They Are Going After The Churches:

[The Thinker]

I do like how non-thinker keeps throwing out Bible verses and totally ignoring that slavery went away in Europe, after Christians came to power and only ended up coming back when mass amounts of cheap labor was needed with the discovery of the Americas. Even than, it was Christians that played a major role in the anti slavery movements of the colonial era. Who cares about history and context though? Non-thinker hates Christians and Christianity and will do anything in his power to make Christians or Christianity look bad, no matter how much evidence he has to ignore.

That's completely irrelevant to the fact that the Bible condones slavery. It is the principle here that matters. You do know that right? And European colonial powers kept slavery in their colonies until the 1800s and justified it through the Bible which ensured generations of humans wouldn't have dignity for nearly two millennia after Christianity's start. What else would you expect from a perfect deity?

So your point is totally mute. Once again.

[The Thinker]

It is ironic to watch somebody attack slavery and accuse Christians of supporting slavery, when he wants to force people to serve others or else. I guess when you're losing and losing badly, any shelter in the storm will due.

Force people to serve me or else? That's an absurd parody of my view. Please try to be more logical. Or, go back to serving your husband's needs where you belong and as god intended.

[NorrinRadd]

Do you really want this as a reality?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]17364[/ATTACH]

I doubt that any of us "want" that per se. But we are willing to accept that unlikely but possible consequence of greater freedom and less government intrusion.

[The Thinker]

I already answer this Thinker. In my world love and justice are universal and immutable concepts or attributes. We ultimately live in a just universe where love and mercy are more than the accidental by products of biological processes. They are permanent qualities, sure and certain, not transitory or dependent on our shifting, mutable character.

Why are love and justice good things?

[NorrinRadd]

That's completely irrelevant to the fact that the Bible condones slavery. It is the principle here that matters. You do know that right? And European colonial powers kept slavery in their colonies until the 1800s and justified it through the Bible which ensured generations of humans wouldn't have dignity for nearly two millennia after Christianity's start. What else would you expect from a perfect deity?

No, the Bible does not "condone" slavery.

So your point is totally mute. Once again.

"Moot."

[Sparko]

That's completely irrelevant to the fact that the Bible condones slavery. It is the principle here that matters. You do know that right? And European colonial powers kept slavery in their colonies until the 1800s and justified it through the Bible which ensured generations of humans wouldn't have dignity for nearly two millennia after Christianity's start. What else would you expect from a perfect deity?

So your point is totally mute. Once again.

The only slavery the bible ever condoned is what we call indentured servitude, working off a debt. Then they were freed unless they actually wanted to remain as servants. The type of slavery you are talking about is not condoned, in fact the whole point of EXODUS was to save the Hebrews from that type of slavery from the Egyptians.

[seer]

Why are love and justice good things?

There you go again! You are a broken record Thinker. Something, or rather someone, eventually has to define what is good. Either the individual, or the collective, or in my case the Creator. So love and justice are good qualities because they conform to the moral character and the commands of God. And because they are for our benefit.

[seer]

That's completely irrelevant to the fact that the Bible condones slavery. It is the principle here that matters. You do know that right? And European colonial powers kept slavery in their colonies until the 1800s and justified it through the Bible which ensured generations of humans wouldn't have dignity for nearly two millennia after Christianity's start. What else would you expect from a perfect deity?

So your point is totally mute. Once again.

First, the bible never says that slavery is a good or moral thing. It is allowed in some cases just like God allowed Israel to have a King or for men to divorce their wives even though He did not condone it. And "manstealing" which was the basis for Southern slavery was strictly condemned in Scripture. And I'm not sure, given your worldview where human existence is merely the accidental byproduct of natural forces, how that confers dignity to human beings.

[The Thinker]

No, the Bible does not "condone" slavery.

Yes it does. The quicker you realize that the quicker you won't be in denial.

[The Thinker]

The only slavery the bible ever condoned is what we call indentured servitude, working off a debt. Then they were freed unless they actually wanted to remain as servants. The type of slavery you are talking about is not condoned, in fact the whole point of EXODUS was to save the Hebrews from that type of slavery from the Egyptians.

That's false. This is a common claim by Christians who are in denial about what the Bible says and history shows. First, indentured servitude is still problematic. If god was OK with it then, he's OK with it now, since according to seer, god never changes. So that would have to mean indentured servitude is still morally acceptable in the 21st century.

Second, indentured servitude only applied to Hebrews in the Bible. For non-Hebrews, lifelong slavery was allowed. There is a misinformation campaign by Christians to claim it was all voluntary indentured servitude, or something like it. Here's a quote from scholarly work A History Of Ancient Near Eastern Law on slavery (emphasis mine):

4.5.5.1 Enslavement

A citizen could not be enslaved against his will if independent or without the permission of the person under whose authority he was if a subordinate member of a household. The only exception was enslavement by court order for commission of a crime or civil wrong. Although in practice economic circumstances would often force a person into slavery, in law his act was, strictly speaking, voluntary. The foreigner, by contrast, could be enslaved through capture in war, kidnapping, or force, unless protected by the local ruler or given resident alien status. In the latter case, protection still might only be partial. As a proverb puts it: "A resident alien in another city is a slave."

To drive the point even further so that there is no confusion over whether this applied to Israel:

4.5.2.2 Foreign slaves could be acquired by war, purchase, or birth. If a besieged city accepts the offer to allow their surrender, the people serve as tribute labor (Deut. 20:11). Should the city not surrender, men should be killed at capture rather than turned into slaves; women and children can be taken as booty (Deut. 20:12-14).


4.5.4.6 Foreign slaves bought from the surrounding nations or from foreigners living in Israel do not go out: they are inherited as property (Lev. 25:44-46).

The Christian or Jew who wishes to deny that some Biblical slavery was indeed real life slavery, little different from the kind we had in the antebellum South, and condoned by their god, Yahweh, is in utter denial.

[The Thinker]

There you go again! You are a broken record Thinker. Something, or rather someone, eventually has to define what is good. Either the individual, or the collective, or in my case the Creator. So love and justice are good qualities because they conform to the moral character and the commands of God.

So basically your justification is totally circular? IE: love and justice are good qualities because they conform to the moral character, and the commands of God, and God is good because....well....he's just good.

That makes no logical sense and it shows your view is not superior to mine.

And because they are for our benefit.

That would be a reason that exists independently of god. Love and justice would benefit us just as much if there was no god.

[The Thinker]

First, the bible never says that slavery is a good or moral thing. It is allowed in some cases just like God allowed Israel to have a King or for men to divorce their wives even though He did not condone it. And "manstealing" which was the basis for Southern slavery was strictly condemned in Scripture. And I'm not sure, given your worldview where human existence is merely the accidental byproduct of natural forces, how that confers dignity to human beings.

If god commands something it is good (according to your own logic) and your god certainly commands slavery in numerous places (e.g. Lev 25:44-46). And your god does command the Israelites to take other tribes as slaves through force. But let's not get off track here. The main point was that you believe god never changes. And that means whatever god thought was moral in 2500 BC he thinks is moral now. But you know many things are allowed or prescribed in the Bible that we would never allow for today (like slavery), and so that means you have to believe they are still moral today -- since your god never changes. And that means you do not have a superior view over mine since your view would keep Iron age morality alive in the 21st century, a lot like how ISIS wants to keep 7th century morality alive in the 21st century.

[seer]

So basically your justification is totally circular? IE: love and justice are good qualities because they conform to the moral character, and the commands of God, and God is good because....well....he's just good.

That makes no logical sense and it shows your view is not superior to mine.

Thinker, it is time to put up or shut up. Offer a non-circular argument of your own. If not we are still left with what I said. In my world we live in a just universe where love mercy and goodness are universal and immutable qualities and not dependent on our shifting and mutable moral natures.

That would be a reason that exists independently of god. Love and justice would benefit us just as much if there was no god.

That is not true at all. God created us for a purpose, and fulfilling that purpose is what is best for us. There is no such teleology if we were created by the blind forces of nature. Love and justice may serve the species, but only accidentally, at other times selfishness and cruelty may so serve the species - eliminating the weak and infirmed from the gene pool. There is no "right" way for humans to be in your world.

[seer]

If god commands something it is good (according to your own logic) and your god certainly commands slavery in numerous places (e.g. Lev 25:44-46). And your god does command the Israelites to take other tribes as slaves through force. But let's not get off track here. The main point was that you believe god never changes. And that means whatever god thought was moral in 2500 BC he thinks is moral now. But you know many things are allowed or prescribed in the Bible that we would never allow for today (like slavery), and so that means you have to believe they are still moral today -- since your god never changes. And that means you do not have a superior view over mine since your view would keep Iron age morality alive in the 21st century, a lot like how ISIS wants to keep 7th century morality alive in the 21st century.

It is never "commanded." You "may..." And if God "allowed" things in the past that He didn't allow today that would not necessarily mean that He changed, only that He accommodated our natures until He could bring men to a higher realization, to a higher moral ground.

[The Thinker]

Thinker, it is time to put up or shut up. Offer a non-circular argument of your own. If not we are still left with what I said. In my world we live in a just universe where love mercy and goodness are universal and immutable qualities and not dependent on our shifting and mutable moral natures.

I'm only arguing one thing here: your claim that your view is superior to mine. If you claim your view is circular and my view is circular, then you cannot claim your view is superior to mine. It would mean we're equal. That's the only point I want to demonstrate right now. You've basically admitted that, but yet you still insist your view is superior to mine. That makes no logical sense.

In your world your arbitrarily defined values are held by an arbitrarily defined god. An ISIS member could claim the same thing about his universe using a different god and different values and claim whatever those values and god are is what he can assert as "just." To me that in no way indicates his moral views are superior to mine. And again, your god is jealous, angry, vengeful, and thinks slavery is OK - and these must be immutable traits according to you, and so that must mean slavery is morally acceptable in principle by your view even today. I do not find that superior at all. In fact, it seems inferior.

That is not true at all. God created us for a purpose, and fulfilling that purpose is what is best for us. There is no such teleology if we were created by the blind forces of nature. Love and justice may serve the species, but only accidentally, at other times selfishness and cruelty may so serve the species - eliminating the weak and infirmed from the gene pool. There is no "right" way for humans to be in your world.

Yes it is true. It doesn't matter whether it is by accident or not, if love and justice serve the species, it benefits us, just as much as if we were planned the same exact way as our accident, and therefore this would exist independently of god. And if selfishness and cruelty are bad according to your god, your god must have logical reasons for why this is so, and if he does, those logical reasons must exist independently of god, otherwise you're left with an arbitrary brute fact "it just is" or circular reasoning -- which means you can never escape the trilemma -- which means your view is not in any way superior to mine.