CreateDebate


Debate Info

21
36
No. Yes.
Debate Score:57
Arguments:68
Total Votes:81
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 No. (18)
 
 Yes. (24)

Debate Creator

Sitar(3680) pic



Does the Bible teach the enslavment of women? Please prove it with Scriptures.

Please try to use the New King James Version. You can use this: https://www.blueletterbible.org/ website to search the Bible, as well as this: https://www.biblegateway.com/ website. Let's have some fun.

No.

Side Score: 21
VS.

Yes.

Side Score: 36
3 points

All you are going to get from these Progressive bigots are verses from Old Testament Jewish law. These Bigots judge and ridicule Christians based on laws before Christ.

Jesus said he without sin cast the first stone against the adulterous woman.

These same bigots who constantly insult the Christian faith never say a thing against Islam which does teach it is ok to beat and even kill women.

They are such laughable phonies who rail against the Christian faith when it teaches to love even our enemies.

Side: No.
2 points

You're such a shining example of loving your enemies. /s

Side: Yes.
1 point

Agreed. Liberals like to do that..............................................................

Side: No.
LittleMisfit(1745) Clarified
1 point

Do you believe we should discard all the laws from the Old Testament? The verse about selling your daughters as slaves is part of the same speech where God gave the 10 commandments (Exodus 20:1–17). So, should we discard those too? Nothing in the new testament says slavery should be abolished. Quite the contrary. It says, "Servants [slaves], be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ."

Women are still considered inferior to men in the New Testament, as can be seen in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Since the 10 commandments and the verses about selling your daughters as slaves are from the same speech, what criteria do you use to determine the instructions from it that we should still follow, and which ones should be discarded?

Side: No.
seanB(950) Disputed
1 point

The story of the adulterous woman wasn't included in the bible until hundreds of years after Jesus was dead. Regardless, it is quite clear biblical figures all consider women inferior to men, as does Islam, as you mention.

Both backwards ways of thinking. Outdated, hundreds of years ago.

Side: Yes.
FromWithin(8241) Disputed
2 points

LOL, backwards? According to who? YOU?

You know nothing of what you speak. The New Testament says that the Christian husband shall be the head of the house. This does not in any way say the woman is inferior. God recognises the roles of men and women as does the animal kingdom.

I thought you evolutionists say we are all animals. Do you see the obviois roles of male and female animals.

Why is it you refuse to acknowledge that natural roles of men and women? Man is the stronger of the genders and is better equipped to support a family. Women have more of a nurturing nature whereby they breast feed our babies and fill the obvious roles of a mother in a family environment.

This does not mean they have to fill the obvious roles of mothers. They can choose to go opposite their roles and this is their right to do so. Sure a father can be the home maker, and pump mothers milk from the mother, and deny the obvious.

People of faith have no problem following the obvious roles of our genders.

This is no way makes a woman inferior. It makes her who she is.... a woman!

Are you Progressives the new age humanist God telling everyone what you deem as outdated.

You pretend to care so much for women and minorities, while you legalize the killing of viable late term abortions for any reason.

Have you ANY idea how insanely barbaric and hypocritical you are? Peope ike you new age enlightened Progressives care more for a woman not following her natural role in life, then you care for the lives of our most innocent babies.

YOU ARE TOTALLY LOST IN YOUR SO CALLED FORWARD THINKING.

Your new forward updated thinking sacrifices human lives for personal convienence.

Do you even possess the simplest of intellect to see it?

Christians possess the humanity to not sacrifice their young for the sake of convienence.

Side: No.
0 points

The debate is titled, "Does the Bible teach the enslavement of women?", not "Does the New Testament teach the enslavement of women?"

Side: Yes.
-Yuri-(284) Disputed
0 points

He is not disagreeing with what the old testament says, his point is jesus made new teachings many of which were clarifications or changes to things interpreted to man in the old testament.

Side: No.
0 points

Jesus said he without sin cast the first stone against the adulterous woman.

Let he who is without such idiocies cast the first argument on this side.

Now fade away.

Side: Yes.
seanB(950) Disputed
0 points

Misinterpretation on my part. Comment deleted.

My apologies.

Side: Yes.
-1 points

Exodus 21 is God's instructions to protect young women who are bought by a dowry for marriage. God give these guidelines as law to protect the women from abuse. The mindless parrots who try to twist this into the same thing as slave trading which protects no right of the enslaved only prove that they are intellectually lazy, they hate God, they hate Christians, and they hate the Bible.........closed minded fools.

Side: No.
2 points

What is the obsession with KJV? The Bible was not written in this language or translation, nor is it the most accurate even compared with more modern translations.

Side: Yes.
NowASaint(1380) Clarified
1 point

You're misinformed on this issue. "Modern translations" are all based on manuscripts which were rejected as corrupt by church leaders. God preserved His word, God guided it's translation into English and there is only one Bible or all of them are wannabees and none of them are correct. God kept His word pure, and men who obeyed God in peril of their own lives brought us the King James Bible, they paid with their blood in horrible executions from enemies of God who wanted to keep His word obscured.......and all modern versions try to obscure God's word by confusion, changing words and meanings, deleting tens of thousands of words and many entire passages..............

But you are lost, so you really don't care, you don't believe God cares about you so why would you believe God cares about His word and opposes people who try to imply we really don't know what it is and we can change it to whatever we think it should be.

Side: No.
Sitar(3680) Clarified
0 points

The NKJV is my favorite translation............................................................................

Side: No.
NowASaint(1380) Clarified
1 point

Modern Bible versions twists wordings allowing for confusion, and you won't be able by using them to show God's intention for women in ancient Israel was to protect them. People here are twisting wordings around, ignoring cultural context and failing to see the law of God was put in place for the protection of women in the Old Testament. "Enslavement of women" is a very loose term, and the way it sounds is never condoned by the Bible in any place, but with the way modern fake Bibles like the NKJV and NASB twists word meanings obscuring context and distracting from the cultural contexts, you will not be able to show that people who are trying to say the Bible supports slavery in the broad and evil sense are wrong....and they are wrong, and they are intellectually lazy for failing to question what they think is unanswerable rhetoric which they have bought into mindlessly......

NKJV is from Hell, it should be burned the same as NASB, NSV, and all the rest of them. God's word is preserved in English in the King James Bible. God promised He would keep His word pure and preserved without error down to the tiniest punctuation mark forever. People who think they can pick and choose for themselves what God's word is, and use multiple varying translations are misguided and most of them are not even saved.

God's instructions for the care and protection of women is entirely different from the Koran

Side: No.
0 points

Mine is the YLT, and I only use that one for all my purposes.

That's the best for criticising, because anything else is blasphemy, and criticising blasphemers is rather insignificant.

Side: Yes.

Many of the words used in the KJV had different meanings today than they did back in King James time. The NASB is a more up-to-date translation that uses modern English and also takes into account the tens of thousands of Biblical manuscripts that have been discovered, and the wealth of knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek languages and cultures that has been learned over the past 400+ years since the KJV was published. I'll respect your wishes to use the KJV, but I'll also include the NASB version, which is much more clear.

----------

Exodus 21:7-11 (KJV)

"And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant [female slave], she shall not go out [be set free] as the menservants do [male slaves were set free after 7 years Exodus 21:1-6]. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another wife [polygamy]; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money."

My notes are in [brackets]

Exodus 21:7-11 (NASB)

β€œIf a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do. If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people because of his unfairness to her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money."

----------

To summarize, men can sell their daughters as slaves and/or wives. If her master isn't happy with her, he can't sell her to someone else. If the man wants another wife, he can't neglect his previous wife. If he does, he has to set her free, instead of selling her to someone else.

Do that really sound like something a benevolent god would say, or does it sound like something men from a misogynistic society would say?

Side: Yes.
FromWithin(8241) Disputed
1 point

You hypocritical fool. YOU SUPPORT KILLING VIABLE LATE TERM BABIES FOR ANY REASON AND YOU HAVE THE NERVE TO PREACH TO OTHERS? YOU PIOUS HYPOCRITE!

Side: No.
1 point

Liberals man. Liberals just won't listen. Some of them learn though.

Side: No.
Cuaroc(8829) Disputed
0 points

10/10 rebuttal.

Side: Yes.
0 points

I don't support killing late term babies for any reason except the health of the mother, incest, or rape, so go argue with your imaginary foe somewhere else. Your own Bible supports abortion, so go argue with your god about it. The topic of this debate is not abortion, so I'm done with you. Bugger off and http://i.imgur.com/sm7bvy1.gif

Side: Yes.
Cartman(18192) Disputed
0 points

You hypocritical fool. YOU SUPPORT KILLING VIABLE LATE TERM BABIES FOR ANY REASON BY MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE WHO SHOULDN'T HAVE CHILDREN GET PREGNANT AND YOU HAVE THE NERVE TO PREACH TO OTHERS? YOU PIOUS HYPOCRITE!

Side: Yes.
Whitepride21(59) Disputed
0 points

You hypocritical fool. YOU SUPPORT KILLING VIABLE LATE TERM BABIES FOR ANY REASON AND YOU HAVE THE NERVE TO PREACH TO OTHERS? YOU PIOUS HYPOCRITE!

Now I know what you do when someone brings up strong evidence against your beliefs.

Side: Yes.

"Enslavment"?

Is that when you're kidnapped by the Czech Republic and turned into a Slav? Those damn Slavics, it's a conspiracy!

Side: Yes.
1 point

πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚ missed that well spotted , wouldn't mind being enslaved by some of them hot Slav ho's πŸ‘„πŸ‘„πŸ‘„ bring back slavery πŸ’ƒπŸΌπŸ’ƒπŸΌπŸ’ƒπŸΌ

Wow 😱 Just spied the poster of this debate is a mad cow πŸ‘‰πŸ„

Side: Yes.
1 point

The Bible is, largely, a book of enslavement with a smattering of common sense weaved in among the lines of viciousness ... which most do not need a book to recognize. It says if you don't wish to follow the slave master you will be punished severely.

The thing is, the slave master didn't write the book, that was written by those who would want to CONTROL the slaves ... especially the ones who could do "nice things for them".

Sorry, I can't use "scriptures" to "prove" anything because the slave masters wrote them also.

Side: Yes.