12 comments for “Ozy And Millie

  1. You know, I could actually understand that reasoning, if biblically-sanctioned slave ownership came with a corollary of insistence on treating the purchased slaves better than their previous owners had.

    Of course, ideally, this would mean freeing the slaves, but survival of the tribe was a slightly more important ideal than human rights back in those days…

    • Jesus said in the New Testament (this is a paraphrase), “Moses wrote you a law allowing you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard.” Is it so hard to believe that the same thing happened with the slavery law?

      • Not in the slightest. In fact, that’s an extremely telling statement – not all of the laws were intended to be permanent. It was a step towards good, not an end-all definition.

    • It does. In fact, the law is that you have to treat the slave as good as yourself; if you have one pillow, the slave gets it.

    • Old Testament slave ownership does include various restrictions on what can be done to slaves, and the penalties for breaking those rules. They mostly boil down to “don’t do any permanent harm to a slave”, like knocking out a tooth, and (for Hebrew slaves) requires setting them free in the 7th year (Deut 15:12-18), even saying “do not send them away empty-handed”.

      Biblical slavery was NOT like American slavery. There were definite limits.

      • Very true. The slavery in the Bible was a very different thing than what American’s think of. I love this rather mature discussion on Biblical law actually.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.