Your guitar analogy fails because playing the guitar is a skill set that has to be acquired over time. What is the analogous skill set involved with understanding You will not enslave other people for any reason -- especially when the one issuing the order has a supposedly demonstrated track record of kicking the shit out of those who don't conform to his will?

(January 24, 2016 at 11:17 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 9:48 am)athrock Wrote: IS GOD A MORAL MONSTER - SLAVERY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
 
Many people argue that the portrayal of God in the Old Testament exposes Him as a “moral monster”, and they cite the existence of slavery in Israel as one example of God’s immorality. In their view, it would have been proper for God to outlaw slavery altogether.
 
This perspective suffers from the fallacy of presentism—the interpretation of past events in terms of modern-day morals and attitudes. Instead, the historical accounts of Israel as recorded in the Bible should be judged within the context of the Ancient Near East (ANE). Specifically, the Mosaic Law of Israel may be compared with other ANE codes of law such as that of Hammurabi. Such comparisons will highlight the incremental advancement of ideals for human behavior which God embedded in Mosaic Law.
 
There are three primary texts pertaining to the treatment of slaves in the Old Testament: Exodus 21, Leviticus 25 and Deuteronomy 15. From these, we can extract the following specific instructions:
 

1. Enslavement of others by kidnapping was prohibited. (Ex. 21:16)
   “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.”
   
2. A Hebrew slave was to be set free after six years of service if the slave chose freedom; they were not slaves for life (Ex. 21:2-6). Non-Hebrew slaves purchased from neighboring nations could be slaves for life. (Lev. 25:46)
   
3. If a female slave was chosen to be a wife of the owner’s son, the owner was to treat her as his own daughter. The husband was obligated to provide her with food, clothing and sex (which would result in the blessing of children). If he failed to provide these things, she was free to leave. (Ex. 21:7-11)
   
4. Slave owners were to be punished for killing their slaves. (Ex. 21:20)
   
5. Under some circumstances, slaves were to be set free if they were severely injured by their owners. (Ex. 21:26-27)
   
6. Slaves were to be given a day of rest. (Ex. 23:12)
   

 
Paul Copan, author of Is God a Moral Monster?, notes the following incremental improvements in the treatment of slaves required by Mosaic Law when compared with other ANE codes:
 


From this, we can see that the New Atheists argument that the God of the Old Testament results from fallacious thinking - specifically, presentism - and that God was actually moving the Israelites forward incrementally toward more enlightened thinking. Consequently, any justifications for atheism that are based upon objections to God as a moral monster are unfounded.

Who gives a fuck about ancient Israelite slaves when the modern Jews helped finance modern slavery that resulted in over 65 million people spending their lives in miserable slavery?

Wow. I'm stumped. I had no idea that the Jews were behind all this.

Do you have a source? A link to a website or something?

Because I clearly need to get up to speed and pronto.

(January 24, 2016 at 8:32 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 12:02 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Why not just educate the people that slavery was evil and they shouldn't do it?

Or simply put it on that list of things called Commandments ... except that would violate free will.

Ya and like I have pointed out to him before, he has no problem with god pre-programming us with an objective morality, some how that is not a violation of our free will.

(January 24, 2016 at 11:20 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Your guitar analogy fails because playing the guitar is a skill set that has to be acquired over time. What is the analogous skill set involved with understanding You will not enslave other people for any reason -- especially when the one issuing the order has a supposedly demonstrated track record of kicking the shit out of those who don't conform to his will?

It doesn't take much time to understand it; it takes longer to accept and embrace it - especially in light of the fact that every other nation (as highlighted by Jorm) was not only practicing slavery but enslaving the Israelites themselves (cf. the Babylonian captivity).

I mean, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" is easily understandable, but do you think that it vanished overnight? 

How about ever?

I just want to say that this is an utterly pathetic display. The apologist has the benefit of our ignorance of the specifics of slavery among the Hebrews, so he can make up any sunshine story he wants. The bible doesn't state why God chose to abet the slave ethics that he did, so once again the apologist can make up any sunshine story he chooses. And after all is said and done, granted such liberties, he can't make the vicarious suffering of the slaves into a moral act. You have your choice of facts and you still can't make it work. Pathetic.

(January 24, 2016 at 11:23 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 8:32 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Or simply put it on that list of things called Commandments ... except that would violate free will.

Ya and like I have pointed out to him before, he has no problem god pre-programming us with an objective morality, some how that is not a violation of our free will.

Which might actually mean something if we could not ignore natural law and do those things which even our own consciences tell us are wrong.

But perhaps I should not presume...tell me, Mr. Wizard: Do you ever do things that you know in your heart are wrong?

(January 24, 2016 at 10:42 pm)athrock Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 9:16 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: A Perfect Teacher would find no problem in so doing, don't you think?

Ever try to teach someone to play the guitar who simply wasn't going to get it? Tone deaf...no rhythm...one arm...unwilling to practice...whatever. Now, multiply this times millions of people who made up the nation of Israel. The problem isn't always with the teacher.

It's a challenge to find that point at which the strongest, most willing and eager are challenged while the weakest are not discouraged. Looking at the history of Israel and Christianity, I think God has found the right balance.

And who, pray tell, made those students?

Your analogy would be apt if I had made those students in an Act of Special Creation. That condition not obtaining, your objection is stripped of value.

Quote:God expresses love in the Old Testament while Jesus re-affirms the existence of hell in the New. They are fully compatible with some differences in emphasis.

With a good concordance, I think you could find examples of all of God's attributes in both testaments.

And I think that claims of these differences are overblown by people who WANT discrepancies...so they find them where they really do not exist.

I was asking about his timeless morality.

But since you brought it up, do you consider your God's expression of love by killing all but eight humans a loving attribute, really?

I'm a father. If my son were to misbehave, would you think it loving if I killed him as punishment? Would you think it moral?

If so, you're the last person to be delivering lectures on morality. And if not, you've just bought into moral relativity.

(January 24, 2016 at 11:25 pm)athrock Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 11:20 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Your guitar analogy fails because playing the guitar is a skill set that has to be acquired over time. What is the analogous skill set involved with understanding You will not enslave other people for any reason -- especially when the one issuing the order has a supposedly demonstrated track record of kicking the shit out of those who don't conform to his will?

It doesn't take much time to understand it; it takes longer to accept and embrace it - especially in light of the fact that every other nation (as highlighted by Jorm) was not only practicing slavery but enslaving the Israelites themselves (cf. the Babylonian captivity).

I mean, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" is easily understandable, but do you think that it vanished overnight? 

How about ever?

Yet that was thought so important that it was enshrined in the Law, as well as a host of ritual commandments that were obviously less morally significant than slavery or genocide.

Yeah, not buying it.

(January 24, 2016 at 11:27 pm)athrock Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 11:23 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Ya and like I have pointed out to him before, he has no problem god pre-programming us with an objective morality, some how that is not a violation of our free will.

Which might actually mean something if we could not ignore natural law and do those things which even our own consciences tell us are wrong.

But perhaps I should not presume...tell me, Mr. Wizard: Do you ever do things that you know in your heart are wrong?

That is not the point, the point is I cant come to conclusions on what is right or wrong by my own experience because according to you god has already programmed me, that is not free will.

(January 24, 2016 at 11:14 pm)athrock Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 10:37 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: You've ignored the point that a choice made under duress is not "free".

You've ignored the point that if your god is perfect, then by definition so should be his revelation ... and creations such as students of his morality, for that matter.

You've ignored the point that a timeless objective morality should not look any different from any historical vantage.

Until you address those objections, your "argument" -- if I may dignify it as such -- is vapid. Not to mention that said "argument" is merely a set of unfounded assertions.

Over to you.

Not intentionally. Promise. I'm a bit peeved at a few other posters, but not you. So let's continue.  

"You've ignored the point that a choice made under duress is not "free"."

I agree. Where is our conflict?

"You've ignored the point that if your god is perfect, then by definition so should be his revelation ... and creations such as students of his morality, for that matter."

God's revelation IS perfect, but that doesn't mean that He gives it to us all at once, does it?

"You've ignored the point that a timeless objective morality should not look any different from any historical vantage."

I don't play the guitar, but I'll stick with guitar analogies - at least until they completely fail me.  

As a teacher, you COULD give your student a difficult song to play...let's take one of the classics like "Free Bird" or "Stairway to Heaven"...by simply handing him the sheet music and wishing him well. Or, you could give him the chords, the riffs, whatever, a little at a time until he had all the skills in place to play the song. And the whole time when he's simply practicing chord changes without really knowing why you're having him practice them, the Song Remains the Same. (see what I did there?)

THEN you give him the sheet music, and say, "Play this." If you've put the pieces in place first, playing the solos should be easy with a little practice. 

Does this help?

I will address this post when I'm home on my computer. Needless to say, the deconstruction will be too long to issue it comfortably from my phone.

Note, though, that comparing a Perfect Teacher who Created the student is still unjustified, and will not be entertained any further. If your points require such slipshod examples for support, it might be better for you to reconsider your position. You're defending the indefensible, and shooting blanks in so doing.