Pat Robertson says it's ok to ignore parts of the Bible.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

1) I was under the impression that proselytizing was not allowed in this forum.

Nothing said wasn't solicited a poster.

What I cited solicited Annik specifically and all of us in general. You are proselytizing.

You want to know why Slavery is not 'all bad' in the context of the bible? Well it has to do with salvation.

The slavery in the text I cited was not allegory. It was, for example, the case of a man actually selling his daughter into slavery. In the words of your fairy tale monster.

2) YOU MYTHICAL GOD FIGURE REFERENCES THE CASE OF A MAN SELLING HIS DAUGHTER INTO SLAVERY IN THE MATERIAL I QUOTED. This is not indentured servitude. You cannot dodge this with euivocal prestidigitation.

But I can point to the reason for the slavery was not for the expressed purpose as a sex toy, as you would have everyone believe. For unattached unsanctioned sex was still a sin. Marriage was the reason for 'barter.' Something that still goes on today between certain families Today.

Strawman much? I said nothing of "sex toys". The babble text, attributed directly to your fairy tale monster, cites a father selling his daughter as a servant, rather than a concubine.

“Exodus 21:7 If a man sells his daughter as a servant,...

Other parts also seem to refer to concubines, but that is not the only role, as you would have everyone believe. In any case, selling a daughter as a prostitute is an equally abominable custom that your fairy tale also sanctions through its god-character. Selling a person AT ALL into slavery is an abomination. And AGAIN, your claim that this referred to indentured servants, who freely and willingly enter into servitude through a contract is straight-up bullshit.

---

Are you employed?

I thought that deceit was the method of your devil figure.

Any of us who are employed can leave that employment at any time. You are throwing out red herrings and grabbing at straws.