Exodus 21:17 and Leviticus 20:9 specify putting to death those who curse their parents. Deuteronomy 21:18 specifies putting to death by stoning children who are "stubborn and rebellious". (No mention of serious crimes being required in either case). Do you obey God's law in this matter? If not then why not? Would you obey God's law and support your neighbour if he asked you to help him stone his children to death for being stubborn and rebellious as God requires? Would that be OK if the children were in their 20's?
The "slaves" were not the sort of slaves that Americans once kidnapped from Africa. A better translation would be "bond servatns". After 7 years they were supposed to be let go, unless they decided they wanted to stay with their master for life. There are a lot of people out there today who are too plain stupid to successfully navigate the modern world on their own. They would be better off if they attached themselves to some well to do person and became their household bond servant.
The Africans taken as slaves to the New World were not largely kidnapped; they were largely purchased in the markets implied and endorsed by implication in Leviticus 25:44-46. I take it that you see yourself as the "protector" of such a poor inadequate who ought to have the sense to decide to be a bond-servant. I think you need to read Exodus 21 1-10 a bit more carefully. Also Leviticus 25 44-46, and Exodus 21 20-21. Buying and selling slaves as permanent property? Sex slavery? Holding families hostage against a time-expired bond-servant "deciding" to become a slave? Beating slaves? (which was also endorsed by Jesus in the Bible). Would you do those things? Would you be happy with your neighbour obeying God and doing those things?
Before I answer first you answer my questions to sakic in #313.
You do well to consider the scriptures, and look to them. When studied with faith, they bring life and peace.
Leviticus 25:44-46 was not an endorsement of slavery, but an effort to limit it. This is clear if you read the surrounding verses. The scriptures serve as tutor for mankind, bringing him from a state of barbarity to a state of enlightenment. The main point of the passage you cite, when surrounding verses are considered, is that you are not to treat your fellow Hebrew (your neighbor) like that. Jesus then showed us that our neighbor is anyone who is around us. Mankind is tutored by God at a rate we can handle it.
I will have to address your points on capital punishment tomorrow. This morning I wold like to address your points on corporal punishment.
The slaves that you say Americans bought fair and square were mostly kidnapped, and as such do not compare with a 'bond servant" agreement.
You seem to think it fine for the State/Schools to beat on children but not OK for a Master that the parent has chosen to do the same. Wild children have to be disciplined for their own good and the good of society. On that we agree. What choice does the parent have about their government? In these days of complusory attendence laws what choice do they have in schools (unless they homeschool). At least they can pick their master.
I see the Bible's solution as less statist and more free than the socialist position that the state should have a monopoly on force. The more power parents (and their chosen masters have) to use force to discipline then the less force the state will need (and the less power it need have).
Perhaps you live among civilized, secular people who do not need a caning to stay out of trouble. Good for them, but you should not assume that the whole world is like them.
As for "slavery" being unchristian, it is in a way. Philemon is a good study on that, he was a run away slave and Paul teaches the next lesson on how "slaves" ought to be treated. The Bible tutors humanity to the final step.
Frederick Douglass was a former slave, and a CHristian. He observed that while the Bible permitted men to be masters it did not permit them to be bad ones. If he can content himself with that and still have faith in God, despite living as a slave, then Thatcherite is surely without excuse in his efforts to condemn his Maker.
The Law was given as the ideal. In a just society, that is what the law would look like. I wish that we were good enough that we could handle law that just. We are not there yet, and may never be.
Who is in a better position to know the wickedness of a young man, his parents, or 12 strangers. Who would be most likely to condemn him to death, his parents or 12 strangers? It is clear that parents would be 1) better informed than strangers on whether their child was worthy of death and 2) less likely to call for death than strangers even in those situations where the strangers have equal knowledge.
The intent of the law was therefor not to kill more young people, but rather to strengthen the lawful authority of the parent. That would be a good thing. Right now, children can defy their parents openly, knowing that the state will intervene on the side of their foolishness if the parents even spank them in public. We now have children that grow up wild and rebellious, worthless to themselves and others. These are the kind that agents of the state will later have to kill or imprision- we have over 2 million like that right now. Isn't that enough?
When respect for parents is greater, respect for all authority and the law also becomes greater. The point of the law is to save life, even when it calls for ending it.
If we implemented all of the Old Testament Law in our current state we would be required by the Law to kill large numbers of people that God would rather spare alive that they may have more time to repent.
I support that Law as the Ideal. I believe in working for a society that is virteous enough to support such a virteous law. The closer we can get to that, the more our laws can be modeled on the ideal.
I believe the law in this case is based on the idea that the parents are upstanding citizens, and not crack-heads or something. No one would follow the lead of such a person. Still, if good people have an out of control sociopath on their hands it would be good if we could kill them before they killed a number of innocent people. I have seen some kids that you just know are going to wind up killers if they don't get killed first. Both outcomes happened in the cases I am thinking of.
THe biggest lesson of the Bible is that though the Law is stern and just, Mercy and Grace can trump it. Remember that every Christian is a person who has confessed that they are worthy of death- that they have broken the Divine Law. It is only by His substitution, bearing in His Own Body the penalty meant for me (and you, if you care to believe it) that the eternal penalty for our sins has been paid. You should not be surprised when people such as us say that the law should be hard and just, nor should you be surprised when we plead for mercy toward the lawbreakers. It is not a contradiction, rather we realize the purpose of the Law is not to perfect us, or to give us grounds to demand that God accept us as equals in righteousness. Instead its purpose is to make us aware of our failings and need for Him.