Total Posts:49|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Supporting Slavery

Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:03:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I am not saying slavery is bad, I am just curious of how an atheist can conclude objective statement about morality.

At 8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!

So it is bad because you feel bad about human beings not being treated a certain way? Well, those who practice slavery don't feel bad, so slavery isn't bad for them.

As for violence, there are two side of the coin. When a lion sinks it's fangs on a gazelle, sure it is bad for the gazelle, but it is good for the lion.
In the end, the lion used a means which brings harm to the gazelle in order to bring a good end, even if it was for itself. By ending slavery, you bring harm to slavery practitioners and slave traders.
Why do you think there is a standard and equal value for humans? I can only think of spiritual reasons.

If slavery is bad because it is not popular today, was it good back then?
Morality
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:06:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:03:02 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not saying slavery is bad, I am just curious of how an atheist can conclude objective statement about morality.

At 8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!

So it is bad because you feel bad about human beings not being treated a certain way? Well, those who practice slavery don't feel bad, so slavery isn't bad for them.

As for violence, there are two side of the coin. When a lion sinks it's fangs on a gazelle, sure it is bad for the gazelle, but it is good for the lion.
In the end, the lion used a means which brings harm to the gazelle in order to bring a good end, even if it was for itself. By ending slavery, you bring harm to slavery practitioners and slave traders.
Why do you think there is a standard and equal value for humans? I can only think of spiritual reasons.


If slavery is bad because it is not popular today, was it good back then?

You need to realize most atheists admit there is no objective morality, and after admitting such, go on to create their ideas of what are right or wrong based along personal lines. Most atheists have the outlook that human happiness is good, and they would like to increase it. This is not "right", but it also isn't "wrong".

This was the very premise of almost everything Nietzsche wrote.
12_13
Posts: 1,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:09:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

The word that came to Jeremiah from Yahweh, after that the king Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people who were at Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty to them; that every man should let his man-servant, and every man his maid-servant, who is a Hebrew or a Hebrewess, go free; that none should make bondservants of them, to wit, of a Jew his brother. All the princes and all the people obeyed, who had entered into the covenant, that everyone should let his man-servant, and everyone his maid-servant, go free, that none should make bondservants of them any more; they obeyed, and let them go: but afterwards they turned, and caused the servants and the handmaids, whom they had let go free, to return, and brought them into subjection for servants and for handmaids. Therefore the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah from Yahweh, saying, At the end of seven years you shall let go every man his brother who is a Hebrew, who has been sold to you, and has served you six years, you shall let him go free from you: but your fathers didn't listen to me, neither inclined their ear. You were now turned, and had done that which is right in my eyes, in proclaiming liberty every man to his neighbor; and you had made a covenant before me in the house which is called by my name: but you turned and profaned my name, and caused every man his servant, and every man his handmaid, whom you had let go free at their pleasure, to return; and you brought them into subjection, to be to you for servants and for handmaids. Therefore thus says Yahweh: you have not listened to me, to proclaim liberty, every man to his brother, and every man to his neighbor: behold, I proclaim to you a liberty, says Yahweh, to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine; and I will make you to be tossed back and forth among all the kingdoms of the earth.

Jeremiah 34:8-17

And if Jews really obeyed the Law, all people in their nation should have been brothers, same nation, because:

He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. The uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant."
Genesis 17:13-14

And then they would also have to obey this:

If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold to you, and serve you six years; then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.
Deuteronomy 15:12
Morality
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:11:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:09:11 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

The word that came to Jeremiah from Yahweh, after that the king Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people who were at Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty to them; that every man should let his man-servant, and every man his maid-servant, who is a Hebrew or a Hebrewess, go free; that none should make bondservants of them, to wit, of a Jew his brother. All the princes and all the people obeyed, who had entered into the covenant, that everyone should let his man-servant, and everyone his maid-servant, go free, that none should make bondservants of them any more; they obeyed, and let them go: but afterwards they turned, and caused the servants and the handmaids, whom they had let go free, to return, and brought them into subjection for servants and for handmaids. Therefore the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah from Yahweh, saying, At the end of seven years you shall let go every man his brother who is a Hebrew, who has been sold to you, and has served you six years, you shall let him go free from you: but your fathers didn't listen to me, neither inclined their ear. You were now turned, and had done that which is right in my eyes, in proclaiming liberty every man to his neighbor; and you had made a covenant before me in the house which is called by my name: but you turned and profaned my name, and caused every man his servant, and every man his handmaid, whom you had let go free at their pleasure, to return; and you brought them into subjection, to be to you for servants and for handmaids. Therefore thus says Yahweh: you have not listened to me, to proclaim liberty, every man to his brother, and every man to his neighbor: behold, I proclaim to you a liberty, says Yahweh, to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine; and I will make you to be tossed back and forth among all the kingdoms of the earth.

Jeremiah 34:8-17

And if Jews really obeyed the Law, all people in their nation should have been brothers, same nation, because:

He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. The uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant."
Genesis 17:13-14

And then they would also have to obey this:

If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold to you, and serve you six years; then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.
Deuteronomy 15:12

Those quotes only specify releasing Herbrew men and women. Anyone else was cursed to a lifetime of slavery.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:21:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:03:02 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not saying slavery is bad, I am just curious of how an atheist can conclude objective statement about morality.

At 8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!

So it is bad because you feel bad about human beings not being treated a certain way? Well, those who practice slavery don't feel bad, so slavery isn't bad for them.
That's not true. When people begin treating people as possessions, it lowers the value they see for other people. That's corrosive to any society, and the decay of society is harmful to all of its members.

As for violence, there are two side of the coin. When a lion sinks it's fangs on a gazelle, sure it is bad for the gazelle, but it is good for the lion.
Lions and gazelles don't live in the same social group.

In the end, the lion used a means which brings harm to the gazelle in order to bring a good end, even if it was for itself. By ending slavery, you bring harm to slavery practitioners and slave traders.
But it serves to the over-all good of the society. This is why all countries have abandon the practice of legalized slavery.

Why do you think there is a standard and equal value for humans? I can only think of spiritual reasons.
Because any other system of value for humans leads to the destruction of social harmony.


If slavery is bad because it is not popular today, was it good back then?
No. It was destructive to societies then as well, for all of the reasons I've stated previously. You're stuck in a mode of believing in some kind of objective morality - requiring a dictate from somewhere. But no dictate is objective. The truth is that morality is subjective, but must serve the best interests of the health of the given society. What is most healthy for one society, may not be what is most healthy for another. However, because we are looking primarily at human societies, we have some very common interests - human interests, and that causes many social standards to eventually sort quite similarly.

If slavery weren't harmful, why do you suppose every country would have abandon it, despite it being fully approved by the largest religious segment in the world?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment. The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today. They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.

Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
steffon66
Posts: 240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?
steffon66
Posts: 240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:26:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.
Morality
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:27:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment. The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today. They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.

Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
If God can take the time to ban infidelity, homosexuality, idol worship, and paganism, he sure as hell can ban slavery.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:33:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:06:00 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:03:02 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not saying slavery is bad, I am just curious of how an atheist can conclude objective statement about morality.

At 8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!

So it is bad because you feel bad about human beings not being treated a certain way? Well, those who practice slavery don't feel bad, so slavery isn't bad for them.

As for violence, there are two side of the coin. When a lion sinks it's fangs on a gazelle, sure it is bad for the gazelle, but it is good for the lion.
In the end, the lion used a means which brings harm to the gazelle in order to bring a good end, even if it was for itself. By ending slavery, you bring harm to slavery practitioners and slave traders.
Why do you think there is a standard and equal value for humans? I can only think of spiritual reasons.


If slavery is bad because it is not popular today, was it good back then?

You need to realize most atheists admit there is no objective morality, and after admitting such, go on to create their ideas of what are right or wrong based along personal lines. Most atheists have the outlook that human happiness is good, and they would like to increase it. This is not "right", but it also isn't "wrong".

This was the very premise of almost everything Nietzsche wrote.

I have to admit it's funny to watch Christians trying to take feeble pot-shots at atheists, while doing everything they can to ignore the fact that their superstitious moral code fully embraces the practice of slavery.

But your failure is to work so hard toward not understanding the true function and concept of morality. It's not for you to dictate to the world, or for me to dictate to the world, or for men of the 4th century to dictate by picking out primitive superstitious writings and proclaiming that because they agree, it must be "God's word" (which is all the Bible is).

Morality is a social mechanism. Without it, societies cannot persist. So morality is subjective, but subjective to the functioning of a given society, rather than to the will of any individual. Is that really so hard to grasp?

Even if you suggest (for the sake of argument), that there is a God who dictates moral codes, that doesn't make them objective. They'd still be God's subjective morality. And they wouldn't work because moral codes are subjective but must serve the interests of the given society. What doesn't serve to promote beneficial functioning of the society is deemed "immoral" (slavery, for example). And before popping the top of your trachea open to expel more misdirected carbon-dioxide (speaking figuratively), you might take a moment to recognize the fact that you don't believe rape, infanticide, genocide and slavery are moral, while your Bible supports such barbarity as "moral". So please, have the integrity and honesty to accept that you don't accept the Bible's warped view of morality, anymore than I do.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:35:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:27:05 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment. The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today. They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.

Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
If God can take the time to ban infidelity, homosexuality, idol worship, and paganism, he sure as hell can ban slavery.
God did ban slavery. It was unlawful to kidnap another man into slavery. The kind of slavery we're talking about here is voluntary servitude. It was an alternative to prison.
Morality
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:39:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:33:05 PM, Beastt wrote:


I have to admit it's funny to watch Christians trying to take feeble pot-shots at atheists, while doing everything they can to ignore the fact that their superstitious moral code fully embraces the practice of slavery.
I don't know why you're being so hostile- I'm on you side of the debate here.

But your failure is to work so hard toward not understanding the true function and concept of morality.
Most people don't use it as a social function, that's not it's defined. It is supposed to be a guideline for how one should act.
It's not for you to dictate to the world, or for me to dictate to the world, or for men of the 4th century to dictate by picking out primitive superstitious writings and proclaiming that because they agree, it must be "God's word" (which is all the Bible is).
If you read anything I've posted on the Bible you would very well know I believe it's nonsense.

Morality is a social mechanism. Without it, societies cannot persist. So morality is subjective, but subjective to the functioning of a given society, rather than to the will of any individual. Is that really so hard to grasp?
It's not necessary for a society exist, unless you consider the bare premise of keeping the a society from falling in on itself. Morality is not objectively provable. . It may be used by societies to keep them functioning, but these still rely on assumptions about what is right and wrong.

Even if you suggest (for the sake of argument), that there is a God who dictates moral codes, that doesn't make them objective.
I never did.
They'd still be God's subjective morality.
I don't disagree.

And they wouldn't work because moral codes are subjective but must serve the interests of the given society. What doesn't serve to promote beneficial functioning of the society is deemed "immoral" (slavery, for example). And before popping the top of your trachea open to expel more misdirected carbon-dioxide (speaking figuratively), you might take a moment to recognize the fact that you don't believe rape, infanticide, genocide and slavery are moral, while your Bible supports such barbarity as "moral". So please, have the integrity and honesty to accept that you don't accept the Bible's warped view of morality, anymore than I do.
Perhaps you should read what I write more, because I recognize the Bible is not something that should dominate your life.
Morality
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:41:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:35:12 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:27:05 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment. The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today. They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.

Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
If God can take the time to ban infidelity, homosexuality, idol worship, and paganism, he sure as hell can ban slavery.
God did ban slavery. It was unlawful to kidnap another man into slavery. The kind of slavery we're talking about here is voluntary servitude. It was an alternative to prison.
I'm fairly certain the Bible state sit was fine for the Israelis to kidnap slaves during wartime.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:46:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:21:34 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:03:02 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not saying slavery is bad, I am just curious of how an atheist can conclude objective statement about morality.

At 8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!

So it is bad because you feel bad about human beings not being treated a certain way? Well, those who practice slavery don't feel bad, so slavery isn't bad for them.
That's not true. When people begin treating people as possessions, it lowers the value they see for other people. That's corrosive to any society, and the decay of society is harmful to all of its members.

As for violence, there are two side of the coin. When a lion sinks it's fangs on a gazelle, sure it is bad for the gazelle, but it is good for the lion.
Lions and gazelles don't live in the same social group.

It can be argued that imperialism and exploiting weaker countries and societies is a form of slavery. So what is the difference?

In the end, the lion used a means which brings harm to the gazelle in order to bring a good end, even if it was for itself. By ending slavery, you bring harm to slavery practitioners and slave traders.
But it serves to the over-all good of the society. This is why all countries have abandon the practice of legalized slavery.

Slavery can provide an efficient source of labor. So what is the situation if we assume a plausible scenario where slavery significantly allows a society to advance?

Countries did not abandon slavery because it is inefficient, because of the spread of the idea of "human rights", which is frankly inefficient by any objective standards if we assume atheism.

Why do you think there is a standard and equal value for humans? I can only think of spiritual reasons.
Because any other system of value for humans leads to the destruction of social harmony.

Powerful countries and societies were doing fine for hundreds of years with slavery. How do you define social harmony and why is it important?



If slavery is bad because it is not popular today, was it good back then?
No. It was destructive to societies then as well, for all of the reasons I've stated previously. You're stuck in a mode of believing in some kind of objective morality - requiring a dictate from somewhere. But no dictate is objective. The truth is that morality is subjective, but must serve the best interests of the health of the given society. What is most healthy for one society, may not be what is most healthy for another. However, because we are looking primarily at human societies, we have some very common interests - human interests, and that causes many social standards to eventually sort quite similarly.

If slavery weren't harmful, why do you suppose every country would have abandon it, despite it being fully approved by the largest religious segment in the world?

Can you explain how it was destructive for societies?
It seems that you are saying that we should favor the interest of others over our own interest. Can't for the life of me find ration from a material perspective.

Slavery was abandoned largely due to principles, not efficiently (machines weren't that quite advanced yet). However, what justifies those principles of equality?
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).

its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.
steffon66
Posts: 240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:50:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).


its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.

ok its a punishment where no wrong doing has been done. and no i wouldnt like to be in control over everybody. whats your point?
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 2:52:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:50:27 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).


its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.

ok its a punishment where no wrong doing has been done. and no i wouldnt like to be in control over everybody. whats your point?

There is no logical material reason for not performing so-called "wrong doing" if it brings you, society, or what you value significant benefit.
steffon66
Posts: 240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 3:40:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:52:50 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:50:27 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).


its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.

ok its a punishment where no wrong doing has been done. and no i wouldnt like to be in control over everybody. whats your point?

There is no logical material reason for not performing so-called "wrong doing" if it brings you, society, or what you value significant benefit.

so your saying we should all be selfish and not think of other people? if everyone did this the world would be a horrible place so what is best for us and everybody is to not do "wrong" like owning slaves and stealing etc. thats my reason.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 3:44:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 3:40:30 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:52:50 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:50:27 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).


its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.

ok its a punishment where no wrong doing has been done. and no i wouldnt like to be in control over everybody. whats your point?

There is no logical material reason for not performing so-called "wrong doing" if it brings you, society, or what you value significant benefit.

so your saying we should all be selfish and not think of other people? if everyone did this the world would be a horrible place so what is best for us and everybody is to not do "wrong" like owning slaves and stealing etc. thats my reason.

Horrible place for who? Other people unrelated to you.
A cosy place for you.

The rules of nature are selfish, that is what survival of the fittest is all about.

Think of it this way: When performing an action, it would make sense if the benefit out weights the cost. If you are atheist, then any spiritual reason about what other people feeling have zero weight. Therefore helping people makes no sense.
steffon66
Posts: 240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 3:57:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 3:44:12 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 3:40:30 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:52:50 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:50:27 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).


its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.

ok its a punishment where no wrong doing has been done. and no i wouldnt like to be in control over everybody. whats your point?

There is no logical material reason for not performing so-called "wrong doing" if it brings you, society, or what you value significant benefit.

so your saying we should all be selfish and not think of other people? if everyone did this the world would be a horrible place so what is best for us and everybody is to not do "wrong" like owning slaves and stealing etc. thats my reason.

Horrible place for who? Other people unrelated to you.
A cosy place for you.

The rules of nature are selfish, that is what survival of the fittest is all about.

Think of it this way: When performing an action, it would make sense if the benefit out weights the cost. If you are atheist, then any spiritual reason about what other people feeling have zero weight. Therefore helping people makes no sense.

no it would be a horrible place for everybody. imagine if everyone in the world was a robber. you might get rich but it would only last for a minute because someone near you would come and take it from you. everybody would constantly be getting robbed. the only way to keep your money in a world like that is to have more people and more guns than anyone who is going to try and rob you and how many people are going to have more people then the people trying to rob them? only a few. it would be chaotic if everyone did what was best for them ignoring what was best for everyone else. if we lived in a world like that our leaders would have everything and we would have nothing. they would be on top. you dont know what your talking about and if you did you wouldnt want to live in a world where everybody steals and kills for what they want. why dont you buy a gun and move to the worst getto you can find to get a taste of the life you say you want and watch your daughter get raped by some big black dude. i bet then you would learn to care for other people in hopes that they will care for you too. do you really think the world wouldnt change much if everyone was selfish? and yes i know natural law is screwed up and thats probably because it is random and not written like human laws which is all the more reason why we need to think about others because we depend on them thinking about us before they act.
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,482
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 4:10:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:03:02 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not saying slavery is bad, I am just curious of how an atheist can conclude objective statement about morality.

At 8/19/2014 1:48:47 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

How sad that this must be explained to you. It teaches that you can treat another human being as a personal possession. Just as mistreatment of animals can lead to mistreatment of humans, promoting a standard which allows the brutal mistreatment of some people, as well as the mentality that some people are mere possessions, lowers the value of life for all humans.

If you think these things can be isolated, you've obviously never looked into the backgrounds of most serial killers and other violent felony offenders. Teaching anyone that any kind of violence is acceptable, makes all violence just that much more acceptable. And if you can think of one person as a possession - a mere object - you're that much closer to seeing human life as being of little or no value.

As stated; societies tend to slowly gravitate toward more civilized standards, and every country on Earth has abandoned the practice of legalized slavery. But not the Bible!

So it is bad because you feel bad about human beings not being treated a certain way? Well, those who practice slavery don't feel bad, so slavery isn't bad for them.

As for violence, there are two side of the coin. When a lion sinks it's fangs on a gazelle, sure it is bad for the gazelle, but it is good for the lion.
In the end, the lion used a means which brings harm to the gazelle in order to bring a good end, even if it was for itself. By ending slavery, you bring harm to slavery practitioners and slave traders.
Why do you think there is a standard and equal value for humans? I can only think of spiritual reasons.


If slavery is bad because it is not popular today, was it good back then?

bbooooooomm beast you are no longer a beast, you just got slaped so now you are a chicken :D:D
Never fart near dog
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 4:49:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:41:01 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:35:12 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:27:05 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment. The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today. They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.

Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
If God can take the time to ban infidelity, homosexuality, idol worship, and paganism, he sure as hell can ban slavery.
God did ban slavery. It was unlawful to kidnap another man into slavery. The kind of slavery we're talking about here is voluntary servitude. It was an alternative to prison.
I'm fairly certain the Bible state sit was fine for the Israelis to kidnap slaves during wartime.
I'm not sure what you mean by Bible state sit.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 4:52:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 3:57:56 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 3:44:12 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 3:40:30 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:52:50 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:50:27 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:46:37 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:25:20 PM, steffon66 wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:39:59 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
I am not a Christian, so I won't really participate in the discussion.

But are you implying that slavery is bad? Explain your reasoning.

would you like to be a slave and be raped by a dude and beaten with a whip or tortured in other ways?

Would you like to be a rich king who holds power over all?

There is no rule or contract that grantees you are not going to be treated as a slave by a person/society if you wish the person/society no harm, even if it brings you benefit (economically rational).


its wrong because it is a severe punishment where no crime has been committed.

Unrelated as applying punishment can happen for many reasons other than the person breaking criminal law.

ok its a punishment where no wrong doing has been done. and no i wouldnt like to be in control over everybody. whats your point?

There is no logical material reason for not performing so-called "wrong doing" if it brings you, society, or what you value significant benefit.

so your saying we should all be selfish and not think of other people? if everyone did this the world would be a horrible place so what is best for us and everybody is to not do "wrong" like owning slaves and stealing etc. thats my reason.

Horrible place for who? Other people unrelated to you.
A cosy place for you.

The rules of nature are selfish, that is what survival of the fittest is all about.

Think of it this way: When performing an action, it would make sense if the benefit out weights the cost. If you are atheist, then any spiritual reason about what other people feeling have zero weight. Therefore helping people makes no sense.

no it would be a horrible place for everybody. imagine if everyone in the world was a robber. you might get rich but it would only last for a minute because someone near you would come and take it from you. everybody would constantly be getting robbed. the only way to keep your money in a world like that is to have more people and more guns than anyone who is going to try and rob you and how many people are going to have more people then the people trying to rob them? only a few. it would be chaotic if everyone did what was best for them ignoring what was best for everyone else. if we lived in a world like that our leaders would have everything and we would have nothing. they would be on top. you dont know what your talking about and if you did you wouldnt want to live in a world where everybody steals and kills for what they want. why dont you buy a gun and move to the worst getto you can find to get a taste of the life you say you want and watch your daughter get raped by some big black dude. i bet then you would learn to care for other people in hopes that they will care for you too. do you really think the world wouldnt change much if everyone was selfish? and yes i know natural law is screwed up and thats probably because it is random and not written like human laws which is all the more reason why we need to think about others because we depend on them thinking about us before they act.

Risks and consequences can often carry a hefty cost. So it is no rational to take them and make lots of enemies. Cooperation and safety isn't against a logical materialistic principle, unfortunately there are limited resources so we can't please everyone.
As for the ghetto, taking the risk requires being powerful, skilled, and lucky enough to succeed. There is no free lunch, when someone wins, someone have to lose something (money, resources, time, etc...).

Natural law plays the same as the law of scarcity. As I said there are infinite wants and not enough resources to satisfy them, or satisfy everybody. It is a natural response to the state of reality not mere rules of conduct that is randomly followed for no reason.

Lets see this scenario:

You have the opportunity to steal an object of extreme value with 0% chance to be caught. Would you steal it? Provide logical justification.
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 5:23:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?

Alright, Beastt. If you're going to attack the Jews for slavery, do it properly. The verse you want is actually Leviticus 25:44.

This verse that you have brought up is one in which you make a clerical error... It is not that if the slave dies a few days later, that you are pardoned. The intent is that if the slave survives several days, that it is obvious that you did not intend to kill your slave, and so if the slave dies, then you have lost out on your "Property." And let's look at "Property", because the intent here is that the slave is your worker. Indeed, if we look at slavery in Israel, it is more of an employment. There are so many other rules found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy that show us this fact. The "Slaves" here enter servitude willingly and are freed after 7 years. Typically someone enters this slavery because they owe the person money, and so are working it off. So even the word "slave" is misinterpreted by you, a person who does not know any other kind of slavery than that which occurred outside of Israel, and so the assault on slavery here is meaningless. However, on Leviticus 25:44, there is more providence for the argument you seek.

Furthermore, on this verse, it is quickly followed by Exodus 21:26-27, "When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth."
This says that you cannot simply beat your slave. It must be done in a way that no real damage to the person is caused. If the person is damaged, then you have to free the person on the spot. If the person dies, as your original citation shows, then they are to be killed themselves. So, it is much in the way that a parent spanks a child. No permanent damage, no death. Punishment.

I say again, switch to Leviticus 25:44 for a stimulating conversation...
August Rasa, a 4:53 mind
Morality
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 6:35:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 4:49:13 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:41:01 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:35:12 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:27:05 PM, Morality wrote:
At 8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment. The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today. They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.

Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
If God can take the time to ban infidelity, homosexuality, idol worship, and paganism, he sure as hell can ban slavery.
God did ban slavery. It was unlawful to kidnap another man into slavery. The kind of slavery we're talking about here is voluntary servitude. It was an alternative to prison.
I'm fairly certain the Bible state sit was fine for the Israelis to kidnap slaves during wartime.
I'm not sure what you mean by Bible state sit.
You damn well knew what the sentence meant.
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 7:41:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?

I wonder if any new comments will come up, since this has been hashed out a dozen times on here in the last couple of years. Doubtful.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2014 8:00:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/19/2014 2:24:50 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/19/2014 1:32:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
The Bible supports slavery.
Many Christians try to slither away from this issue by making various false claims about slavery in those times being far different and less brutal. They claim God was getting around to gradually phasing out slavery, etc. None of that is supported in the Bible. Biblical writings span an absolute minimum of 1,500-years, and slavery is supported throughout.

In fact, the Bible (Exodus 21:20-21) specifically states that in God's eyes, you can beat a slave to death, (just as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two), and you've done nothing wrong, because the slave was your "property".

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

So here is my question; how can anyone justify promoting a book as caring, loving, moral or beneficial to mankind, which so plainly and clearly supports the practice of slavery?

Every country on Earth has abolished slavery. It's clearly not a socially beneficial practice and therefore, not moral. So how can anyone consider themselves to be a good person, while simultaneously promoting a book which champions the belief that some people should literally OWN other people, and be considered innocent of any wrong-doing, even if they beat them to death?
Well, no, God does not condone beating anyone to death including a slave. The penalty for murdering a slave was capitol punishment.
There it is! That's that GOOD Ol' look right at the verse, read it and then DENY EVERYTHING IT SAYS... pure bull crap that Christians are so completely famous for. You read Exodus 21:20-21, right? It's right there in the O.P., Rod. But what do you do? You decide that you've been taught that God is good, moral, kind caring... all the things that slavery ISN'T. So instead of realizing that Christianity has a dark side... a very VERY dark side, you just deny it to yourself, and then you deny it to everyone else. That's how you remain delusional in your barbaric, sadistic, twisted, immoral faith.

The use of the term "a day or two" shows that there was no technical time frame involved. They didn't wait until the 24th or 48th hour to the last minute to wait and see if the slave died.
So again... you're denying EXACTLY what the Bible says. It's sooooo rare to find a Christian who doesn't re-write the BIble as they read it, to try to fix up the parts that make any sane, rational, and compassionate person lose their breakfast. Sorry, Rod. I'm reading what's written in the Bible, not your white-washed, doctored up, candy-coated, version... the RSV... (Roderick Spode Version) of the Bible. Sorry, not authorized by the church, by God, or by the 4th century trolls who picked the words of the Bible in the first place.

Those who judged scrutinized each case individually. They used judgment similar to what we do today.
Stop making things up. Where would you get ancient minutes from the ancient courts? Either puke them up for us, or admit that you're just manufacturing these toilet stuffings because you can't handle the truth.
If they had done as you claim, they VIOLATED "God's Law", as written in the Bible. This isn't about what people did. You don't know what they did or didn't do. You're just making up what you prefer to believe. That doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that according to YOUR beliefs, the supreme measure of all kindness, love, morality and compassion of the universe, says that owning slaves, and beating them to death, is okay in his book.

They judged according to intent just like we do today. Was the intent of the master to kill the slave? What caused the master to discipline his slave in the first place? They couldn't just discipline a slave for just any reason. A slave could have been unruly, even violent, and that would have been taken into consideration by those judging the case.
Please point that out in Exodus. Oh... what? You can't? Do you know why you can't?
Because it ISN'T THERE. When you claim belief in a book, it means you believe what's written in the book. It doesn't mean you believe your white-washed, candy-coated, sanitized, edited, doctored, bullshitt version of what's in the book.


Slavery was not ideal in the eyes of God, but because injustice existed like theft, provisions were made for voluntary servitude.
Here you go again, telling God what he does and doesn't believe. And this too is typical of Christians. If you don't like "God's word", just insist that God wouldn't have said what the Bible claims he said. Then go right back to insisting that the Bible is "God's word", and should be obeyed... every word. (Except the one's you don't like, and prefer to edit).

What's wrong, Rod; don't they ever read Exodus 21:20-21 in church? Do you suppose there's a reason for that? Why don't we ever see Christians driving around with Exodus 21:20-21 on bumper stickers, t-shirts and key-chains? Is it possible that they just don't like that part of "God's word"? Or is it even more likely that most of them have never heard it, because they let the church tell them what to think, swallow heartily, and then run around bragging about being a Christian?

Here's more of "God's words" on slavery;

- However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

- If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

Yeah, let him go free after seven years. But if he attained any family in that time, he has to leave them behind. YOU get to keep his family PERMANENTLY!

- Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

- Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

This is one of may reasons that Christianity makes non-Christians sick to their stomachs.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire