Author Topic: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.  (Read 41747 times)

caracarn

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #300 on: June 01, 2017, 08:23:02 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.

In the same moment that you say you appreciate the use of logic you are using special pleading to justify God.

To be clear, you claim:
Quote
I could not make the leap that this all just happened by random chance, therefore I was set in the direction of intelligent design.

So because one thing seemed too complex and impossible, you then became convinced of a more complex and unintelligible thing which would explain it?

As I said earlier, you cannot solve a mystery by appealing to a greater mystery.
It solves nothing and is not justified through logic or reason.
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. 

I think you're thinking I'm trying to justify something.  I'm not.  I'm telling you why I believe.  It's as simple as "I believe the Bible is true because God says it is".  I'm not trying to get you to agree with me.

We're not going to get anywhere here.  I believe one thing, you believe another. 

caracarn

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #301 on: June 01, 2017, 08:23:34 AM »
Now I'm lost.  The only piece of the above statement that applied to you was that (and which I believe you stated yourself in our discussion and I'm reproducing here for clarity 'It seems we have come full circle - the time to accept a claim is when the evidence supports it.  Up until that point all we can say is, ‘we don’t know.’) first sentence.  Everything else was replying to the poster I was responding to, but to any of your positions.

I am the only one saying 'we don't know.'

Unless you have changed your mind in the past few posts, you are claiming to know something, or at a minimum you are holding as true something for which you know you have no proof.

The point is, our positions are not equal in regards to justification or reasonability.
OK

Pigeon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #302 on: June 01, 2017, 08:25:45 AM »
I believe the bible is a collection of ancient tales, written over the ages for a variety of purposes.  It's perfectly logical that some of the stories in the bible would contain elements that reflect geological forms, civilization, cultural practices, people and events that may have happened.  It is a different matter than it being an exact or correct portrayal of history. 

If chariots were found in the Red Sea, that would be fascinating and a wonderful opportunity for archaeologists to study.  To assume that it was caused by god would require some actual evidence that a god existed or had any hand in this happening.  There are other, more plausible explanations.  Perhaps chariots did sink into the Red Sea way back when.  Maybe they were floating across on a barge that sank.  It would certainly be possible that the primitive people who heard about the chariots sinking wrote that into the mythology of the times, and so it appeared in the bible. 

Your relying on god as an explanation is exactly the same to me as saying since we don't understand something, it must be magic.  Therefore magic must be true.  I see it as we don't understand yet, but we will continue to seek out evidence.

MrDelane

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #303 on: June 01, 2017, 08:30:39 AM »
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. 

I think you're thinking I'm trying to justify something.  I'm not.  I'm telling you why I believe.  It's as simple as "I believe the Bible is true because God says it is".  I'm not trying to get you to agree with me.

Fair enough - and I am not trying to beat this into the ground (or beat you up in the process), but the only reason I continue to respond is because of the following sentiment which keeps coming up:

Quote
We're not going to get anywhere here.  I believe one thing, you believe another.

When things are phrased that way it feels like an attempt to put our positions on the same level, as if it's simply "hey, you like olives and I don't, there is no right or wrong here."  It's the same sort of approach to the 'teach the controversy' movement of intelligent design that tried to put it on equal footing with evolution scientifically.

I recognize that you are not trying to convince me of anything.
I merely wanted it recognized that our positions are not simply different but equal in regards to justifiability and reasonableness.


caracarn

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #304 on: June 01, 2017, 08:30:54 AM »
I believe the bible is a collection of ancient tales, written over the ages for a variety of purposes.  It's perfectly logical that some of the stories in the bible would contain elements that reflect geological forms, civilization, cultural practices, people and events that may have happened.  It is a different matter than it being an exact or correct portrayal of history. 

If chariots were found in the Red Sea, that would be fascinating and a wonderful opportunity for archaeologists to study.  To assume that it was caused by god would require some actual evidence that a god existed or had any hand in this happening.  There are other, more plausible explanations.  Perhaps chariots did sink into the Red Sea way back when.  Maybe they were floating across on a barge that sank.  It would certainly be possible that the primitive people who heard about the chariots sinking wrote that into the mythology of the times, and so it appeared in the bible. 

Your relying on god as an explanation is exactly the same to me as saying since we don't understand something, it must be magic.  Therefore magic must be true.  I see it as we don't understand yet, but we will continue to seek out evidence.
So my next questions is, "Can you then admit that your current position of their not being a god, makes you more likely to jump to other conclusions than some who does and sees a long line (way bigger than a barge) and nowhere else in the entire sea that is just is a piece of evidence that aligns with the Bible account?"

I think it is just normal to interpret new evidence in light of what we want to be true, in your case, that it has nothing to do with a god.

Pigeon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #305 on: June 01, 2017, 08:40:56 AM »
If there were some actual evidence of a god being involved in the chariot sinking, bring it on and let's look at it.  But in the face of a complete and total lack of evidence of a god, it makes much more sense to look at other, much more probable explanations. 

A story being mentioned about chariots in an ancient writing is not evidence of a god, and it is illogical and unreasonable to make that leap.

ooeei

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 856
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #306 on: June 01, 2017, 08:49:21 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.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 08:51:12 AM by ooeei »

omachi

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #307 on: June 01, 2017, 08:59:15 AM »
Quote
Conflating all religions together are one entity, makes for easy things to attack...

You asked for downsides in belief in god, not for me to pick apart your individual position. Rather than reach for a new set of goal posts, I'll just state that the general theme is that belief in something without logical basis is a good way to avoid applying a logical basis to doing harm that can be justified by that belief. There's your downside. To your position or any position that exists outside of logic.

Since you have no qualms about setting aside logic for your beliefs, and it's admirable that you'll admit it, I'll posit there's no logical argument to get you out of your position, since there was no logical argument that got you into it. Nor is there a logical argument that will convince you there are downsides if you can't already see them.

Instead, I'll leave you with an illogical argument. The devil killed Jesus shortly after birth and changed form to impersonate him. The true message of the Christian god was never reported, and the wily snake has lead all the would be believers astray so they'll eternally burn. His message is the one in the bible. And in your words, "you can no more prove it did not happen than anyone can prove it did." And you're right, which is why any sort of argument on matters outside of the realm of logic and evidence is doomed to fail.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #308 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #309 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: 33
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #310 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: 1438
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #311 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: 263
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #312 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #313 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #314 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #315 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #316 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

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 408
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #317 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: 33
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #318 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #319 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #320 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #321 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #322 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

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 408
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #323 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: 1438
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #324 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #325 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.   

Father Dougal

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #326 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #327 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

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #328 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #329 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

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 408
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #330 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 919
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #331 on: June 02, 2017, 08:32:02 AM »
There is very little actual belief that god is objectively good in the fundamentalist position.

caracarn

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #332 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #333 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #334 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #335 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #336 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #337 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #338 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #339 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #340 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #341 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: 1438
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #342 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #343 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #344 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #345 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #346 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #347 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

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #348 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: 402
Re: That's me in the corner... losing my religion.
« Reply #349 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).