ZenMode
Well-known member
Yes, someone(s) had to be the first to propose everything.
The Bible doesn't prohibit slavery, yet you had Alcidamas and Aristotle (4th Century BC) both speaking out against slavery.
If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book
- Thread starter domer76
- Start date
The Bible doesn't prohibit slavery, yet you had Alcidamas and Aristotle (4th Century BC) both speaking out against slavery.
Where on earth did you read that?
No, Aristotle was pro-slavery and never advocated for it's abolishment. Aristotle also thought women were inferior to men in every important respect. The other guy you mentioned is totally obscure and has no impact on Western history.
Greece and Rome were pro-slavery in every respect.
If you read Aristotle, Plato, Confucius, Laozi, Aurelius, the Dhammapada, Nietzsche they are mostly writing about self-improvement and self-actualization. Homer and Virgil focused on courage and reputation.
The New Testament and some of the Jewish prophetic literature was practically unique in it's abiding emphasis on social justice, universal love, and openly siding with the poor and oppressed.
ZenMode
Well-known member
I may have been wrong about Aristotle, but not Alcidamas.
The fact that I grew up in a Christian country, and was obviously influenced by Christianity, doesn't mean that the Bible doesn't push clearly immoral behavior and neglect to condemn other immoral behavior.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
You mean the OT? It predates Aristotle by 3500 years. Greeks and Romans both had slaves as do most ancient cultures including Native Americans.
OTOH, as the link below notes, while the NT doesn't ban slavery, it provides a pathway to stopping slavery. Again, we're talking about a 2000-year-old society.
The odd part, as usual, is that you go after Christians, but never Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists anyone else. Odd, but typical of militant atheists.
Does the Bible condone slavery? | GotQuestions.org
Does the Bible condone slavery? Why doesn’t the Bible condemn slavery? What does the Bible say about slavery?
www.gotquestions.org
Even in the New Testament era, the Bible did not demand that every slave owner immediately emancipate his slaves. Rather, the apostles gave instructions to slaves and their owners on godly behavior within that social system. Masters were admonished on the proper treatment of their slaves. For example, in Ephesians 6:9 masters are told, “Treat your slaves in the same way [with goodwill]. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.” Elsewhere, the command is, “Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven” (Colossians 4:1).
Jesus and the apostles did not outright condemn slavery. They didn’t need to. The effect of the gospel is that lives are changed, one by one, and those changed lives in turn bring transformation to entire families, clans, and cultures. Christianity was never designed to be a political movement, but, over time, it naturally affected political policy. Alexander MacLaren wrote that the gospel “meddles directly with no political or social arrangements, but lays down principles which will profoundly affect these, and leaves them to soak into the general mind” (The Expositor’s Bible, vol. VI, Eerdmans, 1940, p. 301). In nations where Christianity spread and took firm hold, slavery was brought to an end through the efforts of born-again individuals.
The seeds of the emancipation of slaves are in the Bible, which teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27), which condemns those who kidnap and sell a person (Exodus 21:16; cf. 1 Timothy 1:8–10), and which shows that a slave can truly be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16).
Some criticize the Bible because it did not demand an immediate overthrow of every ingrained, centuries-old sinful custom of the day. But, as Warren Wiersbe pointed out, “The Lord chooses to change people and society gradually, through the ministry of the Holy Spirit and the proclamation of the truth of the Word of God” (The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, David C. Cook, 2007, p. 245).
ZenMode
Well-known member
The claim of Christians is that the Bible is the objective source for morality, so "societal" views shouldn't matter to God, right? Why would an all-knowing God encourage blatantly immoral behavior in this book? Why would he lay out a path to abolishing slavery and not say "No, it is not ok to enslave people or to kill them for working on the Sabbath and, no, you can't kill your new spouse on your wedding night if she's not a virgin".
It’s always bothered me why an all powerful god would not interact with humans directly, in person.
Still giving the religionists, especially the Christians, a bunch of shit.
Still avoiding my questions.
You are a product of BELIEF...just as they are.
You just believe differently from them.
And you do not have the balls to debate someone suggesting that both sides of the debate you favor...are just guessing about what you both suppose. The funny thing, though, is that you pretend you are being scientific and logical...which obviously you are not. The religionists, we all agree, are "believers."
Christianity is more than just the Bible, and it is Jesus a Christian is supposed to try to emulate - not David, Solomon, or Cain.
I've read a significant percentage of ancient literature, and the New Testament is almost utterly unique in it's emphasis on service to others, solidarity with the poor, and universal love.
All those ethics you thought you were going to write down to replace the Bible? You just smuggled them in from the western Christian ethos.
ZenMode
Well-known member
Yes, I'm pointing out what I believe are obvious flaws in their beliefs, holy book and generally logic.
I don't think I am.
Yes, but not all beliefs are equal. I believe that Elvis is dead, but I've never seen his body. I don't believe there are tentacled creatures or stuff that makes you glow in the Covid vaccines. Do I know either of those things to be true? No, but I'm very, very confident in my BELIEF.
Yes, but not all beliefs are equal.
There's nothing to debate. There's no new evidence for the Christian God or any other God man has believed in, so there's no reason my beliefs would change.
If you're talking about a unknown, creator deity floating around in infinity, the evidence for that also isn't convincing. The "evidence" being "well, all this stuff couldn't have just happened!"
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
It's weird. He condemns Christianity for not banning slavery 2000 years ago but not a fucking peep that Muslims still keep slaves.
Is anyone besides me sensing a very biased agenda on Mode's part?
ZenMode
Well-known member
Yes, over time, what is considered moral has changed, that's why there's a dramatic difference in god's approach between the OT and NT. That doesn't mean there's any connection to Christianity or the Bible, it's just that societal norms have changed and, in some cases, Christians have very much resisted.
For example, there's a Christian pastor in AZ that, as recently as the 2000's, was calling for the death of all homosexuals. The acceptance of homosexuals has come DESPITE the Bible/Christianity, not BECAUSE of the Bible/Christianity.
Christians have retroactively rationalized an acceptance of homosexuality by "reinterpreting" the Bible or simply not caring what the Bible says.
That's precisely how things have worked in nearly all religious cultures/civilizations. It becomes clear that past religious teachings are untenable by new societal norms and then it becomes a question of how religious leaders make that work.
As I am pointing out the lack of logic in yours.
I think you are, but I will suspend while we are actually discussing the issue.
Okay...I will accept that. But every guess about the true REALITY of existence is a guess...a blind guess. If you think your blind guess that there are no gods...or that it is more likely that there are no gods is more informed or logical or mathematically rigorous...you are wrong. Neither your blind guesses on those issues or those of theists is of greater value or logic.
Yeah, like most of the theists here are VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY confident in their beliefs...which means shit.'
Can you finally grok that?
They are not. But your beliefs and the theistic beliefs presented here...ARE EQUAL...NOTHING MORE THAN BLIND GUESSES ABOUT THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
I am not attempting to change your blind guesses. Your blind guess that there are no gods (if that is one of your blind guesses) MAY BE CORRECT. Your blind guess that it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one...MAY BE CORRECT.
No way I know. What in hell would make me want to change your blind guess from one to the other?
I have no idea of what that means, but I file it with the stuff in a folder labelled: THERE HAS TO BE A FIRST CAUSE AND OTHER RATIONALIZATIONS.
MY BLIND GUESS IS THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW THE TRUE NATURE OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE...JUST AS I DO NOT KNOW. And I am telling you point blank that your rationalizations that YOUR position on the issue is more logical and scientific than the theistic position is bullshit.
Let's actually discuss that. I think it would be very interesting.
Into the Night
Verified User
What content? You don't have any content! You're too busy playing word games!
Into the Night
Verified User
You can't make any evidence just disappear, Void. Argument of the Stone fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Yes there is...even in your religions.
The Bible contains many morals to follow.
Death is not a moral. Redefinition fallacy.
Illiteracy: Misspelling.
Into the Night
Verified User
What 'fields'? Are you trying to imagine the 'lines of force' described by Faraday?So in your mind, the strengths of the gravitational and electrical fields didn't decrease in strength according to an inverse square relationship until Newton and Coulomb wrote down inverse square equations and published them.
There was no 'inverse square law' until Newton.
Into the Night
Verified User
It is much more than the golden rule.
Regardless of which iteration is used.
I would suggest otherwise. Islam is used to enslave and brutalize, even each other.
Into the Night
Verified User
Why would an atheist be offended?