Slavery (on Thursdays)

[Ben Davis]

---

The things that are telling about your post:

1. You refuse to acknowledge the 'ownership of people as property' rules in the biblical laws of 'servitude'. In fact, you seem to talk about every other rule in a fairly knowledgeable way so I have to assume you're aware that the rules explicitly stated that people were owned as property.

---

already been over this many times.
show me in the King James version where it "explicitly states" people be owned as property

Pinsir, Esquilax and others have already covered this. You've deliberately ignored the proof many times and are being disingenuous. That means you must concede this point and accept that the bible mandates the ownership of people as property. I hope for greater honesty in the other parts of our discussion.

2. Your failure to directly answer the questions

I'll answer your question and in turn i'll ask you a direct yes or no
question, do you believe the words "property' an "possession" to mean the same thing?

Depending on context, they can. The context in the bible is clear, they do.

So to your answers:

1. It matters not whether the society was feudal, agrarian, capitalist, communist, anarchist or anything else. So I'll rephrase my question to (hopefully!) make you commit to a direct answer: given the opportunity, would you own another person as property?

No

Why not?

2. Once again a dodge. Your mortgage does not strip you of your right to self-determination. So once again, I'll rephrase: would you submit to being stripped of your right to self-determination?

yes

For the sake of clarity, I'll restate what I meant here: would you submit to being owned as property?