Once you come up with such a standard, then a meaningful discussion is at least possible.

Since your standard is subjective, no rational discussion about your beliefs is even possible.

Noted. But please note well: An eternity is too long to be wrong!

Thanks. I am blessed every day!

You can be blessed every day too if you receive Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior!

I gave you a wide open opportunity to establish paradoxical truth, and you totally punted. Because its fraudulent, point blank. You sacrificed all credibility right there.

Once again that funny standard of subjectivity. If I make up a god, and assign morality to him -- like say kill all the babies and fetuses on earth, stone unruly children, kill witches -- if we assign this morality to a god, then it is no longer subjective. Rather, it's the ultimate, universal, objective, absolute morality of the universe.

This is how true believers think. They just don't know it and don't want to know it.

Pass. That was a guy who cursed a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season. A guy who said not one word against slavery and actually implicitly endorsed it. But you go ahead and worship him and good luck with that eternity thing.

1. Have you taken the time to actually understand the context of Jesus' cursing the fig tree? If so, do you understand it's meaning in that context?

2. Is it your subjective opinion that slavery is a bad thing, or is it an actual state-of-affairs that slavery is a bad thing?

3. Do you understand the different types of what is called "slavery" in the Bible?

4. I had a friend who got a DUI and had a choice between spending time in jail or performing x number of hours of community service picking up trash. Do you object to these instances of slavery?

You are really going to equate picking up trash with actual slavery? Even for you, this seems a bit nonsensical.

Can we agree that slavery is wrong? Or do you think it's an okay thing for one human to own another? The more I talk to bible thumpers and Jesus followers, the grosser they seem to me.

I'll say it: slavery is wrong. And I don't care who hears me say it. It's a moral wrong and you can argue objectivity over subjectivity until you're blue in the face. It's just wrong. Do you disagree with that?

You lord and savior never said so. He even had advice for the treatment of slaves and how they should act. What a supreme d*ck. And you worship this sh*thead? No thanks.

You apparently don't understand that chattel slavery isn't the only form of slavery. My point is, there are many kinds of actual slavery. And, yes, being forced to pick up trash by penalty of going to jail is a type of slavery.

Chattel slavery (i.e. one person owning another person) is forbidden in Scripture. Being forced to work to pay off a debt is not categorically forbidden in Scripture, for example.

So? What has that got to do with price of tea in China?

So, is it your position that your belief that "slavery is wrong" is not merely your opinion, but that it corresponds to an actual state-of-affairs? If so, then by what putative objective, universal, infallible, and knowable standard is slavery "wrong."

Typical thoughtful response. I would encourage you to reason more, and emote less.

Have a good night!

Slaves were taken in wars (of particular interest to the victors were the female virgins...I guess they made really good slaves). Offspring were born into slavery. The bible details how severely they can be punished. By any measure, this is ownership.

But I understand the apologists' need to justify everything in their Users Manual. Linguistic gymnastics don't change the fact: slavery was condoned (even encouraged) in the bible. You can obfuscate all you want, but it's repugnant. A really just, moral, loving god could have prohibited it. Why didn't he? Why didn't Jesus? (oops, that's redundant...after Jesus is god, right? He sired himself so that he could sacrifice himself to himself to forgive everyone's sins according to rules that he established and could have changed at any time, but it seemed a better idea to him to go through this convoluted method. Makes complete sense.)

So ridiculously laughable and archaic.

Lag,

If you haven’t done so, you probably should read Plato’s dialogue “Euthyphro”. It presents the very dilemma posed by defining morality in terms of divine will. The key question in Euthyphro is “Is an action just because it is pleasing to the gods, or is it pleasing to the gods because it is just?”

You seem to lean toward the former of these. This leads directly to a moral system where any action commanded by God is moral. Did God tell a mass murderer to go out and kill people? If yes, then that person acted morally. Did God tell someone to torture a child? If so, it’s perfectly moral to do so.

The problem with this system, beyond what should be obvious, is that it’s no more objective than any other system of morality. It’s still subjective; it’s just punting the subjectivity into q purported deity. God’s opinion of right and wrong holds sway, but it’s still a subjective opinion. To a sincere believer, I recognize that this is sufficient; if there’s an almighty being that can smite me for not listening to Him, I would generally listen. It’s still just God’s opinion, which ia not an objective standard. The standard is arbitrary and subject to change at the whim of God.

The argument that invariably follows is “God would never order X”, where X is some action that we would generally agree to be morally wrong. Well, why not? How do you know this? Where do you get off telling God what He will or won’t do? If, contrary to your assertion, God does order us to commit mass murder, then committing mass murder would be objectively moral.

God orders us to do things that are moral, and His orders are moral by definition. What then is the principle that places limits on what God will order? The idea that God would never order X would seem to indicate that one leans more toward the second option of Euthyphro, God orders actions because they are moral. God would not order certain actions because they are immoral. Actions don’t become moral because God ordered them; they were moral already and God’s job is to let us know which actions are moral. But this totally destroys the idea that God is the source of objective morality. If there is an objective morality, then God only shows us what it is.

Since we're all just repeating ourselves again, here is a post I made six months ago (Official Random **** thread) when you made the same claim about chattel slavery in the bible:

After you deflected from my question (you switched tactics as expected), I asked you again:

You again ignored my question (something I notice you doing a lot). I wonder, will you answer the question or not?

I earned a B.A. in Philosophy, and am familiar with the so-called Euthyphro Dilemma. It's actually a false dichotomy.

More later.

What does your degree in philosophy tell you about this god that slaughtered every child and fetus on earth? You walk the chthonic path for as long as you are willing to defend that for the superstition you believe in.

If some dude's life improved as a result from believing in god while also not negatively affecting anyone else's, would you consider that a good thing and something worth encouraging?

Oh that's easy!
Anytime god does something horrible (or allows something horrible to happen), you just shrug & say "Well... god works in mysterious ways!" ;-)

Yeah which just reveals what a shell game the whole thing is.

A. God is perfectly moral and loving
B. God killed every child and fetus on earth (for what someone else did thousands of years ago)
C. Therefore, killing every child and fetus on earth is moral and loving.

Voila! And I don't even have to think or be an agent in any way, but just be obedient to the evil savagery. Its only defense is that it doesn't exist in reality, but believing in it creates real abominations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iouZYYzQEjU

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html


QUESTION
Does the Bible condone slavery?


ANSWER

There is a tendency to look at slavery as something of the past. But it is estimated that there are today over 27 million people in the world who are subject to slavery: forced labor, sex trade, inheritable property, etc. As those who have been redeemed from the slavery of sin, followers of Jesus Christ should be the foremost champions of ending human slavery in the world today. The question arises, though, why does the Bible not speak out strongly against slavery? Why does the Bible, in fact, seem to support the practice of human slavery?



The Bible does not specifically condemn the practice of slavery. It gives instructions on how slaves should be treated (Deuteronomy 15:12-15; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1), but does not outlaw slavery altogether. Many see this as the Bible condoning all forms of slavery. What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.

The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. In the United States, many black people were considered slaves because of their nationality; many slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings. The Bible condemns race-based slavery in that it teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27). At the same time, the Old Testament did allow for economic-based slavery and regulated it. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing,” which is what happened in Africa in the 16th to 19th centuries. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8– 10).

Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16). A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery.

My degree in Philosophy doesn't tell me anything; it's a worthless piece of junk.

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. - Colossians 2:8


Since I don't believe in any superstition, your point is pointless.

And [Job] said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.

In all this, Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.

Job 2:21-22

So you went to university for a degree in a worthless piece of junk subject, and then taught it to students? Why?

You're going back into your mother's womb naked??

Now re-read my posts and address what I actually asked, if you are able.

eta: to avoid more deflection, here is what I asked:

Were you ignorant of the passages [describing chattel slavery] I posted or did you ignore them?

Double post

"All we can do now is correct the wrong thinking" ... that flies planes into towers and says it's from Holy God, that kills every child and fetus on earth and says it's from Holy God, that poisons public salad bars and says it's from Holy God, that commits mass suicide following a zealot maniac and says it's from Holy God, ad infinitum, i.e. this foolishness is without end.

In other words, you can stop this type of thinking if you choose (instead of abdicating and being obedient to superstitions).

+1