
@@sau2949 The context of rationality. If you cherry pick you can get statements like “hate your father and mother” out of the Bible
@@moor236 is not rational to think it okay to rape and forcibly marry women captives, there is no context that can help this situation
@@sau2949it was plain rational and practiced in 90℅ of ancient world cultures. It was justified by social ierarchy in order to gain and administrate resources for tribes and nation sustainment. This code quoted in the vid is even kinda advanced for "women rights" ,for the times. And even for later times.
We live under different circumstances that shaped us into different mindset and values. Also (in the west especially ) thanks to New Testament.
Sounds like that contradicts "shall not kill" and "shall not covet another man's wife"
Oops.
She ain't a wife after the husbands dead, shes a widow! Life hacks.
Of course it does. It's two different books written by two different people in two different time periods with two different moralities. Why would anyone expect the entire Bible to agree with itself
Yes, of course it contradicts. That shows that it isn't some holy book but is just written by different authors hundreds of years apart.
Accurate translation is thou shall not "murder"
@@Veritas231 True. And to be fair if they aren't really people it isn't really murder so I mean, just classify your enemies as sub human and you're fuckin good to go! (biblically)
Oh yes, this is the book I should follow until the end of time..a book of bronze age horror.
Just use “It’s in the Bible, so it’s ok!” in front of a judge and see what happens.
Hey just asking but where is this in the Bible?
Deuteronomy 21
nooo u dont get it, its out of context!
How so?
Indeed it is.
Everything/anything in the religious texts is classified as ‘out of context’ when it defies their ability to reconcile, being inconsistent, contradictory, or just plain vile.
@@jeffreyhearn8930no, everytime that something actually coming from a different context is cherry picked and judged / misquoted / forced according modern standards. Context is vital to be proper scholars and to be honest. Without context, you just create distortion and malice- wheter if you are "left", "right" or whatever.
Where in the Bible is the passage?
Deuteronomy 21:10-14
@@CosmicSkeptic These captives were not to serve as slaves. That was made clear.
"But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her."
Meaning, you may take her in to be your wife. But do not later decide to treat her as a slave if you are not satisfied with her.
@@Messianic-Gentiledo not take her as a slave if YOU are not satisfied with HER. Meaning if he is "satisfied with her" he's allowed to keep her as a captive. Fucked up.
@@perchperkins06 no, if he is satisfied with her, he is to take her as a wife. This is abundantly clear.
@@Messianic-Gentile "take her as a wife", as in being allowed to assault her and force her to cook and clean for him without giving her a choice.
I'm not a Christian, but the new testament has a different vibe when compared to the old.
The bible was written in times when slavery was prolific.
Yes, the NT has a different vibe. But it still accepts slavery
Colossians 3:22-23
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favour, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men..."
@mailill we also got to keep in mind the different types of slavery that was practiced from the bronze age until the roman empire.
Life long slavery wasnt practiced like how we think in the european/ african slave trade.
I understand it best as indentured servitude for x amount of time.
Quite often there are accounts of ' slaves' being set free and they then living close by ( especially in the Roman Greek world).
Tbh, it's something I will read up on more, Thanks for responding anyway.
@@Yoghurtslinger No, lifeong slavery WAS practised in the Middle East. The OT DOES describe exactly that. If you are a Hebrew male slave and your master "gives" you a wife, when your time is up, she stays his slave AND SO DO YOUR KIDS. For life. Slaves can be given to your heirs until the slaves die.
They had indentured servitude AND debt slavery AND lifelong slavery! They are explicitly told they can buy slaves from the foreigners.
@archapmangcmg in roman society when the new testament was written things were different.
They had left the bronze age, ive read account by prominent historians that said its possible it was practiced how I described.
@@Yoghurtslinger Nope.
The Bible itself says that the Israelites practised permanent, chattel slavery as well as debt slavery and indentured servitude. They WERE that horrible.
The only objections in the Bible to slavery was when God's FAVOURITES were enslaved, not doing the slaving of others, and then it was only the men, and only some of them, that got special treatment. The Israelites/Hebrews were cruel and barbaric in treating humans as property, in raping girls captured in war and keeping them as sex slaves, in committing genocide against their neighbours.
They weren't unique in that but they were still horrible.
In Roman times, lifelong slavery was still practised throughout the empire which would include Judea. The Romans, too, were awful people in many ways, merely stronger than most others and thus able to impose themselves and their ways. As much as we love the idea of Rome, we shouldn't lose sight of the things they got wrong.
One of which was slavery.
It's actually amazing how similar the American slavery was to Biblical slavery but it *makes sense* when you learn *American slavery is deliberately based on Biblical slavery.*
Apologists: “The Bible doesn’t condone slavery! Now let me proceed to explain to you how the slavery the Bible condones was actually good!”
Not slavery.
@@bakedbeans5494 Sure was though.
@@magepunk2376 Deut 21 clearly talks about marrying women of war and Deut 20:14 relates to it.
@@bakedbeans5494 exodus 21 clearly condones the system of slavery by giving instructions on how to practice slavery
@@SevenPr1meYet it does not seem indentical to American slavery.
War is hell. Learn it. It’s the closest you will be to hell on earth. So your faith will be tested.
The most common refrain is: that’s just how things worked back then. As though that justifies such brutality.
It's not about justify it's about being honest and understand that there is no reality without context. Without context, you remain only ignorant .
@@elleanna5869 : Of course context is important, but no context in the world makes the horrible things people used to do acceptable, moral, or ethical, especially things done in the name of their gods. That’s the point. Because it was condoned in their holy book, Christians excuse slavery, treating women as chattel, parents being instructed to kill unruly children, everyone being instructed to kill men who have gay sex, and all sorts of other things which were completely obscene. The Bible, like most holy books, has some wisdom in it, but believers have to stop making excuses for the horribly ignorant ideas in their holy books and accept their doctrine for what it is: imperfect.
@@elleanna5869 There is no context for an eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing god. Whatever he has said or done is always the highest standard and is not changed by how life was 100, 1000 or 10000 years ago. If you dispute that, fine, then God is 2000 years outdated, and we have to find out ourselves what our do's and don'ts should be, and not look to the Bible for anything but historical claims.
Of but of course the bible doesent cater to its writers
Can I get the verses? I’d like to be well armed
I think the one they're referencing here is Numbers 31:17-18, but a couple more I keep jotted down are Exodus 21:20-21, Leviticus 19:20-22 and Leviticus 25:44-46
Yup. Please see also, "Forty days and Forty nights". What a convenient mantra.
See also: Christian views on slavery
The issues surrounding slavery dominated the 19th century in the United States.[41] This created tension between Baptists in northern and southern U.S. states over the issue of manumission. In the two decades after the American Revolution during the Second Great Awakening, northern Baptist preachers (as well as the Quakers and Methodists) increasingly argued that slaves be freed.[42] Although most Baptists in the 19th century south were yeomen farmers and common planters, the Baptists also began to attract major planters among their membership. The southern pastors interpreted the Bible as supporting slavery and encouraged paternalistic practices by slaveholders. They preached to slaves to accept their places and obey their masters, and welcomed slaves and free blacks as members, though whites controlled the churches' leadership, and seating was usually segregated.[42] From the early 19th century, many Baptist preachers in the South also argued in favor of preserving the right of ministers to be slaveholders.[43]
Hit the nail on the head, Alex.
"They weren't slaves, they were prisoners of war"
Prisoners of war even after the war? Whats the term for that again?
Yep, war slaves
I don't get why people think keeping "slaves" as wives would be bad but killing them would not be bad.
Yes. This was describing protocols of war. If a foreigner was living with the Israelites, they were commanded to treat them fairly and with respect. For example Exodus 22:21, “You must not wrong a resident foreigner nor oppress him, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt". Cheers
@@robertcain3426 Somehow, buying foreigners as *permanent slaves your son can inherit* is not wronging them. Somehow. "Buy your slaves from the foreigners among you and the nations around you." Etc.
@@archapmangcmg Many Israelites became slaves to their fellow Israelites to pay their debts. Only the caveat was that an Israelite had to be released after seven years, if I remember correctly.
You can literally read the verses immediately after it to see the context. 🤦🏻♂️
Deuteronomy 21:11-14
11 if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails 13 and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. 14 If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.
In other words, after you have decimated the tribes that God had brought judgment against (you know for burning their children as a sacrifice to idols), you’re free to take an attractive woman into your home (rather than let her starve to death since she no longer has men to provide for her) and make her your wife. However, if she’s not into it and doesn’t want to be your wife, you are not to treat her as a slave but let her go wherever she wants. This was not encouraging them to kidnap women only permitting them to intermarry women from tribes that were likely participating in idol worship. It’s just insane how wildly out of context you guys took this.
So I'm still reading this as you've killed her husband and forcing her to marry you is somehow an act of mercy. And if it turns out you don't like her after the shagging you can just chuck her out instead of contributing to care for her.
Yeah. Go feck yourself.
Oh thank Christ they didn’t HAVE to enslave her, all they did was kidnap them for a month because they were (maybe idk) engaging in something that’s only bad from this specific religious context and also isn’t even close to the crimes committed by any participant on the winning side.
" However, if she’s not into it and doesn’t want to be your wife, you are not to treat her as a slave but let her go wherever she wants."
*Oh no, that isn't what it says. It says if the **_guy_** isn't pleased with HER, he can just kick her out. If she isn't pleased, well... that doesn't matter at all.*
*This was literally encouraging men to slaughter other tribes to take their women.*
@@DivianceHow was that in any way encouraging to slaughter tribes?
@@CombustableLemon Read the text around it.
How do these practises compare to the other laws concerning slavery of the other nations?
That's why I seek moral advices outside the Bible, not inside.
conservatives were on the wrong side of every human rights issue throughout history
Based on what? As long as you don't count the unborn as human and have a twisted understanding on what human rights are. Name one issue that liberals have been on the right side of human rights issues?
@@joshdb142”conservatives abolished slavery”… Stop getting your history from Dinesh D’Souza 😂😂
@@jpt7342 it's just a fact. The extremes have always been wrong but the conservatives have been right way more than the liberals
@@joshdb142get help
@@joshdb142Dude you're confusing the term conservative with republican
Gotta love the people who criticize the bible without reading it... The very next verses say if the woman is unhappy she's allowed to leave. 😂 But let's avoid that part so we can be social justice warriors 👏
The very next verse also says that the womens children are your property and cannot leave 💀.
I assure you, Alex has read the bible in a hell of a lot more depth than you probably will in your entire lifetime.
Yeah after he raped her already… good luck finding a husband after that
@@makislay8678this was literally true throughout all of history, for every culture buddy, and yet you only criticize the west and children today are considered property as well
This is untrue. I think what you’re referring to is Deuteronomy 21:14. “If YOU are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes.” Her happiness/pleasure is not considered and she’s not “allowed to leave”, it’s the prerogative of the captor to let her go if he’s not happy with her. Just wondering, did you misread this passage, or do you just not really care?
Human moral is superior
Humans came up with the morality in this video too silly
@@guntherwhite2043 Just like they came up with god :)
Modern human morality is. This is the morality of humans in the Bronze age.
@@joshuakohlmann9731
Even if that was true, Bronze Age humans morality was still better than modern humans morality, and we're slowly realizing it.
@@Exceedtherealm Can you give some examples of Bronze Age morality that is superior?
Oh, yeah the good old Deuteronomy 20:10-20 and Deuteronomy 21:10-14.
Such loving commandments!
Also, 1 Samuel 15:3 is cute, and Isaiah 13:15-17 (God cares so much about the lives of children). Also Psalm 137:9 shares the same sentiment. And Hosea 13: 14-17
God tells us he's not just a God of love he's also a God of wrath.
If western Christianity led you to believe this wasn't the case, then yea sure these verses would confuse you
@@Veritas231 If you believe in the litteral truth of the Bible, you worship a God with some serious personality disorder.
Christian argument: No, it doesn’t (covers ear) Lalalalala.
As if slavery didn't exist prior.
If one studies history, one finds this plan of action is seriously restrained from the worldly view.
So, I see this sentiment a lot but the slavery in the Bible was pretty standard actually. A quick summary of the laws are, don't go making new slaves as an individual only make new slaves when the tribe goes to war.
This is pretty normal as, if any individual went off and tried to ensnared people from within the tribe or from a neighboring tribe it would just cause issues.
Internal slaves had more rights than external slaves, all of this is pretty standard for the time.
nobody here is saying slavery didn't exist prior. the entire point of this is how slavery is defended in the bible. where did you get that slavery never existed before the bible?
@@joedatius "...where did you get that slavery never existed before the bible?" Perhaps reading and comprehension would be helpful, if you can. You should detect I AM aware of slavery existing prior to '...the Bible...'. However, I seek clarity if you mean prior to the events recounted in the Bible, or prior to the writing of the Bible? Not that it makes much difference, as slavery was established long before either.
Also, one notes slavery as such is rather mitigated from the non-Jewish view of slavery. But this can be determined by reading and study and not from picking and choosing while removing from context sections of the text.
Where in the Bible does it say this? As a Christian, I would like to investigate the matter. Thanks in advance
A load of nothing you just said. Point is that at one point in time, for certain people it was permitted to rape, murder, abduct, and enslave. Whether this applies only to some people and only in specific circumstances is quite irrelevant as it should never be permitted for anyone
@@m.a.a.d9275
I think you are misunderstanding the purpose and function of the Torah.If you really are interested, I think this video explains the matter very well. Better than I could however :).
th-cam.com/video/93JdjLqBQqE/w-d-xo.html
God bless you brother
Why do you think God would allow an imperfect law? I think people are confused about how God could be perfect and loving while also prescribe less than perfect laws for his chosen people.
Yes and your not biased at all thinking that all of what you have said is all literal and beyond the capability of human minds to make up
As a non-religious person, you have to realize western liberals aren't interested in trying to understand. They're only interested in poking holes so that they can justify whatever immoral behavior they desire
This is a bad argument to make. It doesn't work as an internal critique because the Christians have multiple justifications available that are consistent with their worldview. Then it leaves the atheist to try to justify moral claims, good/evil on their own grounds which is shakey at best (see Hume). Not a good line of argumentation.
@@poleve5409 Christians can ground their ethical claims while atheists cannot. This line of argumentation will force atheists into arbitrariness which will end the debate.
What justifications beyond god said it was okay in Leviticus 25:44-45?
you believe we can't ground our morality, but that's a lie
We have senses, feelings of our own
The god you got your morals from had atrocious morals of his own
1 He drown innocent children for crimes they didn't commit. The flood
2 He interfered with the pharaohs free will, so that he would refuse to release the slaves. He says that to Moses before he sends him in
3 He created Adam and eve without the knowledge of good and evil then expected them to understand it was wrong to disobey him
4 He made a talking snake for no reason, even knowing that it would use the power to speak to trick the humans. That was either his plan all along or it wasn't and he's inept
Either his plan was for us to have the knowledge of good and evil in which case it failed
Or his plan was for us to get the knowledge of good and evil but punish us for what his plan
I can go on. I expect you won't able to refute that these actions are evil Without resorting to a thought terminating cliche
@@drsatan3231 that's not what is in question. The question is how can Christians justify the belief that the source of all morality would allow slavery? To which they have many options "harsh laws for a harsh time", appeal to mystery, "the Hebrew laws regarding slavery were quite progressive for their time and began a series of incremental shifts towards abolition", etc... Now how does the athiest justify the belief that slavery is morally wrong?
@@mitch0990 what's not what's in question?
I brought up multiple points and you haven't addressed any of them
Do so now
When does it say this?
Let’s go Dr Josh!!!!
The Bible isn't telling you that slavery is ok here, what God is doing is taking the current worldview and telling Isreal that they are to do better. God is continually leading them to become better people throughout the whole Bible. Everytime someone goes to war, God is showing the Israelites that they don't have to be brutal and barbaric like their neighbors. Their neighbors would not have been kind enough to give any time to mourn.
God is not a president waiting to be re-elected, he can say anything and do anything, but was too weak to set them straight the first time, I guess.
"you are to do better, not by stopping slavery, but by doing slavery differently" isn't the win you think it is. It's still god saying slavery is ok.
Also, not brutal and barbaric? How many conversion camps led by churches with double digit rates of suicide are still a thing?
It’s in the bible so how can there be anything wrong with it? Plunder away believers!
Old Testament that isn't an active calling to this day.
I really hate when people do this.
It's a deceptive lie meant to make others believe it is an active calling to this day.
Not accusing you CS, i just know how often people do this for a stab at Religion in general.
Who are you to say some of the word of god is better or should be followed and other parts are worse and should not be followed?
@@tecromancer uhm.
What?
Yeah this is a ridiculous clip. People don't understand the new testament is a direct abrogation of the mosaic covenant.
Eh, my comment has little to do with how each Testament aligns (or does not) with each other.
It's more on the "Commands to do X"
Some will pick a piece of scripture from the Old Testament. One that happens to be a command to do "X" and then not do "X" afterward. (In other words, the command dies with the task being fulfilled)
But instead of mentioning that it's an old command that died with the time. They bring it up like that religion is modern-day Aztecs in ideal.
As if they will suddenly take up that command again and start offering us all to their respective gods.
It's a deceptive thing to do. That is often praised despite the clear manipulation and deceptiveness of such a narrated bit of "propaganda"
@@KalousTheGuy Okay I see what your point is. You're saying the guy in the video is taking an example of what NOT to do and is saying "Look! The Bible says to do this!"lol
There’s a difference between descriptive and prescriptive… at that time this was normal behavior around the world.
The Bible is prescriptive in the sense that the god it worships should have timeless, perfect moral standards.
@@tankbuggeruexactly, a God who has always been and always will be who knows the future would be immune to any cultural norms
@@magneto44 Indeed, so it makes no sense that God would change his mind about things, to ever have less compassion than us, and to command his favorites to dish out vengeance. Fairly petty, irresponsible, angry and unfair, and that's by human standards.
So why use this as a moral book then?
Where is this?
religious people amuse me to no end.
Don’t compare old stuff with new standards
New standards of...not being killed or enslaved? Forgot women were completely fine with being forcibly captured and taken from their homes in the past, silly me.
New testament doesn't say to abolish slavery.
What bugs me about some people, is the fact that they'll listen to this bible passage and completely ignore it or act like everyone's too stupid to figure it out.
This was describing protocols of war. If a foreigner was living with the Israelites, they were commanded to treat them fairly and with respect. For example Exodus 22:21, “You must not wrong a resident foreigner nor oppress him, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt". Cheers
The moral preening is strong with these two.
Was this prescriptive or descriptive?
Athiests deny any good in the bible yet will jump at the chance to say this is truth in the bible. Lord please save these people ❤
Deuteronomy 21:10 When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 Take her to your home, where she will shave her head,[a] cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since you forced her to have intercourse with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
We are not challenging God for his crimes, we are challenging the belief that such an evil creature ever existed.
This a terrible place for me to say this. I'm subscribed to O'Connor but I am a Christian. I'm subscribed to this channel partly because there are just enumerable(!!!) Christians who do not understand how stupid it is to accept everything (they think) the Bible has to say without question. Anything written by human hands should be subject to extreme scrutiny and it is genuinely embarrassing when I see other Christians who don't know a damn thing about the Bible act like they know what Jesus actually taught.
Edit: YES. WE ARE LITERALLY TALKING ABOUT SLAVERY HERE. There are many examples of things written in the Bible where something clearly awful is said and it is entirely unreasonable to assume it was just a translation mistake.
As a Christian you think slavery is bad, just wait till you read what sin does to the mind, body and soul, I’m sure you’ll understand why Christ came down and prioritized the salvation of the soul rather than putting a Band-aid to a symptom but rather taking care of the root of all causes of pain and suffering, but hey I’m not an atheist
@@japexican007 My brother in Christ, slavery is sin.
You're a Christian yet you fail to release that this is nowhere within the bible? This is the Old Testament whoch is the Torah which is Judaism not Christianity
@@_Kommissar_ dude are you doing a bit? The Old Testament is in the Bible. I literally have a Bible right next to me as I write this. I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is in the Bible. Beside, Judaism and Christianity are both theistic. We have similar values and in a way we worship the same God
@@SKMisaac the New Testament, there are numerous references to the Old Testament, including quotations, allusions, and parallels. The New Testament writers often drew on the Old Testament to support their theological arguments, demonstrate the fulfillment of prophecies, and provide a foundation for Christian beliefs, and I can tell you that one this man said is no-where in the bible and if you are so certain then give me the page you are reading.
“Does God accept this kind of behavior?”
No.
“It’s written down that this is what you do.”
No, it’s written down that this is what the Israelites did.
“Then God is ok with this.”
No, God punishes the Israelites according to their actions.
@AnonYmous-yj9ib “tHe bOoK is gOds BoOk, yOu DiSagreE wiTh goD”
“@Skybunny
THANKS FINALLY I've recently read the Old Testament and the Bible definitely condemned all of this. The Bible says this is what used to be done or what once happened, NOT what you SHOULD do. I think the Bible even emphasizes that even those who weren't chosen by God found these actions horrible.”
They deleted your comment.
@@AnonYmous-yj9ib
Mathew
“22:34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, 22:36 which is the great commandment in the law? 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
“22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
”
Jesus, Christian God says this. I don’t know about you but that doesn’t sound like put people into slavery.
Yeah it's so dumb
They're punished for owning slaves in the wrong way, not for owning slaves at all.
The Vikings, Romans, Muslims and Mongols were no better in their treatment of defeated foes.
They had their own God/s also so the idea of deity has always been present in humanity.
Can we get a verse for this claim really want to read it for my self
Deuteronomy 21:10-14
The Bible does not prescribe slavery. For someone who is one of the least dishonest atheists I’ve come across I’m sad to see this video. Please refer to the mountains of work on this. Inspiringphilosophy has videos on this and the mosaic law, etc.
So, he completely misrepresented every example in the actual interview? And how does telling someone whose family you just killed she has a month to mourn them because she's now your wife not slavery? And don't point to the verses saying that she can't be treated like a slave. That's a translation where the words don't have the exact same meanings (such as the type of slave meant)
Could you explain yourself why this verse is not about slavery than? How forcing a woman to be someone wife after their mourn their dead relatives for 30 days(and other changes)?
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters," (Colossians 3: 22-23)
Also:
"10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy[a] them-the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites-as the Lord your God has commanded you. Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.(Deuteronomy 20: 10-20)19 When you lay siege to a city for a long time, fighting against it to capture it, do not destroy its trees by putting an ax to them, because you can eat their fruit. Do not cut them down. Are the trees people, that you should besiege them?[b] However, you may cut down trees that you know are not fruit trees and use them to build siege works until the city at war with you falls."
@@hive_indicator318 This is why it’s so important for people to actually understand the Bible before talking about it. The Old Testament is not long-standing objective moral prescriptions those texts are descriptive (saying what happened) not commands from God. Even Jesus says this when referring to divorce in the New Testament to give you an irrefutable example…
@@hive_indicator318 I recommend you watch the videos I recommended and see for yourself
Kinda rich how the Anglo-American establishment, after centuries of subjugating others with horrible practices, the minute their empire ends, they immediately start pointing fingers at god as if to say “well don’t blame us, God was even worse”
What?
@@averagejoe2232 read it again
We're not saying don't blame us. Western society did something truly horrible. That doesn't give Christianity a pass though. Saying one did it as well does nothing to absolve the other
The difference is christianity, and christendom, did far less terrible things than you did. this mass wave of anglos becoming atheist is nothing more than the pride of you guys expressing itself@@nathanfrancis9376
It's not God, it's religion and it's only one part of the problem. If it's any consolation the problem isn't relegated to one side and it's not a problem that can or should be solved by blaming the people.
God says in this passage, "since you have humiliated her". It's given as the reason the captor cannot then sell the woman as a slave if he ends the marriage after the fun is over, "grows tired of her:"
But isn't marriage supposed to be sacred? What kind of marriage ends in humiliation and unilateral abandonment for the bride? A fake marriage, that's what. A forced marriage aka rape.
The war bride can also be released from marriage without ANY provision for a possible pregnancy.
"Since you have humiliated her" is God's own mens rea or knowledge of guilt and one of the most inculpatory remarks in the entire Bible.
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
1 Thessalonians 5:21
This method of interpretation and application of the Scriptures is an illustration of why the early Christians were not biblicists. They interpreted everything in the OT through Christ. There’s a reason legal slavery disappeared in the heavily Christianized world with the growth and spread of Christian faith.
Religious people get half way there. Times were different then, the world was a savage place. The road to ending slavery was a long hard journey that we still haven't completed.
The problem comes when you believe that a god exists who allows and condones all this.
The better explanation is that no such god exists. That people created gods who shared their values.
Where exactly in the Bible you have this description? Where is a link between this example from Israel (sounds like some story which can happend in any place hundreds years ago) and the Bible?
can you guys give me the bible verses for this?
Deuteronomy 21:10-13
@@dinohall2595 thank you!
@@Dandelion560 No problem!
And thanks to Dr. Jennifer Bird, I know that he doesn't take her as a WIFE but he just takes her. The concept of Wife, marriage added many hundreds of years later.
I often hear Christians talk about how people back then didn't have the mindset we have now so God had to give them different rules to follow compared to us. But I failed to see how a all powerful God couldn't have raised a compassionate nation to set them apart of everyone else. Like wouldn't that be a huge selling point.
I'm not being polemical yet, but I'm just curious if they interacted with Deut 21:14 in their podcast? Which says "If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her." (NIV)
So you can force yourself on a woman and she gets the reward of being saved from slavery
@@GiubileiFernando yeah. Sounds a bit dodgy if you ask me.
"Hey girl... don't wanna be a slave? Stay with me for 30 days, we sleep together and then you're free to go. Technically we didn't break my law - deal?"
@@kiljaeden7663 "I'm gonna rape you for a month then, if I'm not satisfied, I get a guaranteed divorce. What do you mean what if you're not satisfied? You don't get a choice!"
Bible's war crimes.
Instead of paraphrases, it sure would be nice to get the specific passage that this discussion references…
But if I were to take a guess - they are talking about Deuteronomy 21:10-14 where the 14th verse says “But if you no longer delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her.”
Deuteronomy 21:14 ESV
Is it “slavery” when the woman is treated as any other Israelite wife?
What’s wrong with slavery?
What was the better alternative?
I think it's just a historical account, not an endorsement
God's commands, guidelines or recommendations should be considered to be endorsements, don't you agree?
@@tankbuggeru you might be right, I'd have to read the full context.
Doesn’t have anything to do with slavery. In fact if after the month you refuse marriage you must let her go.
“But it shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go wherever she wishes; and you certainly shall not sell her for money, you shall not treat her as merchandise, since you have humiliated her.”
Deuteronomy 21:14 NASB2020
And if you keep her, she's an unwilling sex slave. Can't just ignore that bit.