DoctorAlien:


To a Christian like me, Allah and Vishnu/Verdes does not exist. Jehovah alone is God, and He alone is qualified to be the universal moral arbiter.

But to Muslims and Hindus Allah and Brhama exist. You haven't shown that they don't exist. The Koran is the word of Allah and in it contains his objective moral system and values. So again even your God centered morality is ONLY subjective. It is subjective to the God of the bible.

DoctorAlien:
The issue of slavery usually conjures up thoughts of the harsh “race-based” slavery that was common by Europeans toward those of African descent in the latter few centuries. However, slavery has a much longer history and needs to be addressed biblically.1

Some “white”2 Christians have used the Bible to convince themselves that owning slaves is okay and that slaves should obey their “earthly masters.” Regrettably and shamefully, “white” Christians have frequently taken verses of Scripture out of context to justify the most despicable acts. In some cases, it could be argued that these people were not really Christians; they were not really born again but were adhering to a form of Christianity for traditional or national reasons. Nevertheless, we have to concede that there are genuine “white” Christians who have believed the vilest calumnies about the nature of “black” people and have sought support for their disgraceful views from the pages of the Bible.

But what does the Bible really teach?

Greek and Hebrew Words for “Slave”
The Hebrew and Greek words used for “slave” are also the same words used for “servant” and “bondservant,” as shown by the following table.

Greek and Hebrew Words for Slave
In essence, there are two kinds of slavery described in the Bible: a servant or bondservant who was paid a wage, and the enslavement of an individual without pay. Which types of “slavery” did the Bible condemn?

A Brief History of Slavery
It is important to note that neither slavery in New Testament times nor slavery under the Mosaic Covenant have anything to do with the sort of slavery where “black” people were bought and sold as property by “white” people in the well-known slave trade of the last few centuries. No “white” Christian should think that he or she could use any slightly positive comment about slavery in this chapter to justify the historic slave trade, which is still a major stain on the histories of both the United States and the UK.

The United States and the UK were not the only countries in history to delve into harsh slavery and so be stained.

The Code of Hammurabi discussed slavery soon after 2242 BC (the date assigned by Archbishop Ussher to the Tower of Babel incident).
Ham’s son Mizraim founded Egypt (still called Mizraim in Hebrew). Egypt was the first well-documented nation in the Bible to have harsh slavery, which was imposed on Joseph, the son of Israel, in 1728 BC (according to Archbishop Ussher). Later, the Egyptians were slave masters to the rest of the Israelites until Moses, by the hand of God, freed them.
The Israelites were again enslaved by Assyrian and Babylonian captors about 1,000 years later.
“Black” Moors enslaved “whites” during their conquering of Spain and Portugal on the Iberian Peninsula in the eighth century AD for over 400 years. The Moors even took slaves as far north as Scandinavia. The Moorish and Middle Eastern slave market was quite extensive.
Norse raiders of Scandinavia enslaved other European peoples and took them back as property beginning in the eighth century AD.
Even in modern times, slavery is still alive, such as in the Sudan and Darfur.
We find many other examples of harsh slavery from cultures throughout the world. At any rate, these few examples indicate that harsh slavery was/is a reality, and, in all cases, is an unacceptable act by biblical standards (as we will see).

The extreme kindness to be shown to slaves/servants commanded in the Bible among the Israelites was often prefaced by a reminder that they too were slaves at the hand of the Egyptians. In other words, they were to treat slaves/servants in a way that they wanted to be treated.

Slavery in the Bible
But was slavery in the Bible the same as harsh slavery? For example, slaves and masters are addressed in Paul’s epistles. The term “slave” in Ephesians 6:5 is better translated “bondservant.” The Bible in no way gives full support to the practice of bondservants, who were certainly not paid the first century equivalent of the minimum wage. Nevertheless, they were paid something (Colossians 4:1) and were therefore in a state more akin to a lifetime employment contract rather than “racial” slavery. Moreover, Paul gives clear instructions that Christian “masters” are to treat such people with respect and as equals. Their employment position did not affect their standing in the Church.

Other passages in Leviticus show us the importance of treating “aliens” and foreigners well, and how, if they believe, they become part of the people of God (for example, Rahab and Ruth, to name but two). Also, the existence of slavery in Leviticus 25 underlines the importance of redemption, and enables the New Testament writers to point out that we are slaves to sin, but are redeemed by the blood of Jesus. Such slavery is a living allegory, and does not justify the race-based form of slavery practiced from about the 16th to 19th centuries.

As we already know, harsh slavery was common in the Middle East as far back as ancient Egypt. If God had simply ignored it, then there would have been no rules for the treatment of slaves/bondservants, and people could have treated them harshly with no rights. But the God-given rights and rules for their protection showed that God cared for them as well.

This is often misconstrued as an endorsement of harsh slavery, which it is not. God listed slave traders among the worst of sinners in 1 Timothy 1:10 (“kidnappers/men stealers/slave traders”). This is no new teaching, as Moses was not fond of forced slavery either:

He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death. (Exodus 21:16)
In fact, take note of the punishment of Egypt, when the Lord freed the Israelites (Exodus 3–15). God predicted this punishment well in advance:

Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions.” (Genesis 15:13–14)
Had God not protected slaves/bondservants by such commands, then many people surrounding them who did have harsh slavery would have loved to move in where there were no governing principles as to the treatment of slaves. It would have given a “green light” to slave owners from neighboring areas to come and settle there. But with the rules in place, it discouraged such slavery in their realm.

In fact, the laws and regulations over slavery are a sure sign that slavery isn’t good in the same way the Law came to expose and limit sin (Romans 5:13). One reverend explained it this way:

In giving laws to regulate slavery, God is not saying it is a good thing. In fact, by giving laws about it at all, He is plainly stating it is a bad thing. We don’t make laws to limit or regulate good things. After all, you won’t find laws that tell us it is wrong to be too healthy or that if water is too clean we have to add pollution to it. Therefore, the fact slavery is included in the regulations of the Old Testament at all assumes that it is a bad thing which needs regulation to prevent the damage from being too great.3

You can write all of the excuses that you wish but if the authors of the Bible had any real sense of morality, or basic human empathy, they would have expressed it in their beloved prose by prohibiting slavery not rationalizing or regulating it.

When your religiously motivated politicians are against abortion do they ban it, or do they regulate it?

How about birth control?

Prostitution?

DoctorAlien:


To a Christian like me, Allah and Vishnu/Verdes does not exist. Jehovah alone is God, and He alone is qualified to be the universal moral arbiter.

You have just supported the argument that you were trying to counter.

mmsen:


You have just supported the argument that you were trying to counter.

Nope. I have only proven that as a Christian, my worldview is rational in that objective moral values exist, and they necessarily rest on the authority of God, the universal moral Arbiter. As a Christian, only Jehovah exists to prescribe moral values to me. It would make no sense to say that objective moral values exist, while still denying the existence of a universal moral Arbiter.

DoctorAlien:
You don't get it do you?

The issue is not whether I can do good acts without God; it is that without God:

1. There is nobody or group of persons to reveal what is objectively good. Whenever a person or group of persons says that a thing is good, they would be merely expressing their own opinion, which is by no means superior to any contrary opinion another person or group of persons might have.

2. There would be no objective reason to do good acts, or to avoid bad acts(that is if such things as "good" acts and "bad" acts can exist without God.)

Thus, if I throw God out of the picture, it would make no sense for me to say that I am doing good acts, or that I am a good person, because then I would have become "righteous in my own sight."

Don't make sense. There are general Good and Bad laws governing the universe and it has nothing to do with religion.

for example who will kill someone and say he did a good thing?, or who will help the poor and say he did bad thing?,

You can be Good without being a Christian.

DoctorAlien:


Nope. I have only proven that as a Christian, my worldview is rational in that objective moral values exist, and they necessarily rest on the authority of God, the universal moral Arbiter. As a Christian, only Jehovah exists to prescribe moral values to me. It would make no sense to say that objective moral values exist, while still denying the existence of a universal moral Arbiter.

Your worldview is not 'rational', nor is it objective if you need to keep qualifying your statements with 'as a Christian'.

2+2=4 whether you are an elephant, cow, donkey or Christian. That is objective.

Your statements of opinion are not fact.

dalaman:


But to Muslims and Hindus Allah and Brhama exist. You haven't shown that they don't exist. The Koran is the word of Allah and in it contains his objective moral system and values. So again even yiur God centered morality is ONLY subjective. It is subjective to the God of the bible.

If Jehovah exists(i.e if the Bible is true), then Allah and Bhrama and all other gods as they are described by other religions do not exist. If Allah exists(i.e. if the Koran is true), then Jehovah and other gods do not exist. All these gods can't exist together. The existence of one nullifies the existence of the others.

Therefore only one universal moral Arbiter exists, on whose authority rest the objective moral values. The identity of this universal moral Arbiter is a different question.

DoctorAlien:


If Jehovah exists(i.e if the Bible is true), then Allah and Bhrama and all other gods as they are described by other religions do not exist. If Allah exists(i.e. if the Koran is true), then Jehovah and other gods do not exist. All these gods can't exist together. The existence of one nullifies the existence of the others.

Therefore only one universal moral Arbiter exists, on whose authority rest the objective moral values. The identity of this universal moral Arbiter is a different question.

All 3 can be non existent and morality is just a creation of men. Who created the sharia moral code? What about the moral code espoused in the Verdes?

mmsen:


Your worldview is not 'rational', nor is it objective if you need to keep qualifying your statements with 'as a Christian'.

2+2=4 whether you are an elephant, cow, donkey or Christian. That is objective.

Your statements of opinion are not fact.

I thought he was being dishonest/pretending to be dumb when he kept replying my posts on this thread with strawman upon strawman, I now see he really doesn't understand by his subsequent posts

he still doesn't see that starting a statement with "As a Christian" makes whatever he says afterwards entirely SUBJECTIVE, he's shooting himself in the foot while believing he's shooting someone else

dalaman:

All 3 can be non existent and morality is just a creation of men. Who created the sharia moral code? What about the moral code espoused in the Verdes?

I'm an atheist but I'm afraid I have to agree with doctoralien here, there needs to be source of anything for it to be objective, you can even use it in another form

If there is no God, then there would be no objective flavor of cakes. It could be Pear and Walnut flavoured Cake, Chocolate Mud flavoured, Ginger Spice flavored, Vanilla Bean cake etc. It would just be completely arbitrary, pointless.Without God, who's to say that your choice of Cake is objectively right or better than what another person or a group of person choses? When you die, who is going to reward you for choosing the right flavor of Cake or punish you for choosing the wrong one? For an atheist to argue against God being the source of objective flavor of cake, he must admit that his favorite flavor of Cake is arbitrary and has no way of telling if its objectively right or not therefore one universal cake flavour arbiter exists

mmsen:

You have just supported the argument that you were trying to counter.

thank you! he doesn't see the irony

DoctorAlien:


1. There is nobody or group of persons to reveal what is objectively good. Whenever a person or group of persons says that a thing is good, they would be merely expressing their own opinion, which is by no means superior to any contrary opinion another person or group of persons might have.

How do you determine what is objectively good?
Has God ever called you to tell you what is good?

Efewestern:


Don't make sense. There are general Good and Bad laws governing the universe and it has nothing to do with religion.

for example who will kill someone and say he did a good thing?, or who will help the poor and say he did bad thing?,

You can be Good without being a Christian.

let me play the impasta's advocate here

I can kill someone and say I did good!, if someone is attempting to kill my daughter, I pull my gun, shoot at him and he dies, I can say I've done a "good thing" even though I just killed someone

"Who will help the poor and say he did bad?" Theists if the voice in their head (which they call their god's voice) told them not to help but they still went ahead to help

hopefulLandlord:

let me play the impasta's advocate here

I can kill someone and say I did good!, if someone is attempting to kill my daughter, I pull my gun, shit at him and he dies, I can say I've done a "good thing" even though I just killed someone

"Who will help the poor and say he did bad?" Theists if the voice in their head (which they call their god's voice) told them not to help but they still went ahead to help

lol.. the guy is just shooting himself in the foot, I myself am a Christian and I believe in God .

you can imagine him trying to relate good things to only Christianity when half the world population are not even Christian.

I watched a program yesterday on Aljazeera and this was actually the topic, an atheist was invited and believe me I so much enjoy the discussion.

mmsen:


According to the Quran and the Bible slavery is fine.

Domestic abuse is acceptable.

Rape is acceptable.

Child abuse is acceptable.

Meanwhile birth control is a problem.

Religion provides the most useless moral framework and that is why the most religious societies are also the most chaotic.

If you were a smart one, you'd pin a Bible passage beside every point you made.

Lolzz, you can't help yourself can you?

hopefulLandlord:

I'm an atheist but I'm afraid I have to agree with doctoralien here, there needs to be source of anything for it to be objective, you can even use it in another form

If there is no God, then there would be no objective flavor of cakes. It could be Pear and Walnut flavoured Cake, Chocolate Mud flavoured, Ginger Spice flavored, Vanilla Bean cake etc. It would just be completely arbitrary, pointless.Without God, who's to say that your choice of Cake is objectively right or better than what another person or a group of person choses? When you die, who is going to reward you for choosing the right flavor of Cake or punish you for choosing the wrong one? For an atheist to argue against God being the source of objective flavor of cake, he must admit that his favorite flavor of Cake is arbitrary and has no way of telling if its objectively right or not therefore one universal cake flavour arbiter exists

You've killed it.

Efewestern:


lol.. the guy is just shooting himself in the foot, I myself am a Christian and I believe in God .

you can imagine him trying to relate good things to only Christianity when half the world population are not

Christians are only 30% of the world's population . The remaining 70% are non christians.

DoctorAlien:
You don't get it do you?

The issue is not whether I can do good acts without God; it is that without God:

1. There is nobody or group of persons to reveal what is objectively good. Whenever a person or group of persons says that a thing is good, they would be merely expressing their own opinion, which is by no means superior to any contrary opinion another person or group of persons might have.

2. There would be no objective reason to do good acts, or to avoid bad acts(that is if such things as "good" acts and "bad" acts can exist without God.)

Thus, if I throw God out of the picture, it would make no sense for me to say that I am doing good acts, or that I am a good person, because then I would have become "righteous in my own sight."

hmm, you are looking at it from a narrow perspective.
some religious persons do good because their religion promises them reward for good and punishment for bad. would you do good if there were no reward or punishment

Efewestern:


lol.. the guy is just shooting himself in the foot, I myself am a Christian and I believe in God .

you can imagine him trying to relate good things to only Christianity when half the world population are not even Christian.

I watched a program yesterday on Aljazeera and this was actually the topic, an atheist was invited and believe me I so much enjoy the discussion.

Is this program on line? I wish u can get the link. Would love to watch it

dalaman:


Christians are only 30% of the world's population . The remaining 70% are non christians.

and only an extreme minority follow the BuyBull