Seems a bit odd to say atheists have no morals, I mean pretty much all people follow some type of moral philosophy even if they don't realize it. Some might see morals based on things other than dominant unquestionable authority like yourself.
Bible morals :Witches, kill them. Homosexuals, kill them.fortunetellers, kill them. those who don`t listen to priests, kill them. those hitting their dad, kill them. those who curse their parents, kill them, adulterers, kill them. fornicators, kill them. people who believe in other religions, kill them. non-believers,kill them. fals prohets ,kill them. blasphemers, kill them. those who work on the Sabbath, kill them. This is the word of god. Amen Alleluiha !!
Here is a quote from one of yours, out of his book.. The Delusions of Disbelief " By Aikman. But then you spend more time demeaning atheists, then reading your own litterature: "This is not to say that atheists are worse in their behavior, on average , than people of religious faith. Obviously, this is not the case. As I stated before, individual atheists have been, and are , capable of examplary behavior.(sic)
Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Exodus 21:20-21 When a slave-owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives for a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner’s property.
1 Samuel 15:1-3 Samuel said to Saul, ‘The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, “I will punish the Amalekites for what they did in opposing the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” ’
Would you mind pointing out the proper context with which to view this verse?
Deuteronomy 22:20-21 If, however, this charge is true, that evidence of the young woman’s virginity was not found, then they shall bring the young woman out to the entrance of her father’s house and the men of her town shall stone her to death, because she committed a disgraceful act in Israel by prostituting herself in her father’s house. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
I do no believe in your made-up God and so I have no morals. Great! I'm going to come to your seminary and beat you to death just to prove your point that I am evil :))))
id like to know why you deleted the comments i made on your video of the very obnoxious prosumptions arrogant man talking about atheism. you are a coward.
@billsurlatete The reason is I took down about 3 videos the other day as I'm fed up of bashing atheism.If I keep doing it I will become like them with same old debates.Also I want to get back to who I am.I'm a preacher first and Bible teacher.Hope this makes things clear.I did not like the titles also I put on the videos,it is all to negative,I want to be more loving.Take care now from Jason.
@Zwemer100 your video was still online when i checked, it simply said "adding comments has been disabled". could you simply provide the information I asked about. noteably relating to archeological evidence referring to the resurrection and the miracles of Jesus to which you referenced (dont mension pliny tactavius or joesephus). thank you. i generally do want this information because id love to believe i will live forever.
@billsurlatete I put a link for you at the top of this video. The video you are talking bout sounds like Simons video,is it me talking or Simon?You can find what you need on DR Habermas site he is a world authority on the subject.
Christians have no morals whatsoever. No matter what evil they do- rape children-murder-steal- they need only ask forgiveness and tahdah! They are forgiven! Athiests understand that individuals are responsible for thier action; saying sorry does NOT clean up spilled milk.
@jimbocidman Not to mention that Christian believe that without the bible and god that we have no morals. Atheists believe we have morals without the bible and god. So if we have morals without those things and Christians require it to have morals then really deep down whom are the ones without inner morals? It scares me to think that they need a book to tell them to be moral.
i love when John 3:16 is quoted in this context, to show how much God loves us. even under the most basic scrutiny it doesn't make sense. god sending his son (who is him) to earth fora brief 36 years so that he can die to save humans (who he created) from sin (created by satan who is also created by him). this is not the same as me sending my son to die. i have no idea what would happen my son if i sent him away as i dont have god like will and knowledge. god made no sacrifice.
@Rocketryman Now now then please stop using my apologetic methods,your the cult. You know this as the videos clearly shows this to be so. If you still doubt go and see what is on you tube .You will find atheists doing videos saying how sick they are of the reason rally. Even atheists are saying the same as me. Come out of this New Atheist cult as soon as you can.
@Rocketryman Also go and have a look at Thunderfoots video for the Reason Rally.The one he made with only himself in it.You will find he sounds more like the leader of a cult every day.
@Zwemer10 i've been exposed to it for the first 20 years of my life, i regularly read the bible, infact i read the entire gospel of matthew a couple of days ago. i am facinated by the child like pettyness of it. i particularly enjoy the contradictions between even the infallible gospels. can you please explain christianity, in a way simple enouigh for me to understand.
Did you actually read my comment? Hitchens celebrated when Falwell died because he hated the man and all he stood for. You may call it being nasty (which puts you in the same camp as Fox news) but I call it being honest and showing integrity. Why would your view of a man change simply because he just died? Anyway, this is my last post for now because you are not the sort of person I normally like to communicate with.
@quarternoteable Well,I read your comment,but I thought what it said could not be from a normal person,but now you have said the meaning of the comment all I can say it is disgusting and shows how vile you atheists have become and how vile Hitchens was-how sick,how wicked,how evil can you be to celebrate a mans death on the day he died-your sick.
@Zwemer100 Hitchens hated Falwell when he was alive and he celebrated his death. He was honest, consistent and had integrity. Many Christians hated Hitchens when he was alive and, likewise, they celebrated when he died. I didn't agree with them because I had the highest regard for Hitchens, but at least I could respect their consistency. I can't have the same respect for you because you have shown yourself to be dishonest and a hypocrite of the highest order.
quarternoteable I don't lie . I have seen video interviews of Hitchens the day Falwell died and the day after and Hitchens layed into him. So it is not true what you are saying.Hitchens was a nasty proud man who has made a new cult of hate,that will in the next few years bring war on the streets of America,and Hitchens set the match.
@quarternoteable If you are so pure,then why don't you go to an atheists channel and the two of you can bash christianity together in the comfort of your own space with joy,with humility ,with love that you always do,your so sweet.
@Zwemer100 I'm in two minds about your channel. The level of bigotry you display and the evil nonsense you spout in the name of Christianity are simply mind-boggling. You also seem incapable of following simple logical arguments (that, I can forgive btw). Part of me wants to fight against this evil stupidity in the name of human decency. However, you daily do more damage to your religion, unaided, than any atheist could ever hope to achieve. I therefore feel strangely redundant.
@quarternoteable I'm so sorry that such a great mind of such high morality that you feel this way. You are so right. The intellectual brilliance you have shown and the moral perfection of your channel,makes me realize i'm not worthy to open my mouth in your presence.
@Zwemer100 OK lets talk about morals. When Hitchens died, you uploaded a video and with tear in eye said (amongst other things) that you felt like you had lost an older brother. You also sent 'heartfelt' condolences to his family. A month later you are dishonouring him by using a clip where he is clearly close to death and superimpose 'The Rise Of A New Cult?'. Shame on you sir. Anybody who gets a chance to see both videos will know what sort of person you really are.
@quarternoteable Now when a famous preacher died (Jerry Falwell) the next day Hitchens layed into him when the man had just died,at least I waited a month.Shame on you for what you have just said.
Morals can be instilled by religion, but aren't always. I personally believe religion was a failsafe created to keep people in check from making catastrophic decisions that could affect the human species. If one can tell right from wrong without it, then to each his own. Morals are not religiously imposed, their a measure of how an act will affect the human race. If in a beneficial way, the action is morally good, i.e. selfless acts which boost morale of others. that's my opinion in a nutshell
@Voxnulla You're right, of course. This one's a pretty inconsequential little gnat, but I still find it irritating. And insulting, and dishonest. And hypocritical. And incredibly stupid.
@Andraste77 Not to mention, intellectually fraudulent, ethically dubious and probably bad for the health and safety for our surroundings, species and planet as a whole.
MMmm perhaps ignoring isn't the best thing to do. I say we stick with loathing and ridicule!
@Zwemer100 1. It's You're, not your. 2. You won't find may definitions of cult that don't involve some supernatural belief. I do not have supernatural beliefs, as an atheist. That's pretty much it. But if you insist on calling atheism a cult, I'm happy to say at least my cult doesn't involve thinking my sins can be forgiven by the grisly torture & execution of an innocent individual, in a system set up by a different incarnation of that same individual, like YOUR death cult does.
@Zwemer100 There isn't a reason to assume that the term "cult" involves only small amounts of worshippers. Where would the lower limit be anyway? That feature has been attributed to the word by various groups following the supernatural to avoid it's negative connotation. You are part of a cult, so what? Try and disassociate yourself with it at much as you like, this shall not hide that religion recognizes itself in the definition of the concept of the "cult" and therefore denies it.
@Voxnulla loathing and ridicule!" Yep you said it kid! Well the atheists never counted on me ,I'm going to blast a whole so wide in your movement with Biblical truth you will beg me to stop doing the videos,so keep it up kid.
@Zwemer100 I wish you the very best with your efforts. You seem to have already met some success in blasting away basic syntax and punctuation. Blast away my dear chap.
@Voxnulla O i will,I followed back your comments on other channels,you are one of them atheists from the new atheists cult,full of sick hate,it is sad you have nothing better to do than go on christian channels saying silly and nasty things,if you email me I can send you a list of Hobbies,it might give you something better to play with,take care now.
@Voxnulla I think chess might be a good one for you,it will only take a few days for me to teach you,with your mighty brain it might only be in a day before you could play a game ,what do you think?
@Zwemer100 I think that you seem to fail to understand that I will not entertain your fallacious jabs. You can rant all you want on arbitrary things like how I should get a life, more hobbies and how I'm such a sad bastard, but I'm not interested in explaining ad nausea how thusly you fail argumentative reasoning and logic. Either you are unable or unwilling to understand such concepts or act like a man. It's stupidity that exposes you. I have to add no fuel to that and I know chess.
@Voxnulla O,now we are going for the high moral ground,like your a man of reason,you have not been showing that on some of the christian channels .So lets see how full of reason you are .In Martin Heidegger's interpretation of Dasein he does not think we have objective reality but reasons from action to knowledge,what justification do atheists have for assuming objective reality? Now if you take more than 10 minutes to reply just rememeber - I love you but don't take the mick again.
@Zwemer100 I have the moral highground! And you say the strangest things. Earlier on you wanted to teach me chess and now you expect me to sit and give-paw, debating contemporary philosophy with you? I think I'll pass on that one. I wonder how often you milked this particular displacement activity. I'll take "the mick' whenever It's suits the circumstances.
@Voxnulla I got you boyo,I got you,I got you,don't play with the big boys until you do some more study,take care,you can come on the channel as much as you want,you might learn a few things,and you can find a few good videos on Heidegger on the channel also,take care from Jason.
@Zwemer100 "until you do some more study... you might learn a few things"
This, of course is, always true! It is inherently what studying is for. I'm surprised you know that! What I'm also surprised about is your seemingly detailed knowledge of my prior curricula at various learning facilities. You have to because my refusal to fall into your obvious honey trap of hoop-jump arguments with a pinch of slander give you no such information. That or you haven't "got me".
@Zwemer100 - You've been talking to yourself on YouTube for months, so when is this 'whole' so wide in atheism you're promising?
By the way, that's "hole" not "whole." At the very least, if you want to make your mark for Christian apologetics, you should learn the basics of English grammar and spelling.
Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God by Paul Copan. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2010. Paperback; 222 pages plus endnotes. Amazon Price US$10.19. (Also available on Kindle and Nook.)
Copan concludes his book with a positive case for God’s moral excellence. You and I need not follow the New Atheists down their unstudied, unthinking path to ridiculously reflexive conclusions. God’s goodness stands up to scholarly examination. He is holy and just, and the God of all the earth shall indeed do what is right.
You're in idiot. God can not be god, should the creature of the old testament exist. The simple reason is this, it would take no more effort for him to create a garden world for all those who oppose him to occupy then it would for him to destroy them, and he chooses murder everytime. These are not the actions of a moral being.
It is yet another example of their self-serving, selective application of values they claim to hold dear; a further illustration of what really motivates them. And what is that? By all appearances, it’s not knowledge, science, or regard for morality or human distinctiveness. It’s that they are persuaded that there is no God, and they hate him.
Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris have pointedly refused to go there. The reason for that is transparent, or so it seems to me: they have locked themselves into an extreme atheism that blinds them to genuine scholarly insight and to the culturally sensitive treatment of peoples different than themselves.
Copan assures us that what he writes represents majority, mainstream scholarship. He also tells us that although he intended the book to be reasonably accessible to lay readers, he found it necessary to document his case in depth anyway—so if you question the scholarship, you have every opportunity to follow his sources and find out for yourself.
So here you have my short answer to a question that has no short answer. If it seems inadequate to you I say “Good: it ought to seem inadequate.” In this space I cannot begin to cover these topics with the depth they require. But I can at least point you in a direction where you can do the study for yourself.
He took them forward a step at a time. To fault this would be like faulting Abraham Lincoln for merely emancipating the slaves, when he ought to have selected a Black woman as his running mate.
God’s laws were in virtually every case a significant advance toward treating humans as fully humans, compared to customs among other peoples. God did not force Israel instantly into four or five millennia of social progress
Our contemporary conception of slavery just doesn’t fit the OT context; it was something else entirely. Again, was it ideal? Of course not. But it was progress for the time.
The same goes for other thorny issues, such as apparent maltreatment of women, and certain seemingly kooky laws and commands (don’t wear garments of mixed fiber, for example). Copan repeatedly reminds us it was an early age in the progress of humanity, a brutal age, one of horrific practices of child sacrifice, ritual prostitution, rape, slaughter, and a host of barbarisms beyond our imagination.
In fact a strong historical case can be made that the Israel’s practice of warfare, under God’s guidance, represented a considerable moral advance over the practices current among other peoples at the time. Was it ideal? No. But it was a step forward.
Further, in the few cases where total destruction actually can be responsibly inferred from the text (Jericho and Ai are examples), archaeology informs us that these were small military garrison cities with few non-combatants. The battles there were not the wholesale slaughter of thousands of civilians that many of us have supposed it was.
Copan demonstrates this with comparative literature from the time, and further proves his point by citing the Bible’s own guidance to the Israelites concerning how to deal with the population that remained after they were supposedly all destroyed—proof that total annihilation hadn’t really been undertaken at all.
Readers at the time of Moses, Joshua, Saul and David—the audience for whom the relevant passages were written—would have known that a report of total annihilation really meant something much less than that.
Linguistic practices were different in ancient Palestine than in contemporary Oxford, Cambridge, or New Haven, particularly as they pertain to war. Wild exaggeration (as we would view it today) was the norm.
The biggest moral question there is that of war and genocide. Copan shows in three well-documented chapters that to a great extent we’re just reading it wrong.
He also wants us to consider the altogether reasonable proposition that what God was doing with the Israelites was historically situated, and not all of it was intended as normative for all time. (Some of it was, and there are principles by which we can tell which is which.)
The Ancient Near East (ANE) was vastly different from 21st century Western culture—much more so than most of us have begun to suppose. This is the all-important reality Copan urges us to keep in mind as we consider the strange and often difficult passages of the Old Testament.
. As much as two thirds of the Roman empire were slaves (before the first century it was as high as 90%). By the first century AD an increasingly large number of slaves were being freed?so much so that Caesar had to write up laws that governed the procedure! Quite different from the Old South where only South Carolina had more slaves than freemen (so far as I know).
Slaves could marry, accumulate wealth, purchase their own freedom, run a business, etc. Cicero noted that a slave could usually be set free within seven years; in any case, under Roman law a slave would normally be set free by age 30. All this can be overstated, however. The revolt led by Spartacus in 73 BC caused Rome to treat slaves from the western regions more harshly (very similar to how black slaves were treated). Eastern slaves, however, enjoyed much greater freedom.
Although the masters had absolute rights over their slaves, they generally showed them respect, very unlike the South in the days of Lincoln. They often treated them with human dignity and, although they could beat them, such does not seem to be as regular a practice as it was in America.
They were often well-educated (cf. Gal 3:24 in which the "tutor" or better "disciplinarian" or "guide" of the children was usually a slave). The normal word for "slave" in the New Testament is the term dou'lo", a term that in earlier centuries usually referred to one who sold himself into slavery; later on, it was used especially of those who became slaves as the spoils of war.
Slavery in the first century was quite different from slavery in early American history. For one thing, Roman slaves were either taken as the spoils of war or were such because they sold themselves into slavery (known as "bond-servant").
but are better informed about social injustice and concerned enough to fight wrong practices through legal means. While they have no logical basis to do what they are doing, the real tragedy is that we who do have a basis to address these issues remain largely indifferent. May the Lord of Scripture open our eyes to see that God is interested in the redemption of the whole of creation and not just disembodied souls and spirits!
Those of us who say that we believe the Bible to be the Word of God have to raise our level of awareness and involvement regarding social issues. Having failed to do so, we have let these issues pass into the hands of those who may not be Christians,
Another reason many Christians continue to remain silent in the face of injustice is the platonic view of the cosmos we have adopted, implying that life in the hereafter is the only issue to be addressed, while we watch the world go by in its destructive way. Both mentalities are sadly misguided.
The time delay between the Word of Scripture and its implementation in society is often due to the “holy huddle” mentality prevailing among Christians who are largely unconcerned about issues outside of their immediate periphery.
On this principle, the Bible even lays the foundation for progressing far beyond what was possible in New Testament times by addressing the very economic discrimination and favouritism of which slavery is the worst expression (James 2:1-9; 5:1-6). Of course, lamentably, it must be admitted that the Church has taken many centuries to live out what Scripture taught long ago, and no doubt we continue to drag our feet
but demanded by biblical principles. The pre-fall statement that should guide and ultimately abolish such (and any) practices of superiority is the declaration that all humans—men and women—are made in the image of God.
While the Bible does not reject slavery outright, the conclusion that it actually favours slavery is patently wrong. Scripture does reveal that slavery is not ideal, both in Old Testament laws forbidding the enslavement of fellow Israelites, the law of jubilee, and in New Testament applications of Christ. In fact, the Bible teaches that the feeling of superiority in general is sin (Philippians 2:1-8)! The abolition of slavery is thus not only permissible by biblical standards
The regulation of slavery should therefore be seen as a practical step to deal with the realities of the day resulting from human fall. The aberrations that lead to alienation among individuals, races, and nations are the result of a fundamental broken relationship between humankind and God. Within this tragic scenario, Scripture comes as a breath of fresh air as it seeks to redeem the situation and sets us on a path of ever-increasing amelioration of our predicament
He makes it clear that certain Old Testament commandments were to be understood as concessions to the hardness of the human heart rather than as expressions of God’s holy character. He goes on to reference how this was not the state of affairs in the beginning—that is, before the fall.
He initially appears to play into their hands, asking what Mosaic Law has to say on the subject. When they gleefully quote the permission of Moses to divorce one’s wife, Jesus lays down a method of interpretation that has to be taken very seriously
The New Testament further gives us a paradigm to interpret Old Testament practices. In one of their notorious fault-finding missions, the Pharisees test Jesus on the subject of divorce (Matthew 19:1-9; Mark 10:2-9).
Even when Hebrew law and custom shared in the common heritage of the ancient world, there is a unique care in God’s Name for those people who by status were not considered people—something absent from the codes of Babylon and Assyria.
The word translated “alien” is not the same as slave, but the experience of the Israelites in Egypt was certainly that of slaves— Thus, we see the first statement on human rights: the alien was to be treated as a citizen; in fact, he was to be loved as one of their own (Leviticus 19:33-34).
As an example, on the way to Canaan, God tells his people through Moses that the alien, or foreigner, among them should not be oppressed (Exodus 23:9). The reason given is fascinating: the people of Israel know in their hearts how it feels to be oppressed!
The social elements of those narratives need not apply to us, and the ceremonial ones are largely fulfilled in the completed work of Christ. It is the ethical aspects of Old Testament teaching with which we should be concerned, and there is indeed much to consider.
To begin with, it should not be forgotten that the Old Testament narratives contain codes which are ethical, ceremonial, and social. Therefore, their application to the present day should not always be considered in literal terms.
What are the major developments in the New Testament that give us a clue to interpretation of Old Testament ethics? And are we expected to further extrapolate changes in behaviour beyond the New Testament times to the present day?
To address issues of this kind, we need to step back and ask three larger questions: What are the theological, political, and cultural contexts in which the Old Testament narrative unfolds, and how is the behaviour of God’s people in the Old Testament expected to be different from those of other cultures?
Not always a monetary payment, this may have taken the form of a gift of something considered valuable. The above passage does not merely offer applicable niceties, but provides laws protecting women who enter into marriage in this manner
In the days of the Old Testament, when a man sold his daughter as a servant, he allowed her entrance into a marriage covenant in which she approved. A man or his family typically initiated the sequence of steps leading to marriage. The Old Testament custom included the new husband or his family offering a bride price to the father of the bride.
The closest modern analogy would be that of an au pair. A slave would certainly perform much more strenuous tasks than the light housework required of an au pair, nevertheless similar interpersonal relationships would develop.
The slave signed a contract agreeing to serve the master’s family for a period of 7 years. At the end of this time, the Law required the cancellation of the contract. During the indenture period, the slave was entitled to all the rights of any other family member, except the right of inheritance.
Slavery in colonial America and Britain in the 18th century was fraught with racism and abuse, but in Old Testament Israel, entrance into slavery simply became a necessity for some. No one forced anyone else into slavery.
The reality of slavery cannot be denied. "Slave labor played a minor economic role in the ancient Near East, for privately-owned slaves functioned more as domestic servants than as an agricultural or industrial labor force."
So, even though it isn't the best way to deal with people, because God has allowed man freedom, slavery then exists. God instructed the Israelites to treat them properly
Slavery, like divorce, is not preferred by God. Instead, it is allowed. While many nations treated their slaves very badly, the Bible gave many rights and privileges to slaves.
Slavery was permitted in the Bible because of sin in the world. It existed before the Jews were formed as a nation and it existed after Israel was conquered. God allows many things to happen in the world such as storms, famine, murder, etc.
. New World slavery differs substantially from most ANE institutions labeled 'slavery', which themselves differed at significant points from OT slavery. We will try to make these distinctions clear, when they are relevant to the discussion.
Accordingly, I think--to avoid the inflammatory associations that naturally occur for Westerners when something is referred to as 'slavery'--it wise to carefully set out the structure of what we consider 'slavery' today, and compare that to the OT institution of 'Hebrew slavery'.
The king himself, if a vassal, was the "slave" of his emperor; kings, emperors, and commoners alike were "slaves" of the gods. Even a social inferior, when addressing a social superior, referred to himself out of politeness as "your slave." There were, moreover, a plethora of servile conditions that were not regarded as slavery, such as son, daughter, wife, serf, or human pledge."
"Freedom in the ancient Near East was a relative, not an absolute state, as the ambiguity of the term for "slave" in all the region's languages illustrates. "Slave" could be used to refer to a subordinate in the social ladder. Thus the subjects of a king were called his "slaves," even though they were free citizens.
even though children/family could be bought and sold, they were never actually referred to as 'slaves'--the property aspect (for such transactions) did NOT define explicitly the notion of 'slavery':
Generally, in the ANE, these 'fuzzy' boundaries obtain as well. "Slavery" is a very relative word in our time period, and we have to be very carefully in no auto-associating it with more 'vivid' New World examples. For example, in the West we would never say that the American President's Cabinet members were his 'slaves', but this term would have been applied to them in the ANE kingdoms. And, in the ANE,
From a global cross-cultural and historical perspective, however, New World slavery was a unique conjunction of features...In brief, most varieties of slavery did not exhibit the three elements that were dominant in the New World: slaves as property and commodities; their use exclusively as labor; and their lack of freedom
The reason is that the term "Slavery" is evocative rather than analytical, calling to mind a loose bundle of diagnostic features. These features are mainly derived from the most recent direct Western experience with slavery, that of the southern United States, the Caribbean, and Latin America. The present Western image of slavery has been haphazardly constructed out of the representations of that experience in nineteenth-century abolitionist literature, and later novels, textbooks, and films.
"Scholars do not agree on a definition of "slavery." The term has been used at various times for a wide range of institutions, including plantation slavery, forced labor, the drudgery of factories and sweatshops, child labor, semivoluntary prostitution, bride-price marriage, child adoption for payment, and paid-for surrogate motherhood.
Scholars in the ANE have often abandoned the use of the general term 'slavery' in descriptions of the many diverse forms of master-servant that are manifest in the ancient world. There are very few 'true' slave societies in the world (with Rome and Greek being two of the major ones!), and ancient Israel will be seen to be outside this classification as well (in legislation, not practice).
am a child of the Western World, and a native of the rural American South. The word 'slavery' is such a powerful vortex of images, meanings, cries, and grief to me. Any technical discussion of any type of forced labor or corvee becomes immediately inflamed when the word 'slavery' is attached to it, and I suspect that many others share this association.
for example, i am called to be a 'slave to Christ'...and to obey (within conscience and stewardship) the demands of oppressive governments...this area of cultural forms is notoriously difficult (in my opinion) so the Philemon situation is not at all decisive or instructive for me...(i am familiar, however, with those civil war debates, but consider much of that simply bad theological method)...simply put, i think the problem is more complex than a simple 'Paul hedged here'..
In the NT case, the problem is hugely complicated by the SEEMING position that ALL socio-economic institutions are 'neutral'; that they can be either used wonderfully or abused woefully
The specific case of slavery is more complex than first appears...there is no monolithic 'institution' of slavery in the bible--e.g. the OT has SEVERAL models of what might be called 'slavery' and much of what passed as slavery in the ANE is no longer considered such in socio-economic understandings of the period and area
I'm sick to death,sick of this stupid nasty atheism that has the cheak to throw a few Bible verses call the Bible sexist,at the same time you have nasty atheists riping up Bibles burning Bible on youtube and you try to make out that christianity is about hate.You are the ones pumping out hate,your a cult,a mindless silly cult that will bring war on the streets of America as you preach hate,your sick and need to come out of this atheist cult.
Gen 19: 6 So Lot went out to them through the doorway, shut the door behind him, 7 and said, “Please, my brethren, do not do so wickedly! 8 See now, I have two daughters who have not known a man; please, let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you wish; only do nothing to these men, since this is the reason they have come under the shadow of my roof.”
Ex 21:7 “And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her.
2 Kings 2:24 So he turned around and looked at them, and pronounced a curse on them in the name of the LORD. And two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
Ex 21: 20 “And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.
That's not true, MANY Xtians say Atheists don't have any religion. WE don't invent morality, it is intrinsic in nature. Morality is natural instinct and that has been scientifically proven! Even animals exhibit altrusim...no god need for that! I believe there is absolute or accurate morality...even as an Atheist...but this is true in the same way the Laws of Physics are true....no god is needed for them to exist.
The warm n fuzzy verses u r quoting do not change the immorality committed by the same god who claims to be thee moral authority. Do u really need the verses where slavery, racism, selling your daughter, god commanding a man to be stoned to death and killing 42 youths by having them mauled by bears? READ IT!
They have no moral foundaton and anything they desire at the molment rules their life.They certainly are mean people I get plenty of rude comments,I doubt a world ran by these people would be a very friendly and peacefull world,Oh wait thats right the World is secular.They don't even relize that some of the world leaders behind the scence worship molech,some babylonian owl and meanwhile they attack the Christians while their real enemy gets complete control of them.
@korzon "Oh wait thats right the World is secular."
Didn't you, like a second ago, go on about how we are a minority? That was actually pretty accurate, but now you seem like you're way into conspiracy theory land with NWO and the whole deal. Please go see a psychiatrist about that issue. You may be able to get medication for it.
Our real enemy, in the context of atheism, is of course "faith" in general. The license to believe things without evidence. Not just Christianity.
He is like the atheists pope lol.They have finaly made their non stamp collecting hobby into a religion,as well as have created some pretty wicked people as they are quite angry suffering from some parinoid delusion that everybody is forced to believe in GOD.This type of mental disorder is common with minorities,No different from the Napoleon syndrome.When you don't believe something you simply ignore it and go on with youre life,you don't go fighting people who do thats being a hypocrite.
@korzon "as they are quite angry suffering from some parinoid delusion that everybody is forced to believe in GOD.This type of mental disorder is common with minorities"
It's possible that it's quite common in minorities, but as it isn't what any of the New Atheists have claimed, we have to look for the delusions in your head.
@Gnomefro No you show all the signs of a mental disorder by creating some cult and act like the world favors religion over you.But in reality the UN is basicaly secular as they use democracy supposedly to make their rulings.They invaded Iraq and the dude had no WMD's.All these wars you see have nothing to do with religion,it's all ran by bankers/secularists yet you go barking up the wrong tree and attack Christians as Islam chants kill Christians and jews.
@Gnomefro Religion isn't why there are wars in the middle east.Those people have always been under british rule as they even owned the east indies as well as most the world as rome did.Unlike Christianity that preaches Love youre neighbor even youre enemies they Islam teaches the oppsite.But I guess all that doesn't matter because the secular view is hate youre enemies,and Islam hates the UN and US. mostly for always poking their noses in on their bussines and I can understand that.
@Gnomefro So the World is run by Secular bankers and lawyers and democracy and you belive Christianity has influence in this World rule?And being so delusional by believing that is insane.If you guys want some atheist holiday go ahead and have one it's not like Christians are attacking you.You are the ones attacking them.I'm Christian and I believe the Constitution says all Men have individual rights endowed by their CREATOR I have not a problem with this as even atheists have the same right.
@Gnomefro You don't want to be a Christian muslim jew or whatever you don't need to be.Just be yourself and leave the others alone and at peace.I don't follow sports like most people as they realy take it seriously like a religion even,Yet I don't go bashing on their fun or ridicule them or judge them I just don't do what they do.I am a minority in that almost every guy at my work is obsessed with it.People have even gotten violent lately one guy was beaten up in the news.Seculars do violence to
Seems a bit odd to say atheists have no morals, I mean pretty much all people follow some type of moral philosophy even if they don't realize it. Some might see morals based on things other than dominant unquestionable authority like yourself.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bible morals :Witches, kill them. Homosexuals, kill them.fortunetellers, kill them. those who don`t listen to priests, kill them. those hitting their dad, kill them. those who curse their parents, kill them, adulterers, kill them. fornicators, kill them. people who believe in other religions, kill them. non-believers,kill them. fals prohets ,kill them. blasphemers, kill them. those who work on the Sabbath, kill them. This is the word of god. Amen Alleluiha !!
ndzoko 2 weeks ago
Here is a quote from one of yours, out of his book.. The Delusions of Disbelief " By Aikman. But then you spend more time demeaning atheists, then reading your own litterature: "This is not to say that atheists are worse in their behavior, on average , than people of religious faith. Obviously, this is not the case. As I stated before, individual atheists have been, and are , capable of examplary behavior.(sic)
ndzoko 2 weeks ago
Context?
Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Exodus 21:20-21 When a slave-owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives for a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner’s property.
FosterZygote 2 weeks ago
What's the proper context of this passage?
1 Samuel 15:1-3 Samuel said to Saul, ‘The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, “I will punish the Amalekites for what they did in opposing the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” ’
FosterZygote 2 weeks ago
Would you mind pointing out the proper context with which to view this verse?
Deuteronomy 22:20-21 If, however, this charge is true, that evidence of the young woman’s virginity was not found, then they shall bring the young woman out to the entrance of her father’s house and the men of her town shall stone her to death, because she committed a disgraceful act in Israel by prostituting herself in her father’s house. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
FosterZygote 2 weeks ago
morals have nothing to do with religion dumbass =P
JesusManPowerKick 2 weeks ago
I do no believe in your made-up God and so I have no morals. Great! I'm going to come to your seminary and beat you to death just to prove your point that I am evil :))))
MrDarkbloom 3 weeks ago
id like to know why you deleted the comments i made on your video of the very obnoxious prosumptions arrogant man talking about atheism. you are a coward.
billsurlatete 1 month ago
@billsurlatete The reason is I took down about 3 videos the other day as I'm fed up of bashing atheism.If I keep doing it I will become like them with same old debates.Also I want to get back to who I am.I'm a preacher first and Bible teacher.Hope this makes things clear.I did not like the titles also I put on the videos,it is all to negative,I want to be more loving.Take care now from Jason.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 your video was still online when i checked, it simply said "adding comments has been disabled". could you simply provide the information I asked about. noteably relating to archeological evidence referring to the resurrection and the miracles of Jesus to which you referenced (dont mension pliny tactavius or joesephus). thank you. i generally do want this information because id love to believe i will live forever.
billsurlatete 1 month ago
@billsurlatete I put a link for you at the top of this video. The video you are talking bout sounds like Simons video,is it me talking or Simon?You can find what you need on DR Habermas site he is a world authority on the subject.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Christians have no morals whatsoever. No matter what evil they do- rape children-murder-steal- they need only ask forgiveness and tahdah! They are forgiven! Athiests understand that individuals are responsible for thier action; saying sorry does NOT clean up spilled milk.
jimbocidman 1 month ago
@jimbocidman Not to mention that Christian believe that without the bible and god that we have no morals. Atheists believe we have morals without the bible and god. So if we have morals without those things and Christians require it to have morals then really deep down whom are the ones without inner morals? It scares me to think that they need a book to tell them to be moral.
whitefire1997 2 weeks ago
i love when John 3:16 is quoted in this context, to show how much God loves us. even under the most basic scrutiny it doesn't make sense. god sending his son (who is him) to earth fora brief 36 years so that he can die to save humans (who he created) from sin (created by satan who is also created by him). this is not the same as me sending my son to die. i have no idea what would happen my son if i sent him away as i dont have god like will and knowledge. god made no sacrifice.
billsurlatete 1 month ago
@billsurlatete I think you don't understand Christianity,once you understand the theology it will make sense ,you need to be more open minded.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 - Christianity is a cult. When you understand the theology you quickly come to see (through open mindedness) how bogus it is.
Rocketryman 1 month ago
@Rocketryman Now now then please stop using my apologetic methods,your the cult. You know this as the videos clearly shows this to be so. If you still doubt go and see what is on you tube .You will find atheists doing videos saying how sick they are of the reason rally. Even atheists are saying the same as me. Come out of this New Atheist cult as soon as you can.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Rocketryman Also go and have a look at Thunderfoots video for the Reason Rally.The one he made with only himself in it.You will find he sounds more like the leader of a cult every day.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 - Now you are just chasing your tail. Good luck with that.
Rocketryman 1 month ago
@Zwemer10 i've been exposed to it for the first 20 years of my life, i regularly read the bible, infact i read the entire gospel of matthew a couple of days ago. i am facinated by the child like pettyness of it. i particularly enjoy the contradictions between even the infallible gospels. can you please explain christianity, in a way simple enouigh for me to understand.
#
billsurlatete 1 month ago
I'm an atheist and I don't state that my attitudes toward any religion have anything but personal meaning.
Morality can be sensibly explained by naturalism and reason. This makes god redundant in my eyes.
Next.
robtbo 1 month ago
Did you actually read my comment? Hitchens celebrated when Falwell died because he hated the man and all he stood for. You may call it being nasty (which puts you in the same camp as Fox news) but I call it being honest and showing integrity. Why would your view of a man change simply because he just died? Anyway, this is my last post for now because you are not the sort of person I normally like to communicate with.
quarternoteable 1 month ago
@quarternoteable Well,I read your comment,but I thought what it said could not be from a normal person,but now you have said the meaning of the comment all I can say it is disgusting and shows how vile you atheists have become and how vile Hitchens was-how sick,how wicked,how evil can you be to celebrate a mans death on the day he died-your sick.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 Hitchens hated Falwell when he was alive and he celebrated his death. He was honest, consistent and had integrity. Many Christians hated Hitchens when he was alive and, likewise, they celebrated when he died. I didn't agree with them because I had the highest regard for Hitchens, but at least I could respect their consistency. I can't have the same respect for you because you have shown yourself to be dishonest and a hypocrite of the highest order.
quarternoteable 1 month ago
quarternoteable I don't lie . I have seen video interviews of Hitchens the day Falwell died and the day after and Hitchens layed into him. So it is not true what you are saying.Hitchens was a nasty proud man who has made a new cult of hate,that will in the next few years bring war on the streets of America,and Hitchens set the match.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@quarternoteable If you are so pure,then why don't you go to an atheists channel and the two of you can bash christianity together in the comfort of your own space with joy,with humility ,with love that you always do,your so sweet.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Atheists just admit you have lost the moral argument,even Hitchens said it was not your strong point.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 I'm in two minds about your channel. The level of bigotry you display and the evil nonsense you spout in the name of Christianity are simply mind-boggling. You also seem incapable of following simple logical arguments (that, I can forgive btw). Part of me wants to fight against this evil stupidity in the name of human decency. However, you daily do more damage to your religion, unaided, than any atheist could ever hope to achieve. I therefore feel strangely redundant.
quarternoteable 1 month ago
@quarternoteable I'm so sorry that such a great mind of such high morality that you feel this way. You are so right. The intellectual brilliance you have shown and the moral perfection of your channel,makes me realize i'm not worthy to open my mouth in your presence.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 OK lets talk about morals. When Hitchens died, you uploaded a video and with tear in eye said (amongst other things) that you felt like you had lost an older brother. You also sent 'heartfelt' condolences to his family. A month later you are dishonouring him by using a clip where he is clearly close to death and superimpose 'The Rise Of A New Cult?'. Shame on you sir. Anybody who gets a chance to see both videos will know what sort of person you really are.
quarternoteable 1 month ago
@quarternoteable Now when a famous preacher died (Jerry Falwell) the next day Hitchens layed into him when the man had just died,at least I waited a month.Shame on you for what you have just said.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Morals can be instilled by religion, but aren't always. I personally believe religion was a failsafe created to keep people in check from making catastrophic decisions that could affect the human species. If one can tell right from wrong without it, then to each his own. Morals are not religiously imposed, their a measure of how an act will affect the human race. If in a beneficial way, the action is morally good, i.e. selfless acts which boost morale of others. that's my opinion in a nutshell
Martin23650 1 month ago
If you look some more you will find folk have made comments ,it tells you something.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
What a dishonest little puke you are.
Andraste77 1 month ago
ALL the comments on this video are by the uploader. Tells you something.
Zwemer100 - you should be ashamed and embarrassed for yourself.
Andraste77 1 month ago
@Andraste77 It doesn't take much to spot a zealot. Perhaps we should just ignore them passively like they ignore common sense actively ?
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla You're right, of course. This one's a pretty inconsequential little gnat, but I still find it irritating. And insulting, and dishonest. And hypocritical. And incredibly stupid.
Andraste77 1 month ago
@Andraste77 Not to mention, intellectually fraudulent, ethically dubious and probably bad for the health and safety for our surroundings, species and planet as a whole.
MMmm perhaps ignoring isn't the best thing to do. I say we stick with loathing and ridicule!
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla - I'm in!
Andraste77 1 month ago
@Andraste77 Your so sweet you atheists,the more you talk the more you show you are a cult.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 1. It's You're, not your. 2. You won't find may definitions of cult that don't involve some supernatural belief. I do not have supernatural beliefs, as an atheist. That's pretty much it. But if you insist on calling atheism a cult, I'm happy to say at least my cult doesn't involve thinking my sins can be forgiven by the grisly torture & execution of an innocent individual, in a system set up by a different incarnation of that same individual, like YOUR death cult does.
Andraste77 1 month ago
@Andraste77 Christianity is not a cult, for it is not a relatively small group of people.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 - All religions are cults. Get over it.
Andraste77 1 month ago
@Andraste77 Don't be silly.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 There isn't a reason to assume that the term "cult" involves only small amounts of worshippers. Where would the lower limit be anyway? That feature has been attributed to the word by various groups following the supernatural to avoid it's negative connotation. You are part of a cult, so what? Try and disassociate yourself with it at much as you like, this shall not hide that religion recognizes itself in the definition of the concept of the "cult" and therefore denies it.
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla loathing and ridicule!" Yep you said it kid! Well the atheists never counted on me ,I'm going to blast a whole so wide in your movement with Biblical truth you will beg me to stop doing the videos,so keep it up kid.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 I wish you the very best with your efforts. You seem to have already met some success in blasting away basic syntax and punctuation. Blast away my dear chap.
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla O i will,I followed back your comments on other channels,you are one of them atheists from the new atheists cult,full of sick hate,it is sad you have nothing better to do than go on christian channels saying silly and nasty things,if you email me I can send you a list of Hobbies,it might give you something better to play with,take care now.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 Real sad indeed. Also a very appropriate response from you! Impressive.
Don't worry about my hobbies, I collect them!
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla I think chess might be a good one for you,it will only take a few days for me to teach you,with your mighty brain it might only be in a day before you could play a game ,what do you think?
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 I think that you seem to fail to understand that I will not entertain your fallacious jabs. You can rant all you want on arbitrary things like how I should get a life, more hobbies and how I'm such a sad bastard, but I'm not interested in explaining ad nausea how thusly you fail argumentative reasoning and logic. Either you are unable or unwilling to understand such concepts or act like a man. It's stupidity that exposes you. I have to add no fuel to that and I know chess.
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla O,now we are going for the high moral ground,like your a man of reason,you have not been showing that on some of the christian channels .So lets see how full of reason you are .In Martin Heidegger's interpretation of Dasein he does not think we have objective reality but reasons from action to knowledge,what justification do atheists have for assuming objective reality? Now if you take more than 10 minutes to reply just rememeber - I love you but don't take the mick again.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 I have the moral highground! And you say the strangest things. Earlier on you wanted to teach me chess and now you expect me to sit and give-paw, debating contemporary philosophy with you? I think I'll pass on that one. I wonder how often you milked this particular displacement activity. I'll take "the mick' whenever It's suits the circumstances.
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Voxnulla I got you boyo,I got you,I got you,don't play with the big boys until you do some more study,take care,you can come on the channel as much as you want,you might learn a few things,and you can find a few good videos on Heidegger on the channel also,take care from Jason.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zwemer100 "until you do some more study... you might learn a few things"
This, of course is, always true! It is inherently what studying is for. I'm surprised you know that! What I'm also surprised about is your seemingly detailed knowledge of my prior curricula at various learning facilities. You have to because my refusal to fall into your obvious honey trap of hoop-jump arguments with a pinch of slander give you no such information. That or you haven't "got me".
Voxnulla 1 month ago
@Zwemer100 - You've been talking to yourself on YouTube for months, so when is this 'whole' so wide in atheism you're promising?
By the way, that's "hole" not "whole." At the very least, if you want to make your mark for Christian apologetics, you should learn the basics of English grammar and spelling.
Andraste77 1 month ago
Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God by Paul Copan. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2010. Paperback; 222 pages plus endnotes. Amazon Price US$10.19. (Also available on Kindle and Nook.)
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Copan concludes his book with a positive case for God’s moral excellence. You and I need not follow the New Atheists down their unstudied, unthinking path to ridiculously reflexive conclusions. God’s goodness stands up to scholarly examination. He is holy and just, and the God of all the earth shall indeed do what is right.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
@Zwemer100
You're in idiot. God can not be god, should the creature of the old testament exist. The simple reason is this, it would take no more effort for him to create a garden world for all those who oppose him to occupy then it would for him to destroy them, and he chooses murder everytime. These are not the actions of a moral being.
mordinvan 1 month ago
It is yet another example of their self-serving, selective application of values they claim to hold dear; a further illustration of what really motivates them. And what is that? By all appearances, it’s not knowledge, science, or regard for morality or human distinctiveness. It’s that they are persuaded that there is no God, and they hate him.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris have pointedly refused to go there. The reason for that is transparent, or so it seems to me: they have locked themselves into an extreme atheism that blinds them to genuine scholarly insight and to the culturally sensitive treatment of peoples different than themselves.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Copan assures us that what he writes represents majority, mainstream scholarship. He also tells us that although he intended the book to be reasonably accessible to lay readers, he found it necessary to document his case in depth anyway—so if you question the scholarship, you have every opportunity to follow his sources and find out for yourself.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
So here you have my short answer to a question that has no short answer. If it seems inadequate to you I say “Good: it ought to seem inadequate.” In this space I cannot begin to cover these topics with the depth they require. But I can at least point you in a direction where you can do the study for yourself.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
He took them forward a step at a time. To fault this would be like faulting Abraham Lincoln for merely emancipating the slaves, when he ought to have selected a Black woman as his running mate.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
God’s laws were in virtually every case a significant advance toward treating humans as fully humans, compared to customs among other peoples. God did not force Israel instantly into four or five millennia of social progress
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Our contemporary conception of slavery just doesn’t fit the OT context; it was something else entirely. Again, was it ideal? Of course not. But it was progress for the time.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The same goes for other thorny issues, such as apparent maltreatment of women, and certain seemingly kooky laws and commands (don’t wear garments of mixed fiber, for example). Copan repeatedly reminds us it was an early age in the progress of humanity, a brutal age, one of horrific practices of child sacrifice, ritual prostitution, rape, slaughter, and a host of barbarisms beyond our imagination.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
In fact a strong historical case can be made that the Israel’s practice of warfare, under God’s guidance, represented a considerable moral advance over the practices current among other peoples at the time. Was it ideal? No. But it was a step forward.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Further, in the few cases where total destruction actually can be responsibly inferred from the text (Jericho and Ai are examples), archaeology informs us that these were small military garrison cities with few non-combatants. The battles there were not the wholesale slaughter of thousands of civilians that many of us have supposed it was.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Copan demonstrates this with comparative literature from the time, and further proves his point by citing the Bible’s own guidance to the Israelites concerning how to deal with the population that remained after they were supposedly all destroyed—proof that total annihilation hadn’t really been undertaken at all.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Readers at the time of Moses, Joshua, Saul and David—the audience for whom the relevant passages were written—would have known that a report of total annihilation really meant something much less than that.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Linguistic practices were different in ancient Palestine than in contemporary Oxford, Cambridge, or New Haven, particularly as they pertain to war. Wild exaggeration (as we would view it today) was the norm.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The biggest moral question there is that of war and genocide. Copan shows in three well-documented chapters that to a great extent we’re just reading it wrong.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
He also wants us to consider the altogether reasonable proposition that what God was doing with the Israelites was historically situated, and not all of it was intended as normative for all time. (Some of it was, and there are principles by which we can tell which is which.)
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The Ancient Near East (ANE) was vastly different from 21st century Western culture—much more so than most of us have begun to suppose. This is the all-important reality Copan urges us to keep in mind as we consider the strange and often difficult passages of the Old Testament.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Copan is a student of Old Testament history and the Bible. Harris, Hitchens, and Dawkins are not. Therein lies the critical difference.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
. As much as two thirds of the Roman empire were slaves (before the first century it was as high as 90%). By the first century AD an increasingly large number of slaves were being freed?so much so that Caesar had to write up laws that governed the procedure! Quite different from the Old South where only South Carolina had more slaves than freemen (so far as I know).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Slaves could marry, accumulate wealth, purchase their own freedom, run a business, etc. Cicero noted that a slave could usually be set free within seven years; in any case, under Roman law a slave would normally be set free by age 30. All this can be overstated, however. The revolt led by Spartacus in 73 BC caused Rome to treat slaves from the western regions more harshly (very similar to how black slaves were treated). Eastern slaves, however, enjoyed much greater freedom.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Although the masters had absolute rights over their slaves, they generally showed them respect, very unlike the South in the days of Lincoln. They often treated them with human dignity and, although they could beat them, such does not seem to be as regular a practice as it was in America.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
They were often well-educated (cf. Gal 3:24 in which the "tutor" or better "disciplinarian" or "guide" of the children was usually a slave). The normal word for "slave" in the New Testament is the term dou'lo", a term that in earlier centuries usually referred to one who sold himself into slavery; later on, it was used especially of those who became slaves as the spoils of war.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Slavery in the first century was quite different from slavery in early American history. For one thing, Roman slaves were either taken as the spoils of war or were such because they sold themselves into slavery (known as "bond-servant").
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Does the Bible Condone Slavery?
by L.T. Jeyachandran on 22 March, 2011
Zwemer100 1 month ago
but are better informed about social injustice and concerned enough to fight wrong practices through legal means. While they have no logical basis to do what they are doing, the real tragedy is that we who do have a basis to address these issues remain largely indifferent. May the Lord of Scripture open our eyes to see that God is interested in the redemption of the whole of creation and not just disembodied souls and spirits!
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Those of us who say that we believe the Bible to be the Word of God have to raise our level of awareness and involvement regarding social issues. Having failed to do so, we have let these issues pass into the hands of those who may not be Christians,
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Another reason many Christians continue to remain silent in the face of injustice is the platonic view of the cosmos we have adopted, implying that life in the hereafter is the only issue to be addressed, while we watch the world go by in its destructive way. Both mentalities are sadly misguided.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The time delay between the Word of Scripture and its implementation in society is often due to the “holy huddle” mentality prevailing among Christians who are largely unconcerned about issues outside of their immediate periphery.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
On this principle, the Bible even lays the foundation for progressing far beyond what was possible in New Testament times by addressing the very economic discrimination and favouritism of which slavery is the worst expression (James 2:1-9; 5:1-6). Of course, lamentably, it must be admitted that the Church has taken many centuries to live out what Scripture taught long ago, and no doubt we continue to drag our feet
Zwemer100 1 month ago
but demanded by biblical principles. The pre-fall statement that should guide and ultimately abolish such (and any) practices of superiority is the declaration that all humans—men and women—are made in the image of God.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
While the Bible does not reject slavery outright, the conclusion that it actually favours slavery is patently wrong. Scripture does reveal that slavery is not ideal, both in Old Testament laws forbidding the enslavement of fellow Israelites, the law of jubilee, and in New Testament applications of Christ. In fact, the Bible teaches that the feeling of superiority in general is sin (Philippians 2:1-8)! The abolition of slavery is thus not only permissible by biblical standards
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The regulation of slavery should therefore be seen as a practical step to deal with the realities of the day resulting from human fall. The aberrations that lead to alienation among individuals, races, and nations are the result of a fundamental broken relationship between humankind and God. Within this tragic scenario, Scripture comes as a breath of fresh air as it seeks to redeem the situation and sets us on a path of ever-increasing amelioration of our predicament
Zwemer100 1 month ago
He makes it clear that certain Old Testament commandments were to be understood as concessions to the hardness of the human heart rather than as expressions of God’s holy character. He goes on to reference how this was not the state of affairs in the beginning—that is, before the fall.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
He initially appears to play into their hands, asking what Mosaic Law has to say on the subject. When they gleefully quote the permission of Moses to divorce one’s wife, Jesus lays down a method of interpretation that has to be taken very seriously
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The New Testament further gives us a paradigm to interpret Old Testament practices. In one of their notorious fault-finding missions, the Pharisees test Jesus on the subject of divorce (Matthew 19:1-9; Mark 10:2-9).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Even when Hebrew law and custom shared in the common heritage of the ancient world, there is a unique care in God’s Name for those people who by status were not considered people—something absent from the codes of Babylon and Assyria.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The word translated “alien” is not the same as slave, but the experience of the Israelites in Egypt was certainly that of slaves— Thus, we see the first statement on human rights: the alien was to be treated as a citizen; in fact, he was to be loved as one of their own (Leviticus 19:33-34).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
As an example, on the way to Canaan, God tells his people through Moses that the alien, or foreigner, among them should not be oppressed (Exodus 23:9). The reason given is fascinating: the people of Israel know in their hearts how it feels to be oppressed!
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The social elements of those narratives need not apply to us, and the ceremonial ones are largely fulfilled in the completed work of Christ. It is the ethical aspects of Old Testament teaching with which we should be concerned, and there is indeed much to consider.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
To begin with, it should not be forgotten that the Old Testament narratives contain codes which are ethical, ceremonial, and social. Therefore, their application to the present day should not always be considered in literal terms.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
What are the major developments in the New Testament that give us a clue to interpretation of Old Testament ethics? And are we expected to further extrapolate changes in behaviour beyond the New Testament times to the present day?
Zwemer100 1 month ago
To address issues of this kind, we need to step back and ask three larger questions: What are the theological, political, and cultural contexts in which the Old Testament narrative unfolds, and how is the behaviour of God’s people in the Old Testament expected to be different from those of other cultures?
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Not always a monetary payment, this may have taken the form of a gift of something considered valuable. The above passage does not merely offer applicable niceties, but provides laws protecting women who enter into marriage in this manner
Zwemer100 1 month ago
In the days of the Old Testament, when a man sold his daughter as a servant, he allowed her entrance into a marriage covenant in which she approved. A man or his family typically initiated the sequence of steps leading to marriage. The Old Testament custom included the new husband or his family offering a bride price to the father of the bride.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The closest modern analogy would be that of an au pair. A slave would certainly perform much more strenuous tasks than the light housework required of an au pair, nevertheless similar interpersonal relationships would develop.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The slave signed a contract agreeing to serve the master’s family for a period of 7 years. At the end of this time, the Law required the cancellation of the contract. During the indenture period, the slave was entitled to all the rights of any other family member, except the right of inheritance.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Slavery in colonial America and Britain in the 18th century was fraught with racism and abuse, but in Old Testament Israel, entrance into slavery simply became a necessity for some. No one forced anyone else into slavery.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
comments from carm apologetics site.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The reality of slavery cannot be denied. "Slave labor played a minor economic role in the ancient Near East, for privately-owned slaves functioned more as domestic servants than as an agricultural or industrial labor force."
Zwemer100 1 month ago
•The servitude of a Hebrew debt-slave was limited to six years (Ex. 21:2; Deut. 15:12).
•When a slave was freed, he was to receive gifts that enabled him to survive economically (Deut. 15:14).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
•The slave was required to rest on the Sabbath (Exodus 20:10; Deut. 5:14).
•The slave was required to participate in religious observances (Gen. 17:13; Exodus 12:44; Lev. 22:11).
•The Bible prohibited extradition of slaves and granted them asylum (Deut. 23:16-17).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
•The Bible acknowledged the slave's status as the property of the master (Ex. 21:21; Lev. 25:46).
•The Bible restricted the master's power over the slave. (Ex. 21:20)
•The slave was a member of the master's household (Lev. 22:11).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
So, even though it isn't the best way to deal with people, because God has allowed man freedom, slavery then exists. God instructed the Israelites to treat them properly
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Slavery, like divorce, is not preferred by God. Instead, it is allowed. While many nations treated their slaves very badly, the Bible gave many rights and privileges to slaves.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Slavery was permitted in the Bible because of sin in the world. It existed before the Jews were formed as a nation and it existed after Israel was conquered. God allows many things to happen in the world such as storms, famine, murder, etc.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
. New World slavery differs substantially from most ANE institutions labeled 'slavery', which themselves differed at significant points from OT slavery. We will try to make these distinctions clear, when they are relevant to the discussion.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Accordingly, I think--to avoid the inflammatory associations that naturally occur for Westerners when something is referred to as 'slavery'--it wise to carefully set out the structure of what we consider 'slavery' today, and compare that to the OT institution of 'Hebrew slavery'.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The king himself, if a vassal, was the "slave" of his emperor; kings, emperors, and commoners alike were "slaves" of the gods. Even a social inferior, when addressing a social superior, referred to himself out of politeness as "your slave." There were, moreover, a plethora of servile conditions that were not regarded as slavery, such as son, daughter, wife, serf, or human pledge."
Zwemer100 1 month ago
"Freedom in the ancient Near East was a relative, not an absolute state, as the ambiguity of the term for "slave" in all the region's languages illustrates. "Slave" could be used to refer to a subordinate in the social ladder. Thus the subjects of a king were called his "slaves," even though they were free citizens.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
even though children/family could be bought and sold, they were never actually referred to as 'slaves'--the property aspect (for such transactions) did NOT define explicitly the notion of 'slavery':
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Generally, in the ANE, these 'fuzzy' boundaries obtain as well. "Slavery" is a very relative word in our time period, and we have to be very carefully in no auto-associating it with more 'vivid' New World examples. For example, in the West we would never say that the American President's Cabinet members were his 'slaves', but this term would have been applied to them in the ANE kingdoms. And, in the ANE,
Zwemer100 1 month ago
From a global cross-cultural and historical perspective, however, New World slavery was a unique conjunction of features...In brief, most varieties of slavery did not exhibit the three elements that were dominant in the New World: slaves as property and commodities; their use exclusively as labor; and their lack of freedom
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The reason is that the term "Slavery" is evocative rather than analytical, calling to mind a loose bundle of diagnostic features. These features are mainly derived from the most recent direct Western experience with slavery, that of the southern United States, the Caribbean, and Latin America. The present Western image of slavery has been haphazardly constructed out of the representations of that experience in nineteenth-century abolitionist literature, and later novels, textbooks, and films.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
"Scholars do not agree on a definition of "slavery." The term has been used at various times for a wide range of institutions, including plantation slavery, forced labor, the drudgery of factories and sweatshops, child labor, semivoluntary prostitution, bride-price marriage, child adoption for payment, and paid-for surrogate motherhood.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
Scholars in the ANE have often abandoned the use of the general term 'slavery' in descriptions of the many diverse forms of master-servant that are manifest in the ancient world. There are very few 'true' slave societies in the world (with Rome and Greek being two of the major ones!), and ancient Israel will be seen to be outside this classification as well (in legislation, not practice).
Zwemer100 1 month ago
am a child of the Western World, and a native of the rural American South. The word 'slavery' is such a powerful vortex of images, meanings, cries, and grief to me. Any technical discussion of any type of forced labor or corvee becomes immediately inflamed when the word 'slavery' is attached to it, and I suspect that many others share this association.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
cooments from christian think tank
Zwemer100 1 month ago
i am still thinking through this, so dont take my comments as finished goods
Zwemer100 1 month ago
for example, i am called to be a 'slave to Christ'...and to obey (within conscience and stewardship) the demands of oppressive governments...this area of cultural forms is notoriously difficult (in my opinion) so the Philemon situation is not at all decisive or instructive for me...(i am familiar, however, with those civil war debates, but consider much of that simply bad theological method)...simply put, i think the problem is more complex than a simple 'Paul hedged here'..
Zwemer100 1 month ago
In the NT case, the problem is hugely complicated by the SEEMING position that ALL socio-economic institutions are 'neutral'; that they can be either used wonderfully or abused woefully
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The specific case of slavery is more complex than first appears...there is no monolithic 'institution' of slavery in the bible--e.g. the OT has SEVERAL models of what might be called 'slavery' and much of what passed as slavery in the ANE is no longer considered such in socio-economic understandings of the period and area
Zwemer100 1 month ago
I'm sick to death,sick of this stupid nasty atheism that has the cheak to throw a few Bible verses call the Bible sexist,at the same time you have nasty atheists riping up Bibles burning Bible on youtube and you try to make out that christianity is about hate.You are the ones pumping out hate,your a cult,a mindless silly cult that will bring war on the streets of America as you preach hate,your sick and need to come out of this atheist cult.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
The Genesis text 19:6 shows how sick people can be in wanting to rape angles and girls,that is what the text is saying.
Zwemer100 1 month ago
If god was love it would have most likely named itself love.
wideosvatcher 1 month ago
On rape...
Gen 19: 6 So Lot went out to them through the doorway, shut the door behind him, 7 and said, “Please, my brethren, do not do so wickedly! 8 See now, I have two daughters who have not known a man; please, let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you wish; only do nothing to these men, since this is the reason they have come under the shadow of my roof.”
julzabro 1 month ago
On sexism...
Ex 21:7 “And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her.
julzabro 1 month ago
On killing innocents...1 of 100s of examples...
2 Kings 2:24 So he turned around and looked at them, and pronounced a curse on them in the name of the LORD. And two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
julzabro 1 month ago
On slavery....
Ex 21: 20 “And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.
julzabro 1 month ago
That's not true, MANY Xtians say Atheists don't have any religion. WE don't invent morality, it is intrinsic in nature. Morality is natural instinct and that has been scientifically proven! Even animals exhibit altrusim...no god need for that! I believe there is absolute or accurate morality...even as an Atheist...but this is true in the same way the Laws of Physics are true....no god is needed for them to exist.
julzabro 1 month ago
The warm n fuzzy verses u r quoting do not change the immorality committed by the same god who claims to be thee moral authority. Do u really need the verses where slavery, racism, selling your daughter, god commanding a man to be stoned to death and killing 42 youths by having them mauled by bears? READ IT!
julzabro 1 month ago
Comment removed
julzabro 1 month ago
Comment removed
julzabro 1 month ago
They have no moral foundaton and anything they desire at the molment rules their life.They certainly are mean people I get plenty of rude comments,I doubt a world ran by these people would be a very friendly and peacefull world,Oh wait thats right the World is secular.They don't even relize that some of the world leaders behind the scence worship molech,some babylonian owl and meanwhile they attack the Christians while their real enemy gets complete control of them.
korzon 1 month ago
@korzon "Oh wait thats right the World is secular."
Didn't you, like a second ago, go on about how we are a minority? That was actually pretty accurate, but now you seem like you're way into conspiracy theory land with NWO and the whole deal. Please go see a psychiatrist about that issue. You may be able to get medication for it.
Our real enemy, in the context of atheism, is of course "faith" in general. The license to believe things without evidence. Not just Christianity.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
He is like the atheists pope lol.They have finaly made their non stamp collecting hobby into a religion,as well as have created some pretty wicked people as they are quite angry suffering from some parinoid delusion that everybody is forced to believe in GOD.This type of mental disorder is common with minorities,No different from the Napoleon syndrome.When you don't believe something you simply ignore it and go on with youre life,you don't go fighting people who do thats being a hypocrite.
korzon 1 month ago
@korzon "He is like the atheists pope lol.They have finaly made their non stamp collecting hobby into a religion"
Because he's making a nice speech for Hitchens before giving him an award? Pathetic.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@korzon "as they are quite angry suffering from some parinoid delusion that everybody is forced to believe in GOD.This type of mental disorder is common with minorities"
It's possible that it's quite common in minorities, but as it isn't what any of the New Atheists have claimed, we have to look for the delusions in your head.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro No you show all the signs of a mental disorder by creating some cult and act like the world favors religion over you.But in reality the UN is basicaly secular as they use democracy supposedly to make their rulings.They invaded Iraq and the dude had no WMD's.All these wars you see have nothing to do with religion,it's all ran by bankers/secularists yet you go barking up the wrong tree and attack Christians as Islam chants kill Christians and jews.
korzon 1 month ago
@Gnomefro Religion isn't why there are wars in the middle east.Those people have always been under british rule as they even owned the east indies as well as most the world as rome did.Unlike Christianity that preaches Love youre neighbor even youre enemies they Islam teaches the oppsite.But I guess all that doesn't matter because the secular view is hate youre enemies,and Islam hates the UN and US. mostly for always poking their noses in on their bussines and I can understand that.
korzon 1 month ago
@Gnomefro So the World is run by Secular bankers and lawyers and democracy and you belive Christianity has influence in this World rule?And being so delusional by believing that is insane.If you guys want some atheist holiday go ahead and have one it's not like Christians are attacking you.You are the ones attacking them.I'm Christian and I believe the Constitution says all Men have individual rights endowed by their CREATOR I have not a problem with this as even atheists have the same right.
korzon 1 month ago
@Gnomefro You don't want to be a Christian muslim jew or whatever you don't need to be.Just be yourself and leave the others alone and at peace.I don't follow sports like most people as they realy take it seriously like a religion even,Yet I don't go bashing on their fun or ridicule them or judge them I just don't do what they do.I am a minority in that almost every guy at my work is obsessed with it.People have even gotten violent lately one guy was beaten up in the news.Seculars do violence to
korzon 1 month ago
He forgot he likes to have sex with animals. Hitch was a pathetic coward and low life.
JesusChristDaily 1 month ago
@JesusChristDaily I cannot believe that someone would make that comment.
Danmill23 1 month ago
@Danmill23 You don't like truthful comments?
JesusChristDaily 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JesusChristDaily "He forgot he likes to have sex with animals."
Don't worry dude. You'll find someone else.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@JesusChristDaily Nice to see you taking the moral high ground...
ybra 1 month ago
@ybra No just stating facts.
JesusChristDaily 1 month ago