The question I ask Xtian evangelists...

[Alex-db]

Exodus 21:
[ QUOTE ]
2 "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.
5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. [a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you support slavery?

If not;
Was your omniscient God wrong? Mistaken? Did he have a change of heart he hadn't realised he was going to have?

This paragraph is basically the 11th commandment (Exodus 20 is the 10). Was it wrongly recorded by the human scribe, was the author mistaken? If so isn't it likely the previous 10 contained mistakes too? Thats pretty damn important when placing the success of your entire life project of getting to heaven on correctly following Gods rules isn't it?

Personally, I think it is possible, just, possible, that it was written by humans in a time when slavery was accepted. It is certainly evidence that we either should condone slavery or that the original author/source of the quote was not omniscient.

So would you accept that Christians have cherry picked the passages from the Bible that they liked (not forgetting the fact that these were the best bits cherry picked from a much bigger pool of text), essentially ignoring their only reference to the word of a God that they claim to hold in such high regard?

[goodsamaritan]

I think many conservative christians still believe black people should be enslaved

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
I think many conservative christians still believe black people should be enslaved

[/ QUOTE ]

Get real.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think many conservative christians still believe black people should be enslaved

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, he said many not most, and there are probably hundreds or thousands at least. But yeah, I think its sort of a silly, misleading statement.
Get real.

[/ QUOTE ]

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
Exodus 21:
[ QUOTE ]
2 "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.
5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. [a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you support slavery?

If not;
Was your omniscient God wrong? Mistaken? Did he have a change of heart he hadn't realised he was going to have?

This paragraph is basically the 11th commandment (Exodus 20 is the 10). Was it wrongly recorded by the human scribe, was the author mistaken? If so isn't it likely the previous 10 contained mistakes too? Thats pretty damn important when placing the success of your entire life project of getting to heaven on correctly following Gods rules isn't it?

Personally, I think it is possible, just, possible, that it was written by humans in a time when slavery was accepted. It is certainly evidence that we either should condone slavery or that the original author/source of the quote was not omniscient.

So would you accept that Christians have cherry picked the passages from the Bible that they liked (not forgetting the fact that these were the best bits cherry picked from a much bigger pool of text), essentially ignoring their only reference to the word of a God that they claim to hold in such high regard?

[/ QUOTE ]

not the correct question to ask. it's unfair; it does not take into consideration highly devolved cultures.

at some point, one group of people will be willing to enslave another group if their cultural levels are too radically different.

if a group of cannibals moved into my neighborhood, i'd shoot first and ask questions later.

i'd be very willing to enslave the south pacific island culture described in the recent film "king kong" given a scenario where my culture was forced to co-exist with their culture. however, if they stay on their island and dont threaten my culture then i'd be quite happy with that arrangement.

you cannot reasonably transport modern ethics to a world of 4 or 5 millenia ago.

you can rightfully measure the advancement of any culture based on their science and their best definitions of god.

so i want you to do some research and get a complete picture of some of the ancient cultures that you're bemoaning and then describe a scenario where instead of transporting our modern ethics back in time 4k or 5k years ago, you instead transport that culture to the south side of your city or town ... then we can talk.

ray

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Exodus 21:
[ QUOTE ]
2 "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.
5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. [a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you support slavery?

If not;
Was your omniscient God wrong? Mistaken? Did he have a change of heart he hadn't realised he was going to have?

This paragraph is basically the 11th commandment (Exodus 20 is the 10). Was it wrongly recorded by the human scribe, was the author mistaken? If so isn't it likely the previous 10 contained mistakes too? Thats pretty damn important when placing the success of your entire life project of getting to heaven on correctly following Gods rules isn't it?

Personally, I think it is possible, just, possible, that it was written by humans in a time when slavery was accepted. It is certainly evidence that we either should condone slavery or that the original author/source of the quote was not omniscient.

So would you accept that Christians have cherry picked the passages from the Bible that they liked (not forgetting the fact that these were the best bits cherry picked from a much bigger pool of text), essentially ignoring their only reference to the word of a God that they claim to hold in such high regard?

[/ QUOTE ]

not the correct question to ask. it's unfair; it does not take into consideration highly devolved cultures.

at some point, one group of people will be willing to enslave another group if their cultural levels are too radically different.

if a group of cannibals moved into my neighborhood, i'd shoot first and ask questions later.

i'd be very willing to enslave the south pacific island culture described in the recent film "king kong" given a scenario where my culture was forced to co-exist with their culture. however, if they stay on their island and dont threaten my culture then i'd be quite happy with that arrangement.

you cannot reasonably transport modern ethics to a world of 4 or 5 millenia ago.

you can rightfully measure the advancement of any culture based on their science and their best definitions of god.

so i want you to do some research and get a complete picture of some of the ancient cultures that you're bemoaning and then describe a scenario where instead of transporting our modern ethics back in time 4k or 5k years ago, you instead transport that culture to the south side of your city or town ... then we can talk.

ray

[/ QUOTE ]

The question is completely valid. You are changing the topic. Is it or is it not okay for humans to enslave humans? According to the Bible, God says it is. If he was wrong then he isn't God. If he was right then modern Christians are heretics. Instead of God writing "Slavery for Dummies" he should have detailed the process of making a cure for AIDS or something that would support the all-loving, all-knowing description that Christians like to give him.

[RayBornert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Exodus 21:
[ QUOTE ]
2 "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.
5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. [a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you support slavery?

If not;
Was your omniscient God wrong? Mistaken? Did he have a change of heart he hadn't realised he was going to have?

This paragraph is basically the 11th commandment (Exodus 20 is the 10). Was it wrongly recorded by the human scribe, was the author mistaken? If so isn't it likely the previous 10 contained mistakes too? Thats pretty damn important when placing the success of your entire life project of getting to heaven on correctly following Gods rules isn't it?

Personally, I think it is possible, just, possible, that it was written by humans in a time when slavery was accepted. It is certainly evidence that we either should condone slavery or that the original author/source of the quote was not omniscient.

So would you accept that Christians have cherry picked the passages from the Bible that they liked (not forgetting the fact that these were the best bits cherry picked from a much bigger pool of text), essentially ignoring their only reference to the word of a God that they claim to hold in such high regard?

[/ QUOTE ]

not the correct question to ask. it's unfair; it does not take into consideration highly devolved cultures.

at some point, one group of people will be willing to enslave another group if their cultural levels are too radically different.

if a group of cannibals moved into my neighborhood, i'd shoot first and ask questions later.

i'd be very willing to enslave the south pacific island culture described in the recent film "king kong" given a scenario where my culture was forced to co-exist with their culture. however, if they stay on their island and dont threaten my culture then i'd be quite happy with that arrangement.

you cannot reasonably transport modern ethics to a world of 4 or 5 millenia ago.

you can rightfully measure the advancement of any culture based on their science and their best definitions of god.

so i want you to do some research and get a complete picture of some of the ancient cultures that you're bemoaning and then describe a scenario where instead of transporting our modern ethics back in time 4k or 5k years ago, you instead transport that culture to the south side of your city or town ... then we can talk.

ray

[/ QUOTE ]

The question is completely valid. You are changing the topic. Is it or is it not okay for humans to enslave humans? According to the Bible, God says it is. If he was wrong then he isn't God. If he was right then modern Christians are heretics. Instead of God writing "Slavery for Dummies" he should have detailed the process of making a cure for AIDS or something that would support the all-loving, all-knowing description that Christians like to give him.

[/ QUOTE ]

for typical cultures 4k - 5k years ago, the only real wealth anybody had was their labor and maybe some clothes and a tool or weapon (maybe). the only way to pay or trade for things was to contract yourself for a period of time as a means to transfer your wealth to get the thing you wanted.

so there was the servant/master institution which was really their version of employee/employer relationship except that they all lived in rather close proximity with each other much more like a family.

most of the slavery occurred as the result of losing a major land war; if you lost a war then your labor was forfeit to the winning tribe/nation/city/king/warlord etc.

so, since those were the major games being played out at that time, it makes sense that a culture would have a definition of god that was designed to help them win those games and not lose those games.

********
now let's get to the question you really want to ask:

what you really want to discuss is why you can or cannot extract quality of life from any given definition of god.

this is evidenced by your behavior of holding up the old testament definition of god as inferior based upon the ethics of slavery within that definition.

by todays standards and ethics and culture, the definition is inferior; but it was a pretty damn good definition given the conditions that existed back then.

edit: if charles darwin had a chance to advise moses on the best way to construct a definition of god such that the culture would be fit to survive in a seriously hostile world, would darwin have suggested an alternate definition instead of what moses created?

ray

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
you cannot reasonably transport modern ethics to a world of 4 or 5 millenia ago.



[/ QUOTE ]

The outdated ethics in the Bible are what modern Christians still support. My brother and I had this conversation. He is a born again. He said that if God supported slavery 'he must have his reasons.'

(he was also okay with the rape of slaves since that too was in the Bible.)

[ojc02]

So the bible is inappropriate to use as a guide for modern life?

[kurto]

This is funny...

[ QUOTE ]
so there was the servant/master institution which was really their version of employee/employer relationship except that they all lived in rather close proximity with each other much more like a family.


[/ QUOTE ]

Kind of like modern day work relationship...except that when you get hired, its because the corporation slaughters your family then forces you into bondage. And its very much like your family... subtle differences like: Your dad can rape you at any time and whip you so you can't stand for a day. And, of course, your kids can also be sold and you can be given away.

Ray-- this is what the Bible says is okay. This is the religion and the Book that Christians swear is the word of God. The age is irrelevent since Christians still believe its all true.