814 replies to this topic

[crowTrobot]

Balloon guy, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 4:19 PM, said:

First you must make the case that slavery is evil.

define evil

[speedz99]

crowTrobot, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 6:23 PM, said:

define evil

This is somewhat amusing considering the discussion.Main Entry: 1evil Pronunciation: \ˈē-vəl, British often & US also ˈē-(ˌ)vil\Function: adjective Inflected Form(s): evil·er or evil·ler; evil·est or evil·lestEtymology: Middle English, from Old English yfel; akin to Old High German ubil evilDate: before 12th century1 a : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked <an evil impulse> b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct <a person of evil reputation>2 a archaic : inferior b : causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive <an evil odor> c : disagreeable <woke late and in an evil temper>3 a : causing harm : pernicious <the evil institution of slavery> b : marked by misfortune : unlucky— evil adverb, archaic — evil·ly \-(l)ē\ adverb— evil·ness \-nəs\ noun

[BaseJester]

This thread truly bottles the mind.

[Spademan]

This thread is indicative of every single other thread where a cultist (usually BG is the only one with the fervor to participate) makes idiotic statements in defense of their cults more absurd particulars. It simply stands out in this thread because of the blatantly indefensible position of the Christian cult's text in relation to slavery, and BG's penchant to speak with the authoritative certainty of people who are actually making reasonable, logically sound points. It is delusion in technicolor.

[brvheart]

Spademan, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 11:58 PM, said:

It is delusion in technicolor.

I love this line. Love it.Also, you guys are totally not listening to BG, which should be expected, since the topic is something so obviously "wrong". The Bible doesn't take a position on slavery at all, and you guys aren't listening to that, because you are so certain that the Bible LOVES slavery and hates women and coloreds.The Bible, specifically the NT, is simply saying, "The facts of life are this, slavery exists. If you happen to be a slave, remember, your reward is in heaven. Keep your eyes on God. If you are a master... remember. God is watching you, and will judge your actions."The Bible wasn't written to be the basis for a political party. It was written to speak to every person's heart, no matter their station in life. The actual slaves understood this very well. Just look up some of the songs they sang in the cotton fields.

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 10:19 PM, said:

Also, you guys are totally not listening to BG, which should be expected, since the topic is something so obviously "wrong". The Bible doesn't take a position on slavery at all

Strongly disagree with this. It specifically says "You may buy slaves". Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."You don't get any closer to condoning an action than specifically saying "You may do this". I don't see how any reasonable person could read this passage and think it is not condoning slavery. Furthermore, even if you were right, and the bible "took no position" the point would remain. Any moral authority worth its parchment should take a position on slavery. It should say "slavery is wrong".

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 12:42 AM, said:

Strongly disagree with this. It specifically says "You may buy slaves". Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."You don't get any closer to condoning an action than specifically saying "You may do this". I don't see how any reasonable person could read this passage and think it is not condoning slavery. Furthermore, even if you were right, and the bible "took no position" the point would remain. Any moral authority worth its parchment should take a position on slavery. It should say "slavery is wrong".

I made a specific mistake, that wasn't noticed by me, until your post. My entire post was about the heart issues that are applied to the world via Jesus in the New Testament. The heart issues and the instructions on behavior are all listed in the New Testament specifically and that is that I was referring to as 'The Bible'. I apologize for not being more specific. I'm off to read the context of the section of Leviticus that you posted.

[vbnautilus]

Yeah we've been talking about the OT specifically. There are several passages like the Leviticus one I quoted.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 1:15 AM, said:

Yeah we've been talking about the OT specifically. There are several passages like the Leviticus one I quoted.

I apologize then.

[JoeyJoJo]

speedz99, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 6:22 PM, said:

This is even more nitpicky than usual. Obviously I was just using that form of slavery to make my point.

My point was that using the worst-case scenario to make your point actually weakens your point. For what it's worth, I don't think slavery has any redeeming qualities.

[brvheart]

JoeyJoJo, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 10:15 AM, said:

For what it's worth, I don't think slavery has any redeeming qualities.

You can get a TON of work done for free! (allegedly)

[Spademan]

brvheart, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 12:19 AM, said:

because you are so certain that the Bible... hates women and coloreds.

Well, to be fair it got these two right.

brvheart, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 10:34 AM, said:

You can get a TON of work done for free! (allegedly)

I "heh'd" because of the parenthetical.

[Balloon guy]

BaseJester, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 6:56 PM, said:

This thread truly bottles the mind.

I love this line, It is my all time favorite thing to say now

vbnautilus, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 10:42 PM, said:

Strongly disagree with this. It specifically says "You may buy slaves". Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."You don't get any closer to condoning an action than specifically saying "You may do this". I don't see how any reasonable person could read this passage and think it is not condoning slavery.

I don't see how any reasonable person could judge the Bible by only the OT.

Quote

Furthermore, even if you were right, and the bible "took no position" the point would remain. Any moral authority worth its parchment should take a position on slavery. It should say "slavery is wrong".

You have just created a requirement for moral authority that is completely contingent on the notion that there is a morality separate from all human involvement.Throughout this thread you have made the claim that morality evolves with people, meaning that at one time slavery was cool, and in fact that in some cultures today slavery is cool. Only in recent years has slavery lost it's coolness and is now bad, as we evolved to believe that as a society.Now you want to be able to discount my belief in the Bible being the ultimate authority on morality by using the idea that your current evolved state of morality says that what we now believe to be immoral is at odds with what the Bible says about slavery.Now either you must admit that there is a morality that is completely separate from human involvement and therefore acknowledge that it's origin must come from a 'Higher Power', or retract your above statement as being true because it is only accurate in the current system of morality which may change in a year for no reason other than things change.

[Randy Reed]

vbnautilus, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 6:02 PM, said:

Seriously? We are not in agreement that enslaving people is wrong? Seriously?It's not that "being a slave" is bad, its "enslaving people" that is morally wrong.

Well, unless you are God and created the world knowing this was going to happen. I'm sure he probably seen some benefit to further his plan of strengthing the genetic code of humans.

Balloon guy, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 9:56 AM, said:

I love this line, It is my all time favorite thing to say nowI don't see how any reasonable person could judge the Bible by only the OT.You have just created a requirement for moral authority that is completely contingent on the notion that there is a morality separate from all human involvement.Throughout this thread you have made the claim that morality evolves with people, meaning that at one time slavery was cool, and in fact that in some cultures today slavery is cool. Only in recent years has slavery lost it's coolness and is now bad, as we evolved to believe that as a society.Now you want to be able to discount my belief in the Bible being the ultimate authority on morality by using the idea that your current evolved state of morality says that what we now believe to be immoral is at odds with what the Bible says about slavery.Now either you must admit that there is a morality that is completely separate from human involvement and therefore acknowledge that it's origin must come from a 'Higher Power', or retract your above statement as being true because it is only accurate in the current system of morality which may change in a year for no reason other than things change.

See vb? Morality is completely seperate from human involvement. God created one commonality among all living things, the desire to procreate. All morality from God's sense is strictly to ensure the procreation of the species. That is God's constant. Your morality might change with the times but his doesn't, it is separate from human involvement. War, death, slavery and destruction are just tools he created to further his plan and design for us. BG has made a good point and you have to admit to this higher power.

[Balloon guy]

Randy Reed, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 11:20 AM, said:

BG has made a good point and you have to admit to this higher power.

Thank you Randy

[brvheart]

Randy Reed, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 1:20 PM, said:

Well, unless you are God and created the world knowing this was going to happen. I'm sure he probably seen some benefit to further his plan of strengthing the genetic code of humans.See vb? Morality is completely seperate from human involvement. God created one commonality among all living things, the desire to procreate. All morality from God's sense is strictly to ensure the procreation of the species. That is God's constant. Your morality might change with the times but his doesn't, it is separate from human involvement. War, death, slavery and destruction are just tools he created to further his plan and design for us. BG has made a good point and you have to admit to this higher power.

Christian Randy, you aren't doing a very good job of spreading the 'truth'. This isn't correct.

[Randy Reed]

Balloon guy, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 10:22 AM, said:

Thank you Randy

Your welcome. I finally see the light. My life is now worthless but I can't kill myself since I might not get to the next nicer ant farm. I am trapped and have to put up with his torment.

brvheart, on Thursday, March 25th, 2010, 10:30 AM, said:

Christian Randy, you aren't doing a very good job of spreading the 'truth'. This isn't correct.

Sure it is. Prove me wrong. I can even use the bible to back me up.I just think the difference is most Christians like the idea of having some creator that did this to us. I don't.

[Randy Reed]

vbnautilus, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 9:42 PM, said:

Strongly disagree with this. It specifically says "You may buy slaves". Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."You don't get any closer to condoning an action than specifically saying "You may do this". I don't see how any reasonable person could read this passage and think it is not condoning slavery. Furthermore, even if you were right, and the bible "took no position" the point would remain. Any moral authority worth its parchment should take a position on slavery. It should say "slavery is wrong".

Bg's point is that you are creating an absolute morality which doesn't work (in the human perspective). How do you know that slavery might have had a social benefit. Obviously God wanted to further the Christians in their geneitc heritge and by allowing slavery to assist them might have led a population growth that has enabled the vast Christian majority that God intended?For that matter, wars and genocide could have as well.

[Randy Reed]

Spademan, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 8:58 PM, said:

This thread is indicative of every single other thread where a cultist (usually BG is the only one with the fervor to participate) makes idiotic statements in defense of their cults more absurd particulars. It simply stands out in this thread because of the blatantly indefensible position of the Christian cult's text in relation to slavery, and BG's penchant to speak with the authoritative certainty of people who are actually making reasonable, logically sound points. It is delusion in technicolor.

What's delusional about life? Something gave the molecules a spark and created action. As much as there is a reason to believe it just happened, it's just as logical to imagine some alternate creator putting the spark there. If he could put the spark of life into us, he could have sent us a guide in the form of Jesus to guide us on his path.

[Balloon guy]

The funny thing is the obvious one.You can't show one example of a Christian group who claims slavery is acceptable and or practices it today, but we can all pick out groups who will dance with rattle snakes, reject all modern conveniences, etc.If the Bible really taught that slavery was cool, you would think at least one nut job today would try to get the practice reinstated...Only examples I can think of would be the God-less communist who make their entire country slaves.But those are atheist, not Christians.