I think what he was trying to say is that it was immoral fro God to ALLOW slavery to exist and that makes rules to deal with it doesn't change that fact that He should never have allowed it to exist.FlawedIntellect wrote:Is it just me, or was Outlaw claiming that it's immoral to create rules that punish the act of seriously harming/mistreating another person?outlaw wrote:No matter how you want to explain it, making rules in regards to how slave owners are punished for treating their slaves is immoral as far as im concerned. The fact that rules were made is enough it doesn't matter whether it's if or when they die or what the punishment is it's irrelevant.
Stop telling me i don't understand, i understand perfectly fine, and i still think it's immoral. Do you understand that?
At least I HOPE that was what he was trying to say, LOL !
So, assuming that was it, lets analyse that:
God should never have allowed slavery to exist.
In other words, people should never have been allowed to CHOOSE to make another person a slave and a person would NOT be allowed to CHOOSE to become one as an option to pay off a debt.
God, according to this view, would be a dictator God, controlling the human ability to choose ( violation of free will) to do something that COULD be wrong ( one can argue that there was nothing wrong with indentured servitude to pay of a debt). It seems that some people WANT a God that decides for ALL ( since He must decide for all because decide for some is not fair) WHAT is to be done, WHEN and HOW ( why is of course irrelevant).
Nice God that some people want...