Refuting Christians with their Own Bible

[Fake Messiah]

What exactly is God instructing that is immoral? He is regulating a less-than-ideal social system. He does not instruct people to get slaves. Your objection is that he does not forbid it. Then we are right back to the question you refuse to answer: how would a society (such as they had) effect the same goals without this system?

Only a regulator, where is his magic now to destroy slavery? But also telling slaves to embrace their masters (Ephesians 6:5 by St Paul) "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ." Whores obey your pimps - yeah where is bad in that? He's only regulating, it's not like he can do something.

[vorlon13]

alter boys:

obey your priests !!!

[Redbeard The Pink]

 
What would be a reasonable characterization of these choices? Do they appear to be the intentions and actions of a moral being? A loving being? An all knowing being? No, on all counts. Moral? No, because he directly instructs immoral behaviour. ..... You see, this is why I ridicule religion – because it is ridiculous, and frankly I find it insulting not only to my intelligence but to the dignity of our species.

What exactly is God instructing that is immoral? He is regulating a less-than-ideal social system. He does not instruct people to get slaves. Your objection is that he does not forbid it. Then we are right back to the question you refuse to answer: how would a society (such as they had) effect the same goals without this system?

"Your slaves are to come from the nations around you. From them, you may buy slaves."


Pretty plain to me. He's at least instructing people who mean to take slaves to buy them from surrounding nations. How kind.


So you're telling me that your all-powerful source of universal morality can take the time to forbid cross dressing, eating shrimp, wearing clothes of mixed fibers, gay stuff, and boiling kid goats in their mother's milk, but for some reason slavery was just something he had to work around until we figured out on our own that slavery actually isn't OK? Are you listening to yourself?


You serve a god whose best known feature is that he makes ridiculously long lists of tediously absurd rules and forbiddings toward an untold laundry list of behaviors, but the immorality of slavery was given a total miss in both Testaments. In fact, both testaments endorse it openly. What part of that suggests that slavery is against your god's supposed moral system? If your god really is the source of all morals, then there is literally no indication whatsoever that slavery is wrong.

[RoadRunner79]

---

Ok, let's give it one more go.

[1] Could that nation of tribes get a civilization together? Yes, if that's what your God wanted. The question is, what were his choices? Option 1. is do nothing, don't intervene with their free will, watch the universe unfold but have no interaction and wait for cultural evolution to gradually give rise to ethics, since this will ultimately give rise to more successful societies. But then we wouldn't have the Bible or Jesus - or if we did, they would be false, man made delusions no having come from God even though he was there. Option 2. is give humanity moral guidance. How best to do this? Lots of ways - he could simply appear to each human being, or to whole groups at a time, and clearly explain the world and what is good and bad. There are so many ways he could achieve this, so many creative possibilities.
 
What option does he take? Neither. We are told that he takes option 3. where he chooses only to appear only to a very few humans, meaning that everyone else has to take their word for it and accept extraordinary claims on very weak evidence. He further chooses not to appear after this, meaning that as time goes on the strength of the evidence gets weaker, the message is diluted and corrupted by translation and scribal error, and the heresay evidence gets less and less believable. [A] He only gives them a bizarre selection of very strict and narrow instructions that include barbaric behaviour - by which I mean teachings directly instruct humans to kill and [2]enslave each other [Leviticus 25:44-46; Exodus 21:2-6, 7-11 and 20-21; Ephesians 6:5; 1 Timothy 6:1-2] and consequently create a society based on injustice.

---

 
Your option 2 is not compatible with free will. If God appeared to each person, our choice to choose God rather than not God becomes nearly impossible. However, that does not mean he has not given moral guidance. Everyone knows the difference between right and wrong. We are born with it. 

As a point of discussion, I've never been crazy about using "free will" in this manner in regards to the question of why God doesn't show Himself all the time. As I believe that others pointed out, if it is correct, that God's appearance violates ones free will, then He had no problem doing so to those to whom He did appear.

We are not given an answer to this question, so I think any discussion of it is just theory (and mine is open to change). What I see is two things shown in Scripture. First we have the fall. Sin separates us from God. Part of the consequences of sin, was being cast out of fellowship with God (Garden of Eden). It is by Grace, that God does show Himself, and has provided for redemption. (It is also by grace, that I think that we do not experience the complete separation that will come after the judgment) Second, when I read through the Old Testament, I see a repetition; in that Israel is sent a prophet or see God's work within them, they straighten up for a while, and then they fall away again. It shows us what we are like without God. It's not just about behaving correctly, but what is in our hearts. Which do you think is a truer representation of your driving (when you are being followed by a cop, or not)? I think you see this in social constraints as well. If society broke down, how quickly would we become the Lord of the Flies?

[The Grand Nudger]

Unfortunately for this "they straighten up then fall away" business....

They are carrying out your gods -explicit- orders in genocide and subsequent sex-slaving. It's not some shitty idea they had, that he stood in heaven shaking his about about "silly, silly hoomans". If magic book is to be believed, this is the character of your god. Clearly, neither you nor any christian who so much as attempts apologetics on this issue believes in magic book, or the goodness of the god -in- magic book.

Why not be upfront about that, because it would nip any of this criticism in the bud immediately. Say it with me "That's not my god, I don't believe in that god, my god would never do anything like that". Is that so hard? All these shitty arguments when you don't even need a -good- argument.....sigh.

[SteveII]

What exactly is God instructing that is immoral? He is regulating a less-than-ideal social system. He does not instruct people to get slaves. Your objection is that he does not forbid it. Then we are right back to the question you refuse to answer: how would a society (such as they had) effect the same goals without this system?

"Your slaves are to come from the nations around you. From them, you may buy slaves." [1]

Pretty plain to me. He's at least instructing people who mean to take slaves to buy them from surrounding nations. How kind.

So you're telling me that your all-powerful source of universal morality can take the time to forbid cross dressing, eating shrimp, wearing clothes of mixed fibers, gay stuff, and boiling kid goats in their mother's milk, but for some reason slavery was just something he had to work around until we figured out on our own that slavery actually isn't OK? Are you listening to yourself? [2]

You serve a god whose best known feature is that he makes ridiculously long lists of tediously absurd rules and forbiddings toward an untold laundry list of behaviors, but the immorality of slavery was given a total miss in both Testaments. In fact, both testaments endorse it openly. What part of that suggests that slavery is against your god's supposed moral system? If your god really is the source of all morals, then there is literally no indication whatsoever that slavery is wrong. [3]

[1] Again, regulating, not commanding. 

[2] Your list was for a specific people for a specific time. You are mixing moral laws with dietary laws with social laws--all of which had their meaning to those people. I am listening to myself. You repeating the objection does not change my answer which I have typed out at least 10 times. No one has yet suggested a method to achieve the same goals in this type of society except the "God could have because...omnipotence" line which is a philosophical cop-out.

[3] The NT does not endorse slavery. Instructing slaves to obey their masters is perfectly in line with the gospel. What was the alternative instruction? "Slaves do not obey your masters"? That would have led to violence and death in yet another society that practiced slavery. There were also references instructing people not to mistreat their slaves/servants. I think it is clear that truly following the NT teachings will convict you of even the most modest forms of slavery. 

Purely a philosophical question: what is the precise problem with this type of slavery (not based on a race having less value)? If you do answer, please address voluntary slavery and if and why that is wrong. I am not saying there isn't a problem, I would just like to hear people articulate it.

[RetiredArmy]

That's it... pointing and laughing at SteveII

[RoadRunner79]

Unfortunately for this "they straighten up then fall away" business....

They are carrying out your gods -explicit- orders in genocide and subsequent sex-slaving.  It's not some shitty idea they had, that he stood in heaven shaking his about about "silly, silly hoomans".  If magic book is to be believed, this is the character of your god.  Clearly, neither you nor any christian who so much as attempts apologetics on this issue believes in magic book, or the goodness of the god -in- magic book.

Why not be upfront about that, because it would nip any of this criticism in the bud immediately.  Say it with me "That's not my god, I don't believe in that god, my god would never do anything like that".  Is that so hard?  All these shitty arguments when you don't even need a -good- argument.....sigh.

I think you are confused, because I was responding to a specific statement. 

I also find the words you are attempting to put in my mouth to be unfounded.

[Mr.wizard]

Steve,

Why can't god give a command to stop enslaving people? You acknowledged he commands slaves to obey their masters, why can't he just give a command to the masters to not own slaves?

It doesn't matter whether or not you treat your slaves nicely or poorly, it doesn't matter whether they are forced into slavery or they do it willingly, the concept of a person being owned as property is wrong.

[The Grand Nudger]

I think you are confused, because I was responding to a specific statement. 

IDK RR, doesn;t seem like I'm the one that's confused.  I'm not the one trying to square a circle here, after all.

I also find the words you are attempting to put in my mouth to be unfounded.

You do believe that your god is a genocidal sex slaver...that is your god, and that is the goodness of your god?  I doubt it. Jesus christ..... show a christian the door that gets him out of all of this and he still protests......