Slavery (on Thursdays)

[Huggy Bear]

How do u know what translation/ bible is to be the right one?

The King James Version is the standard, but you still need to reference the original Greek at times to find out what some words actually mean.

You do understand that merely calling them servants doesn't actually make them servants if they weren't treated like them, right? Propagandists do this all the time, calling something one thing while acting as if it were another. That's why what you're doing is semantics; you're happy to call these people servants, and ignore the instructions for how they are to be treated, which includes beating them, passing them down as property- you can't do that with a servant - and buying them.

Show me where Bible instructs anyone to beat their servant? I can show you where it is recommended that you use the "rod" on your kids. But oddly enough, I don't hear any atheist complaining about the Bible supporting child abuse, why? Because it doesn't fit your agenda.

Propagandists have an agenda. They use words/pictures in a way to get the masses to react emotionally. This is why every "Atheist" that has posted a scripture from the Bible uses the "New Living Translation" which was published in 1996. So why this version over the many other translations? Because it fits your agenda.

You see the word "slave" which doesn't appear in the King James Version (published in 1611) has much more negative implications than the word "servant" which automatically make us think of the american slave trade, which would have been illegal according to the Bible, since you could not kidnap and/or force someone into servitude.

It's a profoundly dishonest tactic, but then again, dishonesty and doublespeak is all you have.

Here is an example of doublespeak.

Leviticus 25
40 But as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubile.

Don't play semantics with me. They were slaves. They were treated as property, they were not paid, and they could not leave whenever they wanted. The fact that you are appealing to word games is pathetic.

except that the KJV doesn't use the word "slave"

Is that all you are reduced to? Pathetic word games?

they were paid a pittance. here is part of a post I found describing life in that time period.

Its irrelevant how much they were paid. They were servants, not slaves.

LOL,
nice of you coming to Bad Wolf's defense though.

True. If you visited the Southern States of the US in the years leading up to the US Civil War you would hear the word "slave" hardly ever used, even though slaves were everywhere.

Everyone, especially slave owners, would call them "servants". Very, very rarely would they be referred to as "slaves". And never in polite company. Or to outsiders.

I am both black, and from the south (Mississippi). But I'll still give you the benefit of the doubt and request that you post your sources. Because I can find plenty of sources that would contradict your ridiculous statement.