Refuting Christians with their Own Bible

[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.