Leviticus 25:44-46 ESV / 311 helpful votes

As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly.

Exodus 21:20-21 ESV / 216 helpful votes

“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

Ephesians 6:5 ESV / 190 helpful votes

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ,

It appears he hasn't read it.

But I'm sure your expertise is superior.

him missing those quotes? How can he overlook the passages pertaining to slavery while focusing on those against homosexuality? That's called cherry picking at best, and downright hypocrisy at worst.

It's pretty much common human behavior. In fact, you're doing it right now.

That is, you're attempting to point out the well-known negative aspects of the Catholic Church (and the Pope) while conveniently ignoring the positive event being reported in the OP. It's almost as if no event can be positive in any way without also pointing out the negative parts.

Yes, we know there's always a negative side. It's just that you don't have to point them out. So, why am I reminded of Douglass Adams' "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" with regards to the penchant for humans to always point out the obvious?

in short, context?

Are you stating you have more Biblical scholarship under your belt than the Pope?

Subreddit memes don't really count as scholarship.

Just an aside but if your profile was true wouldn't you have chosen a name other than Cartoonist? For example you could have chosen "UnableToReadGroupRules"...

I'm not biting

Considering some of the things you have said on DU about religion and religious people, your presence in this room will upset several members.


I say this as one of the hosts in this room.

A safe haven that provides opportunities for people of all faiths, spiritual leanings and non-belief to discuss religious topics and events in a positive and civil manner, with an emphasis on tolerance. Criticisms of individual beliefs or non-belief, or debates about the existence of higher power(s) are not appropriate in this group.
-
I have not broken any rules, but you have. You are using my profile to disparage me. I have only criticized the Pope, not anyone's faith or belief.

Please take this admonition on board if you want to continue posting in this group.

This isn't an open group for "freewheeling discussions." That's RELIGION. This isn't a group where Atheism/Agnosticism are cheered while faiths are denigrated. That's the ATHEIST/AGNOSTIC group. You're free to post slams and slurs against the beliefs of both religious and atheist/agnostic people, only you can not do it here.

If you can't moderate your behavior here, we'll be showing you the door. Is that clear?

I urge you to read the SOP for this group before posting again. You'll probably find that this place isn't your cup of tea.

I have only criticized the Pope. I have not said anything against poeple's faith or belief.

Meanwhile, look at others in this thread. They use my profile to disparage me. They post a graphic insulting me by implying I'm an idiot. They use their position to intimidate me. Please point specifically to where I have broken the SOP.

You can have some productive discussions in the Religion or A/A forum, but I'm afraid this place is just not a good fit for you.

You apparently want to double down and pretend that criticism of the Pope is not criticism of someone's faith--and that's fine. You go on and do that, but you can do it somewhere else.

Have a nice trip.

And your posts in other rooms attacking religion are taken into account when posting here.

It may or may not seem fair but this is how it is. As one ov the hosts of this room I am telling you that your post was inappropriate and that your views of the pope are more appropriate in the AA or religion rooms.

A positive step forward, not only about slavery, but encompassing all human rights.

The Constitution of the United States was not just pulled out of a hat. It had many predecessors, the Magna Carta being foremost. As people and governments changed, new ideas were incorporated and bad ideas were minimized our expelled. rug refers to this as "developing morals". We can see this in many instances that happened during our lifetime. Actors used to apply burnt cork to their faces in order to portray African Americans. Modern audiences would find this offensive, and rightly so. Any book on the theater that would include this practice, even if it was originally printed in the 20's, would not be reprinted today without that section edited. Why is the Bible different?

Pope Francis finds the practice of slavery to be abhorrent. Kudos to him for taking it to the world stage, but he needs to exorcise the past. He can't just ignore these passages and pretend they are no longer being included in modern printings of the Bible. He needs to address them, and explain why they were there in the first place. rug refers to that as "context". He then needs to go on and explain his objection to them and how these passages are no longer compatible with modern society. Of course, there will be those who claim that the Bible is the "word of God" and can not be questioned, but isn't what Pope Francis is doing just that? Of course it is, and he is right to do that. Can anyone here support the passages I posted in my first reply? Please step forward.

When these passages are addressed by Pope Francis, and their centuries old ethics are firmly denounced instead of just ignored, then there will be a tsunami of new reflection on what it is to be human and the rights that should be granted to all. Centuries old thinking about the role of women can be updated to treating both sexes as equals. Centuries old hateful practices such as homophobia can be discussed in open forums by citizens of all ranks. We no longer need be bound by centuries old books that have been declared sacrosanct. Faith will not be threatened, it may even be strengthened by this new enlightenment. At the very least, the Bible will no longer have passages that atheists can hurl their indignation at.