Please describe a situation where a law can be made that wouldn't apply to the qualification you made it up?
My claim is that the mean that wrote the constitution did so in light of the Bible. My claim is that the U.S. congress use to publish Bibles. This means they tried to mix the laws of the Bible with the laws of man, such as all those laws describing a democracy.
Where is your argument?
Where is the explanatory congruent argument that makes valid inferences drawn from premises to conclusions?
Where are these democratic laws in the bible?
Y But as time went on they drew further and further away from Jehovah that it came to the point they completely broke his covenant with them.
Yet, this has nothing to do with your god delivering laws to justify slavery.
Are you saying slavery is ok as long as its the biblical kind of slavery?
They did not set up Jehovah's Kingdom is my point. Everything else is moot.
So why would an omnipotent omniscient being tell people to do something, if he already knows they will never do it? Is it an idiot?
Btw, your point changes whenever you need to equivocate around idiotic rationalizations you've already made. You've already ignored half a dozen questions and strayed from the original subject, since you couldn't be bothered to answer for it.
This is purely circular reasoning, based off a rationalization you literally make up on the spot. When confronted on god supposedly delivering these laws to jews in the form of Mitzvoh, you suddenly claim that a government didn't exist, as if the laws that they had were not already subject to the ambiguity of interpretation from ruling authorities ( in the full ignorance of the bible and actual history ). When you don't want to agree to a biblical ethics being used to support slavery, you arbitrary make up a rationale that they are all of a sudden.. trying to interpret subjectively.. and because of that they make errors.
Mostly answered above.
Nothing you said answers it. You keep making up more rationale, ontop o fthe ludicrous ones you've already made up.
However one point I want to make. Did they also follow the Biblical laws on how a slave should be treated and how long they may remain in slavery? No. Hence they went by their own laws.
You mean american slavery?
Actually, they did. They even created laws, based around biblical ideas of servitude. Slaves could buy their way out of slavery. The argument for american slavery was 100% biblical.
Are you trying to say biblical slavery is somehow humane?
You may think it trolling but it's an honest statement.
It's a statement that demonstrates you didn't even read the post. I didn't say anything about any other kind of government beyond secular democracies.