Daniel,Several of the boys who became the 12 tribes of Israel were born of slave women.The “wives” in a competition as to who would have the most children gave thier slave women to bear more children for them.All were equally blessed yes,but doesnt change the fact that God saw it as perfectly ok to have sex with youre slaves.
Also,Abraham was not a king,yet he had concubines.
So you claim it's a *fact* that "God saw it as perfectly ok to have sex with youre [sic] slaves".
Where do you find that in Scripture?
God permitted divorce because of the hardness of mens hearts but that's a far cry from it being *perfectly OK*.
You do realize that Abraham lived before the Law, don't you?
You know, anyone who wants to find fault with God can and will. Nothing God does, ever has done, or ever will do will be good enough for those people.
We could spend the rest of our lives answering pointless questions which have no other purpose than to impugn God.
This nonsense of trying to find something with which to accuse God is nothing more than trying to find an excuse to reject Him.
Anyone who wants to reject God ought to at least have the integrity to be honest about it and just fess up and admit it.
The "several" was 4 , by Bilhah and Zilpah, which were to Rachel and Leah, respectively, by their dad, and consequently were given to Jacob as wives. And who wanted sexual relations. >But contrary to how your objection was expressed, it is not that God saw it as ok to have sex with one's slaves, but that He sanctioned slavery and taking them as wives and thus having relations with them, though this meant becoming mothers in (and in this case) of Israel.
Thus your real objection is to slavery and perhaps concubinage, but while the former invokes memories of slavery in the antebellum South of the US, it was not a monolithic institution , nor originally instituted by God, but an institution that was an integral part of the ANE and its economy, while OT slavery was only sanctioned as a regulated and ameliorated form of it.
And which in the NT was also dealt with (equal pay, no threatening, etc.) as existing in an slave state (perhaps half the church was made up of slaves), while obtaining freedom was exhorted and exampled. (1Cor. 7:21; Philemon)
Meanwhile the general Christian ethos worked toward its abolition when social and political factors allowed, but which was much delayed (as well as reduced) partly by the institutionalization of the church.
We could get deeper into this God willing, but a distinction is to be made between basic moral laws versus culturally applied regulations that work toward the full fulfillment of the former.
Also,Abraham was not a king,yet he had concubines
OK, so the bible shows a refinement of norms as history progressed. Abraham, the first Jew per se, did not have the Mosaic law which increased the emphasis on the monogamous norm, though exceptions were still tolerated if not commanded (e.g. Solomon’s wives, and Esther being one of many of Xerxes’ concubines, later to become his new queen wife when his previous queen wife Vashti was deposed for disrespect). And then Jesus comes into the picture, with every hint and sign that He is God, and that He is the consummation of salvation, and calls for monogamy, period. You have to take God as He comes, not as you’d imagine Him before ever having come to really know Him.
Well, it says maidservants. It doesn’t say how they became maidservants. We have to be careful in any case about equating the biblical servant or slave to the relatively modern scourge of kidnapped chattel slavery the spiritual legacy of which has brought racial turmoil in North America to this day.