Slavery in the bible discussion thread

[Sparhafoc]

I just hope I see you there, you self absorbed hypocrite.

Even Hell has standards.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Leviticus 25:44-46

44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.

45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Can own slaves - not good Hebrews - but those foreign devils are fair game.

You can buy the children as slaves, and you can own them.

You can inherit slaves.

Slaves are a possession.

Slaves kept 'for ever'.


Pretty much says it all really.

The only indentured servants - the proto debt servitude equivocation with employment - were 'the Children of Israel', not all the other slaves.

The equivocation is exposed as either a) abject bullshit or b) ignorance of the Bible.

 

[Sparhafoc]

And again, even if there was only indentured servitude in the Bible (which is clearly bollocks) it would still be a less more society than our modern, secular one. So we're back to the point where either slavery is morally fine because God allows it, or that we modern humans are more moral than the god was when 'he' had this book decreed.

 

[Bango Skank]

And again, even if there was only indentured servitude in the Bible (which is clearly bollocks) it would still be a less more society than our modern, secular one. So we're back to the point where either slavery is morally fine because God allows it, or that we modern humans are more moral than the god was when 'he' had this book decreed.

Do you really except these fundies to admit it? These people want to live forever, so of course they try to whitewash and downplay all the atrocities in the bible. They really believe that thing called "God" exists, so they arent gonna jeopardize their change of immortality. They go for the yes man route.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Although I understand your point/concern, I'm basing my comment on the previous topics in which all three have partook to which you are undoubtedly unfamiliar, as these occurred over the past several years.

Bear in mind the three possibilities in my second scenario, which applies to all three - Bernhard, leroy, and thenexttodie - to a greater or lesser degree.

Fairy muff... although I do believe that they're allowed to change their position. In fact, it would be highly desirable if they think condoning slavery is a position Christians should take.

Er, I think you meant "...is not a position...".

As an aside, I think the Wiki article on slavery in the bible is a good guide - it clearly indicates the different forms that appears in the bible.

Yup. The claim that there's only sugar and silk slavery in the Bible is ignorance/bullshit.

Or, rather, that it's all sugar "because God".

Kindest regards,

James

 

[leroy]

Slavery in the Bible is a hard and deeply emotional topic, but when atheist try to formulate a rational argument based on slavery on the bible, against the existence of God or against the divinity of the bible, they always end up proposing a "not so strong argument" and they usually end up admitting something that atheist are not suppose to admit (objective morality, free will, etc.)

 

[Deleted member 619]

You can't really be that stupid. Neither free will nor objective morality are predicated on the existence of preposterous magical entities. Further, not one single argument I've ever erected has wound up granting those concepts any credence, and I'm unaware of any atheists' arguments that have.

You're lying again.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

Oh cute, the one who wanted me in hell now preaches too me.

Piss off Bernie

 

[leroy]

You can't really be that stupid. Neither free will nor objective morality are predicated on the existence of preposterous magical entities. Further, not one single argument I've ever erected has wound up granting those concepts any credence, and I'm unaware of any atheists' arguments that have.

You're lying again.

those who say that slavery is wrong are granting objetive morality.


besides, If you don't believe in human choice, then you shouldn't accuse anyone for lying ,lying implies choice

 

[Deleted member 619]

those who say that slavery is wrong are granting objetive morality.

I don't use the term 'wrong', so perhaps you should go and level that at somebody who does. That said, I can easily argue that slavery is immoral without granting objective morality, because morality isn't objective, and nor is it subjective, it's intersubjective.

besides, If you don't believe in human choice, then you shouldn't accuse anyone for lying ,lying implies choice

Who doesn't believe in choice?

You should try arguing with the hackenslash on the forum, as opposed to the one who only exists in your tiny mind.

 

[Sparhafoc]

And again, even if there was only indentured servitude in the Bible (which is clearly bollocks) it would still be a less more society than our modern, secular one. So we're back to the point where either slavery is morally fine because God allows it, or that we modern humans are more moral than the god was when 'he' had this book decreed.

Do you really except these fundies to admit it? These people want to live forever, so of course they try to whitewash and downplay all the atrocities in the bible. They really believe that thing called "God" exists, so they arent gonna jeopardize their change of immortality. They go for the yes man route.

I just came off a marathon 6 hour call to two of my dearest friends in the UK.

One of them - a friend of 30+ years - is a very dedicated Christian believer, and his wife is a practicing neo-pagan.

I told him about this thread and he just hung his head in despair, but it provoked honest, reasoned, and quite introspective conversation where we exchanged real dialogue, made each other think, and learned more about each other.

It also gave me the opportunity to introduce him to John Shelby Spong.

I don't believe in Christianity, but I do believe there are contextually appropriate right and wrong ways of doing Christianity, and the 2 chaps specifically motivated to shit on this forum have no more of a clue how to do religion than they know how to do science.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Slavery in the Bible is a hard and deeply emotional topic, but when atheist try to formulate a rational argument based on slavery on the bible, against the existence of God or against the divinity of the bible, they always end up proposing a "not so strong argument" and they usually end up admitting something that atheist are not suppose to admit (objective morality, free will, etc.)

Either that, or it's just your imagination because you're locked in narrow little grooves of thought that you and your beliefs have manufactured.

 

[Sparhafoc]

those who say that slavery is wrong are granting objetive morality.

Nope. Idiotic canard, and it's an idiotic canard I've seen debunked here on this forum when you've claimed it before.

You might consider yourself the fulcrum of understanding LEROY, but when only you fail to comprehend something, and everyone else agrees you are wrong, you don't get to pretend you're really still right.

You are mistaken as you've been mistaken each time you've erected this canard - your inability to process your error is your failing, not ours.

besides, If you don't believe in human choice, then you shouldn't accuse anyone for lying ,lying implies choice

And this idiocy was shredded and used as compost a dozen times already.

 

[Sparhafoc]

You should try arguing with the hackenslash on the forum, as opposed to the one who only exists in your tiny mind.

Can you imagine?

That's antithesis to LEROY - his mind's full of named pigeons he's fortuitously found he had ready made pigeonholes for.

Silly little uninspected life. What a waste, even if there is a god.

 

[Deleted member 619]

I just came off a marathon 6 hour call to two of my dearest friends in the UK.

One of them - a friend of 30+ years - is a very dedicated Christian believer, and his wife is a practicing neo-pagan.

I told him about this thread and he just hung his head in despair, but it provoked honest, reasoned, and quite introspective conversation where we exchanged real dialogue, made each other think, and learned more about each other.

It also gave me the opportunity to introduce him to John Shelby Spong.

I don't believe in Christianity, but I do believe there are contextually appropriate right and wrong ways of doing Christianity, and the 2 chaps specifically motivated to shit on this forum have no more of a clue how to do religion than they know how to do science.

It's amazing, isn't it?

I've been spending a fair bit of time in dialogue with a local Catholic priest and some of his parishioners in the last year. What interests me most is how often I'll say something, the parishioners will look at me like I'm stupid, and the priest will say 'no, actually he's correct'.

 

[leroy]

I don't use the term 'wrong', so perhaps you should go and level that at somebody who does. That said, I can easily argue that slavery is immoral without granting objective morality, because morality isn't objective, and nor is it subjective, it's intersubjective.

nobody is labeling you.

I said, when atheist make an argument (related to slavery) against God or the bible, they usually grant stuff like objective morality.

in this forum nobody makes arguments against God, because atheist form this forum think that they shouldn't, so I am not labeling nobody in particular in this forum.

Who doesn't believe in choice?

You should try arguing with the hackenslash on the forum, as opposed to the one who only exists in your tiny mind.

the hackenslash of this forum doesn't believe human choice (will)


http://leagueofreason.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=14042&start=995

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Slavery in the Bible is a hard and deeply emotional topic, but when atheist try to formulate a rational argument based on slavery on the bible, against the existence of God or against the divinity of the bible, they always end up proposing a "not so strong argument" and they usually end up admitting something that atheist are not suppose to admit (objective morality, free will, etc.)

:lol:

Dandan/Leroy already admitted on this forum that when he says objective morals he actually means Divine Command (thus not objective) and that will (what he also admitted to meaning when he says free will) is possible without a deity. Why he now states those as being problems for atheism is beyond me.

 

[Sparhafoc]

You should try arguing with the hackenslash on the forum, as opposed to the one who only exists in your tiny mind.

And again, LEROY.

When someone explains to you that they think free choice is a borked concept; a notion that is inaccurate and lacking utility in describing reality....

You do not turn round and tell them that their position is still within your manufactured false dichotomy.

If you do this, you not only look like a mendacious little cunt with a giant sense of self-worth and consequent disrespect for anyone else and their views, but you are also blinding yourself to possibilities that your little mind didn't contemplate.

Over and over LEROY, you pollute discourse on this forum.

It's not with one person - it's not like just one person induces this behavior in you - it's with everyone here.

The common denominator is LEROY.

 

[Sparhafoc]

:lol:

Dandan/Leroy already admitted on this forum that when he says objective morals he actually means Divine Command (thus not objective) and that will (what he also admitted to meaning when he says free will) is possible without a deity. Why he now states those as being problems for atheism is beyond me.

Because LEROY seems to think the act of fucking with non-believers earns him cosmic brownie points.

It's not the content of the argument that matters - LEROY just makes up his criticisms wholly dependent on who he wants to fuck with - it's the act of fucking with the non-believers that drives this behavior.

There is no reasonable discourse to be had with him (a fact that's shown in every single thread he participates in) because he doesn't employ reason, and he can't allow anyone else to.

 

[Steelmage99]

[

I said, when atheist make an argument (related to slavery) against God or the bible, they usually grant stuff like objective morality.

Where did you get that idea?

That statement certainly doesn't apply to any interaction you have had on this board.