BUYING AND SELLING SLAVES | Does the Bible Endorse Slavery? (Part 5)

John Harris, Director of Living Waters Europe, breaks down Leviticus 25:44 and many other passages in the Bible that appear to condone slavery. But is this really what it seems?
Part 6 - • DID SLAVES HAVE RIGHTS...
Download the full video and presentation here: shop.livingwat...

[@gordo191]

Happy and Blessed Sabbath everyone ❤ ❤

[@ronburhans5788]

Happy Sabbath

[@Saunders7]

Thank You

[@blocboy_bk2756]

Assuming that all of this is true, why do verses 45-46 still state that non-hebrews can be treated as property, that they can be passed down through the master's family as a permanent inheritance, and that they can be treated as slaves. If the Hebrew word "ebad" means servant and it was used for Israelites and foreigners alike, why does verse 46 make a clear distinction about how foreigners can be treated as slaves "ebad" but not Israelites?

[@Noir_Nouveau]

He used a slight of hand and conflated purchased foreign slaves with foreign migrants into the land. He is unwilling to deal with the fact people can be bought and owned as property and also beaten when the master deems it necessary.

[@Dave_Langer]

Because this guy is lying.

[@Christ_is_Lord_]

Excellent explanation

[@Dave_Langer]

its not, he is lying ot you

[@mcable217]

You haven't done any proper exegesis here. Verse 47 isn't talking about foreign slaves. It's now moved on to Israelites who sell themselves to foreigners. You are conflating the two groups! You already covered how the bible treats the two groups (israelites and foriegn slaves) differently. Very dishonest.

[@myk_3D]

He isn't being dishonest here, he used verse 47 as context to explain that God is not commanding the capture of foreigners. Because foreigners wouldn't be prosperous in Israel if they are actively being hunted down by Israelites. As to Israel's policy on foreign slaves, I am yet to know about that

[@mcable217]

@@myk_3D If you listen at :46 he says that the slave bought from foreign nations were selling themselves into slavery. He prooftexts this assertion using verse 47. There is a major problem however. Verse 47 talks about Israelites selling themselves, not about slaves purchased from foreign lands. So he is intentionally being dishonest by conflating these groups. He has not proved that slaves purchased in foreign nations were selling themselves.

[@myk_3D]

@@mcable217 In the same right, there is any texts that proves that those foreign slaves were obtained by kidnap or capture. By this logic we are both then working on presumptions of the origin of foreign slaves. To further explain my point, I'm trying to say that if Hebrews were capable of selling themselves to foreigners, wouldn't foreigners also be able to do so too

[@mcable217]

@@myk_3D Yes, foreigners could sell themselves into slavery. So you agree the bible allows (even if it did not happen) the purchase of chattel foreign slaves that will be your property and can be passed onto your children.

[@myk_3D]

@@mcable217 no I cannot say I agree to that, based on my understanding of the bible. The word chattel insinuates that these slaves had no way of escape, neither did they agree to be owned. It implies that they are objects to be tossed around, bought and sold on whims of the master. If this is what you understand that the bible allows then No I do not agree to it

[@Noir_Nouveau]

You were very deceitful sir. You used a slight of hand and conflated purchased foreign slaves with foreign migrants into the land. He is unwilling to deal with the fact people can be bought and owned as property and also beaten when the master deems it necessary.