falah wrote on Jan 25^th, 2012 at 11:59am:











In that the 'slaves' and 'sex slaves' which falah presents, are BOND-SERVANTS.

A BOND-SERVANT is a person who cells himself into service as a servant.

Why?

Because they or their family, are poor, or because they and their family have fallen upon hard times.

So, they 'cell themselves', as servants, to wealthy neighbours - for a period of years.



e.g. #1,
falah presents.....
The following passage describes the sickening practice of sex slavery.  How can anyone think it is moral to cell your own daughter as a sex slave?


When a man cells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to cell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.  (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)



Yadda presents the same verse.....

Exodus 21:7
And if a man cell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
8  If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to cell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.

Dictionary;
maidservant = = a female domestic servant.

Dictionary;
betroth = = formally engaged to be married.ie.g. #2,
falah presents.....
The following passage shows that slaves are clearly property to be bought and sold like livestock.

    However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land.  You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.  You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.  (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

n.b.

".....You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way."

Leviticus 25:46




Yadda presents.....

But then, what does the VERY NEXT VERSE, which was omitted by falah present ????

Leviticus 25:47
And if a sojourner or stranger wax rich by thee, and thy brother that dwelleth by him wax poor, and cell himself unto the stranger or sojourner by thee, or to the stock of the stranger's family:
48  After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him:

Those verses are talking about bond-servants.

i.e.
People who cell themselves into service, as a servant.

And those verses [Leviticus 25:47-48] reveal that there was no prohibition in a 'stranger' who was living among the Hebrews, making a Hebrew man his 'slave', that is, his bond-servant.





+++

The reality of the social mores [i.e. the laws] of the Hebrews, is very different to the implication that falah is presenting.

Why so?

That is, why do you think that falah is misrepresenting the social mores [i.e. the laws] of the Hebrews?

Would the fact that the ancient Hebrews were the progenitors of the Jewish people have anything to do with falah's misrepresentation of the mores [i.e. the laws] of the ancient Hebrew people ?






+++


My advice.....

If you wish to understand what the OT Bible truly presents, then you should read and try to study the OT Bible for yourself.

As a person living in the 21 century, it is likely that you may not understand the dynamics of social circumstances that are described in the OT Bible, or if you do understand the social circumstances that are described, you may object strongly with the circumstances that are described.

The mores and customs and the violence which the OT Bible revealed and which are spoken of [in the books of Moses] will seem 'foreign' to a person living in the 21 century,
.......precisely because the OT Bible was written for the circumstances of people who were alive 3,400 years ago.

That was a time when [very large] societies of men, living together were something of a new 'convention', and it was a time when brigands [large predatory bands of armed robbers] were still very common.

It was a time when predation by one group of [stronger] people, upon another group of [weaker] people was common.

Dictionary;
predation, predator = =
1 an animal that preys on others.
2 a person who exploits others. a company that tries to take over another.




It is a type of predation that is presented in this Koran as 'lawful', for example;







Regards examples of the 'lawful' predation today, by one group of people, upon another group of people;


See.....


http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/kuwait-female-political-activist-calls-for-leg...


And;


http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/egyptian-imam-when-i-want-a-sex-slave-i-just-g...

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 9:57am:



There are thousands of reverts to Islam in Australia. Probably you think that we were all in Guantanamo Bay too because John Howard put David Hicks there.

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 9:57am:


This was a betrothal, not a marriage in the modern, Western sense of the word. They didn't live together as man and wife until years later when she had reached puberty - the recognised indicator of adulthood throughout most of human history.

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 1:25pm:

An organisation which pretty much consists of himself. He has been thrown out of other organisations, so started a groupf which he is probably the sole member.

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 1:25pm:


How do you know this?

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 1:25pm:


Hate to be the one to break it to you, but having a doll is not a sign of not reaching puberty.










Aishah, herself said that she had already had her menses before she lived with the prophet, God's peace & blessings upon him.

Some people grow up quicker than others.

In the past, chronological age was not  seen as important as it is today, and people looked at biological factors to determine adulthood. Someone who reached puberty was generally thought of as old enough to marry.



Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 1:25pm:


Some have. larger girls are more likely to reach puberty at an earlier age. Some girls don't reach puberty until 14.

Study finds girls reaching puberty at age nine

http://www.news.com.au/world/study-finds-girls-reaching-puberty-at-age-nine/stor...

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 1:25pm:


Living together, no. Not before puberty. I believe that it is potentially harmful for girls to live with a man before as a wife before she reaches puberty.

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 1:25pm:


I think that the law should be amended. If a person has reached puberty, and wants to marry then why shouldn't they be allowed to? It is a breach of their human rights to deny them the right to marry when they have the biological need to do so.

If there is some form of protection for people who have not reached puberty, then this may be a good thing.

freediver wrote on Mar 19^th, 2012 at 10:17pm:


Slavery was already virtually non-existent in most countries in the Middle East prior to the US civil war.

It had little to do with Western involvement. Countires like Saudi and Iran have never been invaded by Western colonialists, yet had long given up slavery.

Why? Because Muslims are not allowed to make slaves from their fellow Muslims. Unlike slavery practiced in Europe, where millions of Christians had been enslaved by their fellow Christians, Muslims have never been allowed to enslave their fellow Muslims.

Compare this to Christian Europe where 10% of the Christian population of England was enslaved by their felllow Christians in 1081. Approximately 10–20% of the rural population of Carolingian Europe consisted of Christians enslaved by their fellow Christians.

In Russia, 23 million Christians were enslaved by their fellow Christians until government edict in 1861 (government slaves were not freed until 1866).

The fact is that islam discourages slavery, but allows it in some cases with dealing with a histile enemy.

As Islam spread across the known world, slavery became redundant in the central areas of Islamic world, and remained only on the fringes of the Islamic world.




In most of the last 500 years, slavery had largely been confined in the Islamic world to a small part of  Turkey, and the East and West coast of Africa, and in the farest parts of Indonesian archipelago, due to wars in those areas.

There had been little slavery ion the rest of the Islamic world for centuries.

1400 years ago there had been many slaves in places like Saudi Arabia, what had happened to them? They had been freed over time, as Islam encourages (and even in some cases orders) Muslims to free slaves.

The Western Method Of Dealing With hostile Enemies

http://thewe.cc/thewei/&/&/images5/iraq_war_photos/ishaqi_children_massacre.jpe

falah wrote on Mar 20^th, 2012 at 9:40am:

Quote:


That's a bit old don't you think? Under an Islamic system few 25 year olds would be able to afford it. The whole supply and demand thing gets a bit out of whack with one man and four wives.