Author Topic: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.  (Read 89306 times)

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1562
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #300 on: June 01, 2017, 09:06:36 AM »
Not if He just is, was and always will be.  Again, you're using logic, which I totally appreciate, but there is nothing that demands the God conform to our understanding, we'd just like it to be that way.

So basically we can't understand it, except it must be intelligent, we understand that, because of logic.

If we can't explain it we can't explain it.  You seem to assume he/she/it/whatever is intelligent, why is that?  If it doesn't conform to logic, it could very well be extremely unintelligent, or intelligence not even be a thing.  It seems to me that once we say something is outside of our ability to understand it, we don't get to assume its characteristics.
I'm not assuming anything.  I believe what God says about himself.  You just implied that in your mind the designer must be designed,which sure sounded like you using logic.  God never said "I used intelligent design" that we how humans trying to describe what he did called it.  God speaks in the Bible, He comes down to Earth as Jesus, He spent six days doing things in a specific order.  It appears intelligent to me, but if you want to think it's extremely unintelligent, that fine.  I again, can't disprove your stance.  I'm just explaining mine is based on the first chapter of Genesis.

Well now we've made a big leap from "it seems like something intelligent designed the universe" to a whole host of very specific positions about disciples sent down and 6 days and yada yada.

For one, I still don't think appealing to, as Delane very nicely put it, a bigger mystery solves any mystery.  Once we get into "we had to be made by something we can't logically understand" there is no reason at all to assume any sort of god, much less a Christian one.  We're back to Unicorns pooping out fart dust being a reasonable explanation, because hey it doesn't have to make sense if it's beyond our understanding.  Maybe in this whole "beyond our understanding" creation zone universes just spontaneously pop into existence with intelligent life. 

On the other hand, we're taking a series of stories that if anyone told you about in 2017 you'd write off as a crackpot or scam artist, but because these claims were made 2000 years ago they are suddenly considered to be very reasonable to base our lives on.  To me it seems that magical events would become less believable the longer it has been since it happened, yet for the biblical believers it seems that the farther you go back in time, the more believable a magical story is.  I really don't get it.

I saw David Copperfield a few years back make a crowd of people disappear in Las Vegas in person.  It was extremely well done and I still don't know how he did it, but I don't think it was actual magic.  If someone told me about it and I didn't see it I'd believe it even less, and if someone told me it was real magic 2000 years after it happened I'd believe it even less.  I also have little/no doubt that if he'd done a similar trick in the 1700's he'd have been burned as a witch.  2000 years ago he probably would've been feared and/or worshipped as a wizard or witch doctor or something.

Scientology is a great example of a religion that virtually everyone knows is fake, but is surviving/thriving anyway.  India and China are full of all sorts of mystics who claim to be able to do miracles, you can talk to people who've seen their miracles in person, yet I don't know of a single Christian who even vaguely considers they might be the real deal.  The guy who supposedly did similar things 2000 years ago, now that is believable.

!!!  I attended a Copperfield show in a smallish theater (no vast dark spaces within the audience seating portion of the theater), and he made himself (or a double, I assume), suddenly appear ON A RUNNING MOTORCYCLE ON A PLATFORM in the middle of a patch of empty seats about 4 rows directly in front of me!  It was hard core awesome and I have no friggin idea how he did it.  I mean, I understand about visual tricks and misdirection in the abstract, but I've never quite worked out how that particular trick was done so close to me without me noticing anything.   There were seats there (granted, empty ones) when I sat down, and during the first part of the show!  It was right in front of me in physical space!  Good times.

Pigeon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1071
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #301 on: June 01, 2017, 09:26:17 AM »
Quote
India and China are full of all sorts of mystics who claim to be able to do miracles, you can talk to people who've seen their miracles in person, yet I don't know of a single Christian who even vaguely considers they might be the real deal.  The guy who supposedly did similar things 2000 years ago, now that is believable.

To be fair, there are many Christians who fall for magicians.  Stigmata, weeping statues, mysterious visions, etc.  I grew up being fed a steady stream of these stories by Catholic nuns.  There are plenty of faith healers, snake handlers and other Christian charlatans who attract crowds of believers.

Father Dougal

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #302 on: June 01, 2017, 09:59:42 AM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1783
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #303 on: June 01, 2017, 10:05:05 AM »
Quote
India and China are full of all sorts of mystics who claim to be able to do miracles, you can talk to people who've seen their miracles in person, yet I don't know of a single Christian who even vaguely considers they might be the real deal.  The guy who supposedly did similar things 2000 years ago, now that is believable.

To be fair, there are many Christians who fall for magicians.  Stigmata, weeping statues, mysterious visions, etc.  I grew up being fed a steady stream of these stories by Catholic nuns.  There are plenty of faith healers, snake handlers and other Christian charlatans who attract crowds of believers.

Not to mention psychics, those jerks that claim to be able to "contact the other side" and communicate with the dead loved ones. 

I appreciate that some one would want to use logic.  I never said you can do that to understand God.  He's beyond understanding, says so himself. 

If logic is not applicable to this discussion, then there is literally nothing to talk about.  I mean, we're trying to arrive at a conclusion that is reasonable.  And reasonable means applying logic to come up with a good answer.  If that's off the table, then there's not point in even engaging in a discussion.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 12:43:51 PM by tyort1 »
Frugalite in training.

Grog

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #304 on: June 01, 2017, 11:58:06 AM »
Hi caracarn, "complexity" like you see in brain, or life starting, is only complex through our lens. We may not even be that complex in the grand scheme of things. Life may be trivial and a common thing into the universe.
We perceive it as complex only through our understanding. So it's maybe not that correct to say: life is complex, therefore must be logically created by a god.

You don't know if it is really complex. You have no way to make that assumption. The brain of whale is much larger and intricate that ours but is not that advanced. So how do you define complexity? You can't use that as a criteria because is entirely man-perceived.

Sent from my YD201 using Tapatalk


caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #305 on: June 01, 2017, 01:42:54 PM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?
This one is easy.  God is love and God is not a liar, and God clearly gave a commandment, "Do not murder?"  Therefore this message would not be from God but from a demon, assuming it wasn't some form of psychosis.  God has never murdered.  He's gone to war, but not murdered. 

Pigeon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1071
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #306 on: June 01, 2017, 01:56:30 PM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?
This one is easy.  God is love and God is not a liar, and God clearly gave a commandment, "Do not murder?"  Therefore this message would not be from God but from a demon, assuming it wasn't some form of psychosis.  God has never murdered.  He's gone to war, but not murdered.

Lot's wife, the 42 children who mocked Elisha, all the poor slobs mauled by lions in Kings, Jeroboam's son, the population of Sodom and Gomorrah, the firstborn sons of Egypt, the random millions drowned in the flood, hell of a guy, clearly brimming with love.  No matter how you want to spin it, he murders left and right.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #307 on: June 01, 2017, 02:09:18 PM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?
This one is easy.  God is love and God is not a liar, and God clearly gave a commandment, "Do not murder?"  Therefore this message would not be from God but from a demon, assuming it wasn't some form of psychosis.  God has never murdered.  He's gone to war, but not murdered.

Lot's wife, the 42 children who mocked Elisha, all the poor slobs mauled by lions in Kings, Jeroboam's son, the population of Sodom and Gomorrah, the firstborn sons of Egypt, the random millions drowned in the flood, hell of a guy, clearly brimming with love.  No matter how you want to spin it, he murders left and right.
OK, and I'd say you're spinning the fact that someone was killed for a reason you disagree with that it was murder.  God judged and punished in those cases.  I assume you think the death penalty is murder also? 

Pigeon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1071
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #308 on: June 01, 2017, 02:14:37 PM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?
This one is easy.  God is love and God is not a liar, and God clearly gave a commandment, "Do not murder?"  Therefore this message would not be from God but from a demon, assuming it wasn't some form of psychosis.  God has never murdered.  He's gone to war, but not murdered.

Lot's wife, the 42 children who mocked Elisha, all the poor slobs mauled by lions in Kings, Jeroboam's son, the population of Sodom and Gomorrah, the firstborn sons of Egypt, the random millions drowned in the flood, hell of a guy, clearly brimming with love.  No matter how you want to spin it, he murders left and right.
OK, and I'd say you're spinning the fact that someone was killed for a reason you disagree with that it was murder.  God judged and punished in those cases.  I assume you think the death penalty is murder also?

Yes, I do, killing people in other than self-defense is the wrong thing to do.

And assigning the death penalty to a bunch of kids for calling somebody old baldy?  Firstborn babies?  I'd say you'd be spinning here to call that anything but murder.

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 568
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #309 on: June 01, 2017, 02:19:18 PM »
I think we're venturing into less relevant bible verses/scenarios when this exact scenario is actually detailed in Genesis 22.

God commands Abraham to kill Isaac, and Abraham obeys but God stops him at the last second as God was just testing him.

This passage probably doesn't sit well with most moderate Jews, Muslims, and Christians today. 

We all would answer the same as Caracarn.  We wouldn't agree to murder our children.  But the father of Judaism did agree to do this.  And since the whole bible is useful for teaching (per the bible), the takeaway for bible readers is that they should be like Abraham - obedient to God even when he commands murder.

Father Dougal

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #310 on: June 01, 2017, 02:34:24 PM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?
This one is easy.  God is love and God is not a liar, and God clearly gave a commandment, "Do not murder?"  Therefore this message would not be from God but from a demon, assuming it wasn't some form of psychosis.  God has never murdered.  He's gone to war, but not murdered.

Lot's wife, the 42 children who mocked Elisha, all the poor slobs mauled by lions in Kings, Jeroboam's son, the population of Sodom and Gomorrah, the firstborn sons of Egypt, the random millions drowned in the flood, hell of a guy, clearly brimming with love.  No matter how you want to spin it, he murders left and right.
OK, and I'd say you're spinning the fact that someone was killed for a reason you disagree with that it was murder.  God judged and punished in those cases.  I assume you think the death penalty is murder also?

Actually, I was not suggesting He would be asking you to murder.  He would be asking you to punish after He had judged, which as you say, is justified as God doesn't punish unjustly. There are instances in the Bible where He instructed people be killed once they had been judged.  He doesn't do it all Himself.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #311 on: June 01, 2017, 02:39:07 PM »
I think we're venturing into less relevant bible verses/scenarios when this exact scenario is actually detailed in Genesis 22.

God commands Abraham to kill Isaac, and Abraham obeys but God stops him at the last second as God was just testing him.

This passage probably doesn't sit well with most moderate Jews, Muslims, and Christians today. 

We all would answer the same as Caracarn.  We wouldn't agree to murder our children.  But the father of Judaism did agree to do this.  And since the whole bible is useful for teaching (per the bible), the takeaway for bible readers is that they should be like Abraham - obedient to God even when he commands murder.
That's a misinterpretation of that episode.  Abraham and God had over a 40 year relationship speaking regularly at this point.  He did not just one say contact him for the first time and ask him to sacrifice Issac.  God stopped Abraham from killing Issac to show his mercy and to move Abraham's faith away from violence.  God has also promised Abraham before this that his descendants would be numerous as the stars, Abraham knew this was his only son, and therefore showed his trust that God would keep His promise in some way.  Isaac was diverted as the sacrifice by what became known as the scapegoat later on and pointed us to Jesus.  Jesus was the ultimate scapegoat, and after that sacrifice God does not demand anything or anyone be sacrificed for God.  It is useful for teaching, but once again, I'd suggest that you've got poor teachers walking you through Scripture. 

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #312 on: June 01, 2017, 02:41:49 PM »
Hi Caracarn,

Thanks for your responses.  I think your position is very clear.  There's one further question I have, which extends out of the faith side of things.

If you were visited tonight by an Angel, who gave you a gun and told you that God said you must kill someone (perhaps someone who had angered Him), would you do it? It would be justified because God wanted it (and, let's face it, He's done worse).

You'd have to do it in order to prove your faith.  Otherwise, it'd be the Hellfire for you, right?
This one is easy.  God is love and God is not a liar, and God clearly gave a commandment, "Do not murder?"  Therefore this message would not be from God but from a demon, assuming it wasn't some form of psychosis.  God has never murdered.  He's gone to war, but not murdered.

Lot's wife, the 42 children who mocked Elisha, all the poor slobs mauled by lions in Kings, Jeroboam's son, the population of Sodom and Gomorrah, the firstborn sons of Egypt, the random millions drowned in the flood, hell of a guy, clearly brimming with love.  No matter how you want to spin it, he murders left and right.
OK, and I'd say you're spinning the fact that someone was killed for a reason you disagree with that it was murder.  God judged and punished in those cases.  I assume you think the death penalty is murder also?

Actually, I was not suggesting He would be asking you to murder.  He would be asking you to punish after He had judged, which as you say, is justified as God doesn't punish unjustly. There are instances in the Bible where He instructed people be killed once they had been judged.  He doesn't do it all Himself.
There are instances like that and in that dispensation, He did do that, as a sign of obedience.  We are not in that dispensation any longer as we are now in the Church Age, and Jesus is our sign of obedience and God will do His own judging and killing now, so any dream that you'd have in the 21st century is either Satan or psychosis.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #313 on: June 01, 2017, 02:48:43 PM »
You could change the list of results, but the quote applies quite well to this thread as well.......



MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #314 on: June 01, 2017, 02:52:17 PM »
You could change the list of results, but the quote applies quite well to this thread as well.......

Of course, that assumes that a better world is being created.


ETA:
I have to admit though, that's a pretty funny comic.
:)

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 568
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #315 on: June 01, 2017, 03:08:47 PM »
I think we're venturing into less relevant bible verses/scenarios when this exact scenario is actually detailed in Genesis 22.

God commands Abraham to kill Isaac, and Abraham obeys but God stops him at the last second as God was just testing him.

This passage probably doesn't sit well with most moderate Jews, Muslims, and Christians today. 

We all would answer the same as Caracarn.  We wouldn't agree to murder our children.  But the father of Judaism did agree to do this.  And since the whole bible is useful for teaching (per the bible), the takeaway for bible readers is that they should be like Abraham - obedient to God even when he commands murder.
That's a misinterpretation of that episode.  Abraham and God had over a 40 year relationship speaking regularly at this point.  He did not just one say contact him for the first time and ask him to sacrifice Issac.  God stopped Abraham from killing Issac to show his mercy and to move Abraham's faith away from violence.  God has also promised Abraham before this that his descendants would be numerous as the stars, Abraham knew this was his only son, and therefore showed his trust that God would keep His promise in some way.  Isaac was diverted as the sacrifice by what became known as the scapegoat later on and pointed us to Jesus.  Jesus was the ultimate scapegoat, and after that sacrifice God does not demand anything or anyone be sacrificed for God.  It is useful for teaching, but once again, I'd suggest that you've got poor teachers walking you through Scripture.

I wouldn't say it's a misinterpretation at all.  I might have left out the background as I imagine most on this thread have at least some familiarity with Abraham and Isaac.  But I don't think the background changes the substance of the episode.  Regardless of what any bible scholar believes it is meant to teach us, God tested Abraham's obedience and Abraham passed the test so God was pleased.  Yes, it's great that God did not allow him to go through with it.  But there is no context or background that can repudiate the notion that this passage teaches that we should obey God even if asked to murder our children.

I am curious though - How does this test of God's move Abraham's faith away from violence?

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1783
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #316 on: June 01, 2017, 05:30:11 PM »
I think we're venturing into less relevant bible verses/scenarios when this exact scenario is actually detailed in Genesis 22.

God commands Abraham to kill Isaac, and Abraham obeys but God stops him at the last second as God was just testing him.

This passage probably doesn't sit well with most moderate Jews, Muslims, and Christians today. 

We all would answer the same as Caracarn.  We wouldn't agree to murder our children.  But the father of Judaism did agree to do this.  And since the whole bible is useful for teaching (per the bible), the takeaway for bible readers is that they should be like Abraham - obedient to God even when he commands murder.
That's a misinterpretation of that episode.  Abraham and God had over a 40 year relationship speaking regularly at this point.  He did not just one say contact him for the first time and ask him to sacrifice Issac.  God stopped Abraham from killing Issac to show his mercy and to move Abraham's faith away from violence.  God has also promised Abraham before this that his descendants would be numerous as the stars, Abraham knew this was his only son, and therefore showed his trust that God would keep His promise in some way.  Isaac was diverted as the sacrifice by what became known as the scapegoat later on and pointed us to Jesus.  Jesus was the ultimate scapegoat, and after that sacrifice God does not demand anything or anyone be sacrificed for God.  It is useful for teaching, but once again, I'd suggest that you've got poor teachers walking you through Scripture.

I wouldn't say it's a misinterpretation at all.  I might have left out the background as I imagine most on this thread have at least some familiarity with Abraham and Isaac.  But I don't think the background changes the substance of the episode.  Regardless of what any bible scholar believes it is meant to teach us, God tested Abraham's obedience and Abraham passed the test so God was pleased.  Yes, it's great that God did not allow him to go through with it.  But there is no context or background that can repudiate the notion that this passage teaches that we should obey God even if asked to murder our children.

I am curious though - How does this test of God's move Abraham's faith away from violence?

This always puzzled me.  God tested Abraham and was pleased that Abraham passed the test.  Wait, isn't god all-knowing?  If so, there's no test that can happen that he doesn't already know the answer to.  So why give tests?  And how can one be please with an outcome that you already knew was gonna happen?

It would be like god playing roulette.  "Oh, yay, I won again!  And again!  And again! (repeat to infinity)"
Frugalite in training.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #317 on: June 01, 2017, 07:10:37 PM »
You could change the list of results, but the quote applies quite well to this thread as well.......

Problem is, changing the results absolutely will change the quote itself. Nice try but a pretty terrible analogy.   
Earn 25K SPG Points after 3K spend: http://refer.amex.us/KYLEDiFKR?xl=cp10

Get $250 statement credit after 1K spend AMEX Blue Cash: http://refer.amex.us/KYLEDk5SI?xl=cp10

Father Dougal

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #318 on: June 02, 2017, 12:51:20 AM »
You could change the list of results, but the quote applies quite well to this thread as well.......

Problem is, changing the results absolutely will change the quote itself. Nice try but a pretty terrible analogy.   

If you change the list, the quote could change to: "What if it's a hoax and we're making the world a worse place for nothing?"

Like a world where gay people are told they are an abomination.  Or where faith and obedience are rewarded, but kindness is not (it won't get you into Heaven, let's not forget).  And if it's not a hoax, then we are living in a world where the supreme being is so vile that he has condemned Gandhi (and unbaptised babies) to be tortured eternally in Hell.  I'm still a bit sore about Gandhi's fate.

But then it isn't funny anymore.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #319 on: June 02, 2017, 07:19:32 AM »
You could change the list of results, but the quote applies quite well to this thread as well.......

Problem is, changing the results absolutely will change the quote itself. Nice try but a pretty terrible analogy.   

If you change the list, the quote could change to: "What if it's a hoax and we're making the world a worse place for nothing?"

Like a world where gay people are told they are an abomination.  Or where faith and obedience are rewarded, but kindness is not (it won't get you into Heaven, let's not forget).  And if it's not a hoax, then we are living in a world where the supreme being is so vile that he has condemned Gandhi (and unbaptised babies) to be tortured eternally in Hell.  I'm still a bit sore about Gandhi's fate.

But then it isn't funny anymore.

Also don't forget two other big ones.
A world where:

Women are commanded to be silent and submissive (1 Timothy 2:11-12)
The rules of slavery are given to us by God (Exodus 21, Leviticus 25) and upheld by Jesus (Ephesians 6:5, Colossians 3:22)

« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 07:22:56 AM by MrDelane »

Lepetitange3

  • Guest
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #320 on: June 02, 2017, 08:05:33 AM »
Well historian again...that is the reality of the world they were living in.  Women were way below second class citizens and slavery was standard

Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #321 on: June 02, 2017, 08:12:04 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 08:16:10 AM by MrDelane »

J Boogie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 568
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #322 on: June 02, 2017, 08:22:04 AM »
Well historian again...that is the reality of the world they were living in.  Women were way below second class citizens and slavery was standard

Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

Well, to play devil's advocate, murder and theft were also the reality of the world they were living in.  But those two made it to the top of the no-no list (as they should have).  Why outlaw one widespread evil and embrace another? It doesn't seem consistent with God being good.  It's hard for me to accept the OT as true and still believe that God is good.

It's a very compelling argument that human rights have progressed in spite of religion rather than because of it.  The places where human rights flourish the most are typically the most secular.  (Of course, if you take that as far as you can in the other direction and you outlaw religion, you get massive human rights abuses as well.)


Pigeon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1071
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #323 on: June 02, 2017, 08:32:02 AM »
There is very little actual belief that god is objectively good in the fundamentalist position.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #324 on: June 02, 2017, 09:17:16 AM »
There is very little actual belief that god is objectively good in the fundamentalist position.
What fundamentalists are you talking to?

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #325 on: June 02, 2017, 09:18:59 AM »
There is very little actual belief that god is objectively good in the fundamentalist position.
What fundamentalists are you talking to?

I was thinking the same thing.
:)


ETA:
Caracarn - we found something we agree on!
« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 09:20:31 AM by MrDelane »

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #326 on: June 02, 2017, 09:19:42 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

You're thinking of slavery in the cotton plantations around Atlanta orientation.  Slavery in that time and place was not as oppressive, it had a finite end in most cases unless mutually agreed etc.  It was basically used to pay off a debt or pay for something when you had no money, so you gave yourself as a slave for seven years to obtain something. 

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #327 on: June 02, 2017, 09:24:36 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

You're thinking of slavery in the cotton plantations around Atlanta orientation.  Slavery in that time and place was not as oppressive, it had a finite end in most cases unless mutually agreed etc.  It was basically used to pay off a debt or pay for something when you had no money, so you gave yourself as a slave for seven years to obtain something.

You are referring to Hebrew slaves only, other slaves were kept for life, viewed as property and could be passed on to your children if you died (Leviticus 25:44-46)
And, in regards to the Hebrew slaves, there are still situations in which you can keep them as property indefinitely even when their seven years are up (Exodus 21:4-6).

God doesn't seem to have an issue with us owning other people as property.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 09:26:45 AM by MrDelane »

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #328 on: June 02, 2017, 09:26:39 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

Two more things.

First, I would also point out that while there is no dispute that the Bible does not condemn slavery, you cannot automatically make the counter argument that it condones is.  It simply talks about how slaves should be treated.

Second, the Bible's goal is for your salvation, not to reform society.  Several people discuss this topic from that regard, that once you are saved, you would realize that slavery would not be something you would engage in.  This would become a "part of you your friends would not recognize" as you became a new man.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #329 on: June 02, 2017, 09:34:24 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

Two more things.

First, I would also point out that while there is no dispute that the Bible does not condemn slavery, you cannot automatically make the counter argument that it condones is.  It simply talks about how slaves should be treated.

Second, the Bible's goal is for your salvation, not to reform society.  Several people discuss this topic from that regard, that once you are saved, you would realize that slavery would not be something you would engage in.  This would become a "part of you your friends would not recognize" as you became a new man.

The bible lays out the rules for how to enslave other people, how much you are able to beat them and at what point (if EVER) you should be able to let them be free.
You are right in that it never explicitly says that slavery is moral.
It does however say that all scripture is God breathed.

So let me ask you this... if you were to explain to your children how to take heroin, tell them where they should get it from, how they should inject it, what tools they should use..... and never say anything explicit about whether you feel it is right or wrong...
What do you think that would teach them?

At a minimum it seems clear that God doesn't have a problem us owning other people as property - so long as they are the correct people that He described to us.
Unless of course you feel that God would actually tell us how to do something that he felt was immoral?


caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #330 on: June 02, 2017, 09:37:53 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

You're thinking of slavery in the cotton plantations around Atlanta orientation.  Slavery in that time and place was not as oppressive, it had a finite end in most cases unless mutually agreed etc.  It was basically used to pay off a debt or pay for something when you had no money, so you gave yourself as a slave for seven years to obtain something.

You are referring to Hebrew slaves only, other slaves were kept for life, viewed as property and could be passed on to your children if you died (Leviticus 25:44-46)
And, in regards to the Hebrew slaves, there are still situations in which you can keep them as property indefinitely even when their seven years are up (Exodus 21:4-6).

God doesn't seem to have an issue with us owning other people as property.
But they were not enslaved for the color of their skin.  That only began in the last few centuries and is what people usually think of. 

You are once again removing context to make a point the Bible does not make.  The section of Leviticus you lifted those choice phrases out but conveniently left verses 39-43 out of refers to people who cannot cover their debts.  The entire section beginning in verse 35 deals with people becoming destitute enough that they feel the need to enslave themselves.  Enslavement of people after way from pagan nations was commonplace, and this goes to the Bible not being a book to reform society.  Man has chosen to make slaves of people they conquered well before this. 

I'm not sure again how the Exodus situation appear relevant to the oppressive slavery people keep trying to pin on the Bible as encouraging.  In the longer terms for a Hebrew slave they came tothe master and said that wanted to be a slave for life.  They usually did this because they did not want to be responsible for their own upkeep, instead preferring the master to provide them with food and clothing. 

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #331 on: June 02, 2017, 09:48:13 AM »
But they were not enslaved for the color of their skin.  That only began in the last few centuries and is what people usually think of. 
I don't recall saying anything about the color of people's skin.

Quote
You are once again removing context to make a point the Bible does not make.  The section of Leviticus you lifted those choice phrases out but conveniently left verses 39-43 out of refers to people who cannot cover their debts.  The entire section beginning in verse 35 deals with people becoming destitute enough that they feel the need to enslave themselves.  Enslavement of people after way from pagan nations was commonplace, and this goes to the Bible not being a book to reform society.  Man has chosen to make slaves of people they conquered well before this.

Verse 35 is a different topic, and in fact is drawing a distinction between slaves and those who sell themselves as servants.
Verse 39 clearly says, in regards to those who sell themselves to pay off debts, 'you shall not subject him to a slave's service,' making it clear that they are not to be treated as slaves.
You can see the shift in topic as the start of verse 44 in the quote below, which begins with "As for your male and female slaves."
There is a clear distinction being drawn between those who cannot pay their debts and those who are slaves:

Quote
39 ‘If a [z]countryman of yours becomes so poor with regard to you that he sells himself to you, you shall not subject him to a slave’s service. 40 He shall be with you as a hired man, as if he were a sojourner; he shall serve with you until the year of jubilee. 41 He shall then go out from you, he and his sons with him, and shall go back to his family, that he may return to the property of his forefathers. 42 For they are My servants whom I brought out from the land of Egypt; they are not to be sold in a slave sale. 43 You shall not rule over him with severity, but are to revere your God. 44 As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45 Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have [aa]produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46 You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your [ab]countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.


Quote
I'm not sure again how the Exodus situation appear relevant to the oppressive slavery people keep trying to pin on the Bible as encouraging.  In the longer terms for a Hebrew slave they came tothe master and said that wanted to be a slave for life.  They usually did this because they did not want to be responsible for their own upkeep, instead preferring the master to provide them with food and clothing.
So your argument boils down to the idea that you feel the majority of slaves wanted to be someone else's property because it was easier for them that way?


Even if that were true, which I don't see how you can support it, but even if we grant you that much... it still does not change the fact that God has no issue with humans owning other humans as property, so long as they are chosen, beaten and kept according to His rules.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #332 on: June 02, 2017, 09:58:53 AM »
Sorry, I just realized I missed this point you made:

Enslavement of people after way from pagan nations was commonplace, and this goes to the Bible not being a book to reform society.  Man has chosen to make slaves of people they conquered well before this.

I wasn't claiming the Bible INVENTED slavery, only that it appears to condone it and gives us rules to live by in regards to slavery.
Whether or not man chose to make slaves prior to the rules God gave us seems to be a moot point - there are many things man did before God gave us the rules to live by.

There was also a lot of murder and theft and (I guess) graven images before God told us how to deal with each of those things.
Why wouldn't it be safe to assume that since he told us HOW to own people as property that he is okay with us owning people as property?


« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 10:00:48 AM by MrDelane »

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #333 on: June 02, 2017, 10:01:43 AM »
Whether or not you are religious/spiritual and believe those comments have meaning for you todayor that your God is just a pragmatist is your call ;)

True, but then you are faced with the problem of God's perfection and immutability.
The options seem to be:

•  Slavery was always immoral and the bible is wrong.
•  Slavery was moral but is no longer moral now, in which case God has changed his mind.
•  Slavery is moral, which avoids all conflicts in the bible but leads to obvious moral complications.

Two more things.

First, I would also point out that while there is no dispute that the Bible does not condemn slavery, you cannot automatically make the counter argument that it condones is.  It simply talks about how slaves should be treated.

Second, the Bible's goal is for your salvation, not to reform society.  Several people discuss this topic from that regard, that once you are saved, you would realize that slavery would not be something you would engage in.  This would become a "part of you your friends would not recognize" as you became a new man.

The bible lays out the rules for how to enslave other people, how much you are able to beat them and at what point (if EVER) you should be able to let them be free.
You are right in that it never explicitly says that slavery is moral.
It does however say that all scripture is God breathed.

So let me ask you this... if you were to explain to your children how to take heroin, tell them where they should get it from, how they should inject it, what tools they should use..... and never say anything explicit about whether you feel it is right or wrong...
What do you think that would teach them?

At a minimum it seems clear that God doesn't have a problem us owning other people as property - so long as they are the correct people that He described to us.
Unless of course you feel that God would actually tell us how to do something that he felt was immoral?
The drug option is an interesting one and my viewpoint may surprise you.  I do not view drugs as a moral question.  As best I can tell heroin, cocaine and other outlawed substances are made so because of their addictiveness and the fact that they alter the functional state of the individual to such a degree that then become a danger to others.  This is why I feel marijuana should be legal, because it does not have those effects and we should have laws as we do for alcohol that deal with that behavior when it is likely to harm someone other than the individual taking the drug.  I think taking heroin is a poor choice, but I would not attach any morality to it. 

God did not have a problem with people being owned as property.  Have some societies taken this as liberty to do brutal things to people?   Yes.  But the point of the Bible was not to point out everything that could be made better in the world.  God does not say "Thou shalt not text while driving" but we figured out that might be something we should strive towards.  God understands that once someone is saved they will behave differently and perhaps free their slaves.  His target is their soul, not offering a lesson for everything.  In Ephesians when Paul tells slaves to be obedient it is used to show that your condition does not change your obligation to be obedient to authority, such as authority from God.  I'm not going to say this is a nice, fun example, but it is what it is.  I get some people want it to be something else, but the God's purpose is salvation of your soul.  Modification of your character comes from that, not by having it written out.  Paul's reference in Ephesians 6:5 is not condoning slavery.  It is using slavery to show how regardless of your circumstance you continue to act from your heart as Christ commands.

tyort1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1783
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #334 on: June 02, 2017, 10:03:59 AM »
Why not just have an 11th commandment - Thou shalt not own slaves.  Seems like a no brainer.  I mean it messes up the nice round # of 10, but I think it's valuable. 

It seems silly to say that killing people is wrong (gets a commandment), but owning them is fine (does not get a commandment).
Frugalite in training.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #335 on: June 02, 2017, 10:09:19 AM »

Verse 39 clearly says, in regards to those who sell themselves to pay off debts, 'you shall not subject him to a slave's service,' making it clear that they are not to be treated as slaves.


I'm not going to make it any clearer.  Read it as you want.  You keep taking phrases and refusing to read the entire context.  In verse 39 as the example I'll dig in to, the start of that verses, WHICH DOES NOT SHIFT AT THE COMMA, is that because they are Israelites you will pardon them of their debt and no enslave them.  Yes God is saying because you are my people you will be kinder to each other than you are to others.  But this is not saying that you do not enslave people for their debts.  You just do not enslave Israelites for their debt.  I get that makes you unhappy and uncomfortable.  Does not make it "right", but God is not after a happy life for us as people, he is laser focused on one thing; our salvation.  Does that subordinate things that maybe be as people feel should not be subordinated?  It seems so in this case, but since we are slaves to Christ, being slaves to each other was not something that was condemned.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #336 on: June 02, 2017, 10:10:20 AM »
The drug option is an interesting one and my viewpoint may surprise you.  I do not view drugs as a moral question.  As best I can tell heroin, cocaine and other outlawed substances are made so because of their addictiveness and the fact that they alter the functional state of the individual to such a degree that then become a danger to others.  This is why I feel marijuana should be legal, because it does not have those effects and we should have laws as we do for alcohol that deal with that behavior when it is likely to harm someone other than the individual taking the drug.  I think taking heroin is a poor choice, but I would not attach any morality to it.
Okay, but it was simply an analogy - and one which you still didn't answer.
The point was - what lesson do you think your children would take away if you taught them specifics of how to do a thing without explicitly telling them that they shouldn't do that thing. 

Quote
God did not have a problem with people being owned as property.
God did not, or God does not?
It was my understanding that morality was absolute and did not change.
So it seems that either it was immoral and continues to be, or it was moral and continues to be.

And, since you seem uncomfortable with the fact that God never explicitly said it was moral... given that he also never explicitly said it was immoral (and taught us how to do it), we should at LEAST be able to agree that according to God owning other people as property is an amoral issue (which still seems an impossible stance to defend, in my opinion).


Quote
God does not say "Thou shalt not text while driving" but we figured out that might be something we should strive towards.
But by the same token you wouldn't consider texting and driving immoral, would you?

Quote
God understands that once someone is saved they will behave differently and perhaps free their slaves.
'Perhaps' free their slaves.
But if they don't, that's still alright and their salvation is not affected, neither is the slaves.

So, again, it sounds like at best you can argue that God feels slavery is amoral.


caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #337 on: June 02, 2017, 10:14:45 AM »
Why not just have an 11th commandment - Thou shalt not own slaves.  Seems like a no brainer.  I mean it messes up the nice round # of 10, but I think it's valuable. 

It seems silly to say that killing people is wrong (gets a commandment), but owning them is fine (does not get a commandment).
I get it seems silly, but your statement is accurate.  Killing them is not acceptable (because that would destroy what God created) but owning them is not prohibited (taking the leap that everything not a Do Not on the ten commandments is automatically encouraged is not inherent, therefore it is not automatically "fine" it is just not prohibited). 

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #338 on: June 02, 2017, 10:17:09 AM »
I get that makes you unhappy and uncomfortable.

It doesn't make me unhappy, but it definitely makes me uncomfortable.
If you can manage to worship a God that supports owning other people as property, that is your choice.
I cannot.

I will say, at a certain level I'm impressed that you are consistent in your belief.
Most people seem to cherrypick their morality from the bible, ignoring things they are uncomfortable with.

You and I seem to take a very similar stance towards it, you have to take all or none - in the end I guess we simply disagree on what the right conclusion is.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #339 on: June 02, 2017, 10:18:47 AM »
Killing them is not acceptable
But beating them so long as they don't die within a day or two is fine.
Unless, of course, they lose an eye or a tooth from your beating, then you should let them go free.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #340 on: June 02, 2017, 10:28:56 AM »
The drug option is an interesting one and my viewpoint may surprise you.  I do not view drugs as a moral question.  As best I can tell heroin, cocaine and other outlawed substances are made so because of their addictiveness and the fact that they alter the functional state of the individual to such a degree that then become a danger to others.  This is why I feel marijuana should be legal, because it does not have those effects and we should have laws as we do for alcohol that deal with that behavior when it is likely to harm someone other than the individual taking the drug.  I think taking heroin is a poor choice, but I would not attach any morality to it.
Okay, but it was simply an analogy - and one which you still didn't answer.
The point was - what lesson do you think your children would take away if you taught them specifics of how to do a thing without explicitly telling them that they shouldn't do that thing. 

He didn't teach them how to do it.  He did not say, "Go out in the street, find someone who cannot afford what you have, sell it to them, and then when they cannot pay, you shall enslave them."  He told people how to treat people they already had as slaves.  So to make the analogy in anyway parallel, my children would already need to be in possession of heroin when I told them how to treat it.  You'd have to remove your statement about me telling them how to get it.

In any event, you asked a clearer question a few post up, and I thought you were just trying to get what the Bible said about slavery.  But to answer your question "since he told us HOW to own people as property that he is okay with us owning people as property?" the answer to that is yes.  That does not mean he encourages it.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #341 on: June 02, 2017, 10:32:21 AM »
(taking the leap that everything not a Do Not on the ten commandments is automatically encouraged is not inherent, therefore it is not automatically "fine" it is just not prohibited).

Silence from God on the entire topic would have possibly been better.
The issue is not that there is not a 'do not' in the ten commandements in regards to slavery and therefore we assume it's 'fine.'
The issue is that God went out of his way to give us rules of conduct in regards to slavery, very detailed rules.

Why would we not assume that so long as we behave within those rules God is fine with our behavior in regards to slavery?
We assume that with everything else He gave us rules for (that I can think of anyhow, unless you have an example of something which he detailed rules for yet feels is immoral).

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #342 on: June 02, 2017, 10:36:34 AM »
Killing them is not acceptable
But beating them so long as they don't die within a day or two is fine.
Unless, of course, they lose an eye or a tooth from your beating, then you should let them go free.
I'm not sure where you are going with this line of discussion.  Are some pieces of the Bible uncomfortable?  Yes.  Do I find them uncomfortable?  Yes.  But as a Christian I would not do those things because they make me uncomfortable, where perhaps as a heathen I would have.  I make different choices now.  The Bible does not need to tell me not to own slaves, because the change within me creates virtually no desire to even do that.  It's not something I would contemplate.  I get that you would have like God to explicitly condemn this to make you feel better about the book or something, but he did not feel it necessary.  I get that because again, the Bible is not about getting you to be Christian, AS A WHOLE, it  is to help you as a Christian.  While PIECES of it talk about how someone who had slaves would deal with them, the Bible is not an abolitionist tract designed to teach me that slavery is bad.  I therefore do not sit there and say the Bible has a problem because it does not cover this from all angles.  There are a lot of things in my life that the Bible does not provide clear direction on.  I am then to use discernment using what it does teach me so make a decision that I am struggling with.  If you want to argue that the Bible should just be thrown out because slavery is in it, I get that view.  I just don't agree with it.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #343 on: June 02, 2017, 10:40:31 AM »

He didn't teach them how to do it.  He did not say, "Go out in the street, find someone who cannot afford what you have, sell it to them, and then when they cannot pay, you shall enslave them."  He told people how to treat people they already had as slaves.  So to make the analogy in anyway parallel, my children would already need to be in possession of heroin when I told them how to treat it.  You'd have to remove your statement about me telling them how to get it.

Leviticus 25:44-45
"As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you.
Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you,
whom they will have [a]produced in your land; they also may become your possession.
"

Seems clear to me that is teaching us where we may acquire slaves from.
This is not only a reference to slaves we already have - it is saying 'you may have slaves, and here is where you can acquire them.'

Quote
But to answer your question "since he told us HOW to own people as property that he is okay with us owning people as property?" the answer to that is yes.  That does not mean he encourages it.

Fair enough - as I said above, at least you're consistent in your acceptance of biblical morality.
I happen to disagree with you and your God on that and will take the controversial stance that I am not okay with us owning other people as property.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2017, 10:50:37 AM by MrDelane »

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #344 on: June 02, 2017, 10:46:19 AM »
I therefore do not sit there and say the Bible has a problem because it does not cover this from all angles.  There are a lot of things in my life that the Bible does not provide clear direction on.  I am then to use discernment using what it does teach me so make a decision that I am struggling with.

My point is that in this case the Bible is not silent (as you seem to insinuate).
In the case of slavery the bible does in fact 'provide clear direction.'
Very clear.

Quote
If you want to argue that the Bible should just be thrown out because slavery is in it, I get that view.  I just don't agree with it.

To be clear, it is not because it has slavery in it, it is because portions of it are a manual for slavery.

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3278
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #345 on: June 02, 2017, 11:01:00 AM »
Killing them is not acceptable
But beating them so long as they don't die within a day or two is fine.
Unless, of course, they lose an eye or a tooth from your beating, then you should let them go free.
I'm not sure where you are going with this line of discussion.  Are some pieces of the Bible uncomfortable?  Yes.  Do I find them uncomfortable?  Yes.  But as a Christian I would not do those things because they make me uncomfortable, where perhaps as a heathen I would have.  I make different choices now.  The Bible does not need to tell me not to own slaves, because the change within me creates virtually no desire to even do that.  It's not something I would contemplate.  I get that you would have like God to explicitly condemn this to make you feel better about the book or something, but he did not feel it necessary.  I get that because again, the Bible is not about getting you to be Christian, AS A WHOLE, it  is to help you as a Christian.  While PIECES of it talk about how someone who had slaves would deal with them, the Bible is not an abolitionist tract designed to teach me that slavery is bad.  I therefore do not sit there and say the Bible has a problem because it does not cover this from all angles.  There are a lot of things in my life that the Bible does not provide clear direction on.  I am then to use discernment using what it does teach me so make a decision that I am struggling with.  If you want to argue that the Bible should just be thrown out because slavery is in it, I get that view.  I just don't agree with it.

Is that really your Christianity informing your heart, or is it your modern sensibilities?

Since the slavery question is so loaded, maybe the discipline of children would be a more productive example. Proverbs 13:24 (NIV) Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.

It's easy to agree this proverb has maintained it's applicability into modernity. Letting your children live without discipline is not something a good guardian does. But the definition of a moral and effective discipline has certainly changed through the ages. The rod has increasingly become metaphorical, corporal punishment switched out for the time out bench. Even if you personally spanked, I'm assuming you didn't use the dunking chair or the public stocks.

Less nebulously, is the question of your transgender son. You, a modern man, won't support his transition but you don't protest it. You've said you see it as your duty as a loving parent. A man of 50 years ago might have seen true love in putting 'her' into a mental institution and using ECT to fix her up. A man of 100 years ago might have confined her a la The Yellow Wallpaper, or maybe had her uterus removed against her will. All Christian men, doing their Christian duty. But how can that duty change, if the bible is the literal word of God?

I'd postulate you're a man of the modern age. And Christian of the modern age has to preform some impressive mental contortions to continue thinking of the bible as the literal word of God. As many have pointed out, you've put a lot of thought into your faith, and you're very consistent. It's just that you're consistent in your contortions.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Ohio
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #346 on: June 02, 2017, 11:09:00 AM »

He didn't teach them how to do it.  He did not say, "Go out in the street, find someone who cannot afford what you have, sell it to them, and then when they cannot pay, you shall enslave them."  He told people how to treat people they already had as slaves.  So to make the analogy in anyway parallel, my children would already need to be in possession of heroin when I told them how to treat it.  You'd have to remove your statement about me telling them how to get it.

Leviticus 25:44-45
"As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you.
Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you,
whom they will have [a]produced in your land; they also may become your possession.
"

Seems clear to me that is teaching us where we may acquire slaves from.
This is not only a reference to slaves we already have - it is saying 'you may have slaves, and here is where you can acquire them.'

Quote
But to answer your question "since he told us HOW to own people as property that he is okay with us owning people as property?" the answer to that is yes.  That does not mean he encourages it.

Fair enough - as I said above, at least you're consistent in your acceptance of biblical morality.
I happen to disagree with you and your God on that and will take the controversial stance that I am not okay with us owning other people as property.
You a funny man.  I never said I'm OK with owning other people as property.  Again, I feel you are expanding what is said.

The example above no more tells me how to get a slave, than saying "you may acquire heroin from the street" would instruct my children.  Perhaps they would do out licking the road, but they'd likely not find heroin that way.  Similarly if the Israelites went to the border and crossed into the pagan nation, if they were looking for Slaves R Us, they would be looking a long time.  And once again, we've left context out where this was socially acceptable slavery for debts which you insist changes context, even though it is in the same paragraph.  Usually readily accepted that a paragraph encompasses one set of ideas, but if you want different rules for this, that's fine.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 461
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #347 on: June 02, 2017, 11:26:26 AM »
The example above no more tells me how to get a slave, than saying "you may acquire heroin from the street" would instruct my children.  Perhaps they would do out licking the road, but they'd likely not find heroin that way.  Similarly if the Israelites went to the border and crossed into the pagan nation, if they were looking for Slaves R Us, they would be looking a long time.  And once again, we've left context out where this was socially acceptable slavery for debts which you insist changes context, even though it is in the same paragraph.  Usually readily accepted that a paragraph encompasses one set of ideas, but if you want different rules for this, that's fine.

You are making quite a few contortions to get where you feel comfortable.  I feel my conclusions are pretty clear and would invite anyone else to opine on which they feel makes more sense given the text.
By the way, reading the bolded section within a paragraph that covers multiple points of argument is a bit ironic.

I am happy to go back to the text and break it down verse by verse, but I truly feel everyone here is getting tired of the minutae.
The section of Leviticus we're discussing uses a different word in verse 39 than it does in verse 44, drawing a distinction between the servant in 39 and the slaves in verse 44 (in fact, saying you should not treat the indebted servants as slaves).
I haven't dug into the Hebrew just yet, but I would be willing to wager we will see two distinct terms used in the original text - I don't have time to look it up right now as I'm at work, but if someone else wants to do it, I'd appreciate it.

paddedhat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #348 on: June 02, 2017, 11:33:04 AM »
My wife's separation  from the Catholic Church was interesting. She was raised deep into the church. Catholic schooling, parents who tithed, and attended regularly, the whole works. Her first year of teaching was at a local Catholic elementary school. Most of the lay teachers fit into two categories, the ones that were just passing through, since they had no intent of being grossly underpaid, with laughable benefits, for an entire career. The ones that stayed lived as very poor folks, driving junk cars, hoping to find a way to pay for their kids education, barely getting buy. We visited more than one that was living one step above third world conditions. At the end of her first year, the Priest in charge announces that he is wasting too much on paying the teachers every two weeks and will now issue nine paychecks a year. In her case it was less than $900 each.   She was then contacted by the Catholic school that she attended, to interview for her next year. That school offers to hire her on the spot, and offers her ten percent less than the few coins she is currently making. She politely declines, which results in  Mother Superior scolding her for "not being dedicated enough to do god's will". This particular church was then in the middle of a scandal, as the priest would magically end the annual charities appeal, and end up with a new, very expensive car, every year. Not only a new car, but a mid-life crisis car,  like a Trans-AM. He also managed to find it in his heart to drop 1/4 million into a new home for his recently divorced sister. This was back when a typical new places went for $60-70K.

The final straw was relocating to a new area, with a good paying public school job, a husband and a baby boy. She met with the local priest, in the brand new mega-church, and asked about scheduling a baptism. The priest stated that, after the secretary scheduled the meeting, he reviewed her status. He then got very distraught about "the envelopes", and launched a fairly aggressive rant directed at a young lady holding an infant. As she became more upset and confused by his confrontational behavior, she told him that she had recently moved to the area, and didn't understand what he was so upset about. He then came right out and told her that, without a history of significant contributions to his church, there would be no baptism.

That was the beginning of the end for her. She got our son baptized at a big inner city Catholic Cathedral, sort of piggy back him on to a service that was being done for her brother's new baby, but that was the last interaction we had with any of the Catholic leadership. Haven't set foot in one except for funerals, and weddings, since then.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1562
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #349 on: June 02, 2017, 12:13:06 PM »
Killing them is not acceptable
But beating them so long as they don't die within a day or two is fine.
Unless, of course, they lose an eye or a tooth from your beating, then you should let them go free.
I'm not sure where you are going with this line of discussion.  Are some pieces of the Bible uncomfortable?  Yes.  Do I find them uncomfortable?  Yes. But as a Christian I would not do those things because they make me uncomfortable, where perhaps as a heathen I would have. I make different choices now.  The Bible does not need to tell me not to own slaves, because the change within me creates virtually no desire to even do that.  It's not something I would contemplate.  I get that you would have like God to explicitly condemn this to make you feel better about the book or something, but he did not feel it necessary.  I get that because again, the Bible is not about getting you to be Christian, AS A WHOLE, it  is to help you as a Christian.  While PIECES of it talk about how someone who had slaves would deal with them, the Bible is not an abolitionist tract designed to teach me that slavery is bad.  I therefore do not sit there and say the Bible has a problem because it does not cover this from all angles.  There are a lot of things in my life that the Bible does not provide clear direction on.  I am then to use discernment using what it does teach me so make a decision that I am struggling with.  If you want to argue that the Bible should just be thrown out because slavery is in it, I get that view.  I just don't agree with it.

I'm going to assume that by 'those things' you are not referring to the beating someone until they lose an eye or tooth. Because most 'heathens' such as myself have no trouble restraining themselves from actually doing that sort of thing, regardless of lack of faith or occasional intense impulses toward violence. Or do you actually believe that without your current faith you would be unable to control your violent and unethical impulses?