(January 24, 2016 at 11:12 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(January 24, 2016 at 10:59 pm)athrock Wrote: You ignorant little bitch. Look at you moving the goalposts. I said all along that the Mosaic Law was an improvement in Ancient Near East morality. Now, you want to bring in India and China and Greece. Like those cultures radically impacted the views of the Hebrews before, during or after they were themselves enslaved in Egypt.
God isn't restricted to the Middle East, but the people He chose to covenant Himself with, the Israelites, clearly were.
Come back when you've gotten your assignment done properly.
Ha ha. You're a joke. God isn't restricted. But he is. Isn't. Is. Isn't. Can't make up your mind where to draw the lines around your carefully constructed rationalization.
(January 24, 2016 at 10:59 pm)athrock Wrote: Dodged the question, didn't you? And we both know that you didn't answer because once you admit that you would rather be married to an Israelite than a Hittite, the game is OVER.
And sure, it would have been better to live with a people that did not practice slavery at all, but as you have so conveniently pointed out to my advantage, that was not easily done was it? Slavery has been almost universally practiced throughout the course of human history. Greece, China, India, Egypt, Israel, Rome, oh, hell...it might be faster to try to name the nations that did not practice slavery at one time or another.
Further, I never made anything like an attempt to justify even "a little bit of evil." What I have said, repeatedly, is that given the universality of slavery, God moved the Israelites incrementally toward its abolition.
So, get over yourself. Your pathetically transparent moral indignation exposes your intellectual dishonesty.
LOL.
God moved the Israelites incrementally forward on the backs of the slaves he could have saved. It's balls obvious you don't see how that is immoral. Absolutely ridiculous. Don't lecture me when you can't even understand basic morals.
Night, kiddo.
