Johnny Skeptic

Are you saying that Jefferson Davis was right, and that people who wanted to free slaves were wrong? In addition, do you approve of slavery today? If not, why not?

ksen

I'm saying the Bible specifiy slavery as a sin. I'm not saying the Bible endorses slavery as a positive way to conduct business. And I'm not saying that the American system of slavery would have passed Biblical muster.

If we are to truly love our neighbors as ourselves then that ought to lead to wanting to see all men free. But given that even in today's world that doesn't happen then the next best thing is to treat those dependent upon you as humanely as possible.

Do I personally approve of slavery? No I don't. Would I have if I lived in Biblicl times? Probably and you probably would have too.

Why don't I approve of slavery? I don't approve of it because I think it goes against the spirit of "Love your neighbor." I also don't approve of it because I was raised in a culture that hates slavery. If I were raised in a different culture my views on slavery may very well be different.

In a perfect world everyone would be free. We don't live in a perfect world.

Johnny Skeptic

Better stated, no ancient religious book would ever be able to let everyone know how God wants them to act, which is one good reason why a loving God would never use one book as a primary means of communicating with humans over thousands of years. He would know that that would needlessly cause disputes over authorship, interpolations, and interpretation. I doubt that even a God would be able to inspire a book that would be nearly as effective as him directly communicating with everyone himself. Truly, there is no reasonable substitute for a tangible, present, hands-on dad, whether a human dad, or a heavenly Father. If the God of the Bible does not exist, that explains why no Christian can ask God for any tangible benefit and be assured that he will receive it, not food, shelter, clothing, or any other tangible benefit.

If a God inspired the Bible, I find it to be quite odd that he preferred convincing far more people to believe that President Bush exists than that he exists. On the other hand, if the God of the Bible does not exist, that explains that. If the God of the Bible does not exist, that explains lots of stange things that do not appeal to common sense, logic, reason, science, and morality.

If a God exists, I believe that Deists understand him better than anyone else does.

Johnny Skeptic

Where does the Bible say that slavery is a sin, book, chapter, and verse if you please?

Johnny Skeptic

Does that mean that God forced Jewish babies to suffer too when their parents were disobedient? If so, that is understandable since God forces innocent animals to suffer along with humans. In addition, does that mean that God did not kill Jews with hurricanes or any other supernatural disaster if they were obedient? I said "supernatural" disaster because from a Biblical perspective, there is not any such thing as a natural disaster.

Johnny Skeptic

If a loving God inspired the Bible, it is reasonable to assume that he would never tell Jews that if a Jew killed a Jew, he would be put to death, but if a Jew killed a slave, he would only be punished, but not punished at all if the slave recovered within a few days. It would not have been difficult at all for a God to provide proper oversight regarding the proper treatment of slaves. After all, he provided all kinds of oversight in many ways, i.e., Sodom and Gomorrah and the Ten Plagues in Egypt. If anything, the God of the Old Testament was quite strict, and not bashful regarding his agenda. For instance, he ordered the killing of Jews who worked on the Sabbath Day, cursed at their parents, and practiced the freedom of religion by worshipping other Gods.

The best conclusion is that the God of the Bible does not exist. If a God did inspire the Bible, in my opinion, he is immoral.

ksen

Whoops, I meant to type [does not specify slavery as a sin].

James Brown

We're not judging the ancient culture. We're judging the ancient God--the one that religious believers assert is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, the one that religious believers claim is the absolute standard for morality that all people of all eras agree upon.

Is it just a coincidence that humanity's ethics has evolved at exactly the same rate as the commands of the gods they worship?

Stephen T-B

One wonders: who led who?
Did Man lead this God, or did this God lead Man?

According to ksen, the Jews had a Man-led god. (Or should that be "a man-made god"?)

Johnny Skeptic

But that is exactly what critics of the Bible are saying too. It is not reasonable for anyone to assume that a loving God would tolerate the unfair abuse of certain groups of people in any era. Based upon my arguments in the opening post, I believe that the logical conclusion is that a loving, moral God did not inspire what the Bible says about slavery.

At the very least, it is reasonable for people to withhold accepting the God of the Bible pending his explanations for writings that he inspired regarding slavery. It is never rational to rubber stamp everything that any being says and does, especially if all of his written communications with humans are made through questionable human proxies, never tangibly, in person.