The question that makes fundies hostile

[Esquilax]

God did not endorse slavery by issuing rules about to minimize the injustice. Passing out condoms to teenagers is not an endorsement of premarital sex. It mitigates against the potential danger of a moment of weakness.

The difference being that this is the only scenario in which god felt he needed to "minimize harm," rather than just outright barring it, like he does with, say, wearing mixed fabrics, shaving, and homosexuality. It's just when it comes to slavery that the omnipotent god of creation, whose words are supposedly the laws of the land, who once drowned the entire world for not doing exactly what he said, and turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt for turning around when he didn't say to, has to bow to the whims of us humans. Everywhere else, he's this my-way-or-the-smite-way god: since this new approach for slavery is so out of character, it's more rational to consider it a lazy apologetic by immoral christians.

Oh, and then again, I also suggested some easy rules the omniscient god of the bible could have thought up that would have radically changed the plight of the slaves into something positive, without upsetting the status quo too much, like... you know, not beating them. And letting them just work for you as a free man. And not tricking them into staying with you as property forever.

Am I just smarter than your god?