Changes

::It is not about the position vis a vis the morality or otherwise of slavery.  That is most definitely not in question.  It's a bigger problem, and what I've been driving at all along.  If we don't need the Bible to help our argument against slavery (and i'm pretty sure we don't) then there is no place for "Slavery in the Bible" to be part of this article. '''But''' if you '''are''' going to have bible passages then you are duty bound to present '''all''' of the sources if this is going to be a complete, accurate section (which I still maintain has no place in this article).  It's about academic rigour - you can't just cite things you like from a document and ignore things you don't.  This is '''very much''' independent of the argument for or against slavery (as I've stated earlier, there is no argument), it's a matter of principle. "The whole Truth and nothing but the Truth" eh? [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 14:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::It is not about the position vis a vis the morality or otherwise of slavery.  That is most definitely not in question.  It's a bigger problem, and what I've been driving at all along.  If we don't need the Bible to help our argument against slavery (and i'm pretty sure we don't) then there is no place for "Slavery in the Bible" to be part of this article. '''But''' if you '''are''' going to have bible passages then you are duty bound to present '''all''' of the sources if this is going to be a complete, accurate section (which I still maintain has no place in this article).  It's about academic rigour - you can't just cite things you like from a document and ignore things you don't.  This is '''very much''' independent of the argument for or against slavery (as I've stated earlier, there is no argument), it's a matter of principle. "The whole Truth and nothing but the Truth" eh? [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 14:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)