Response Refuting YouTube Atheist Myth Round Two

Brock makes the case that slavery was not so bad in the Bible and I quote the Bible directly to prove that is not the case.
I think that this video proves that the Bible is not defendable because Christians are slowly coming the realization that they cannot use its own words to defend it.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Brock
• Lawley
• TheAtheistAntidote
• flammamancer
• bible
• biblical
• slavery
• christian
• christianity
• religious
• dogma
• god

[Ephemerance]

It's all hypothetical of course, I'm just showing that the bible could be defended.

[Ephemerance]

The bible is often referred to as "the living word of God" and as such, it has to continually shift and role with the punches, as any system of law is continually reinterpreted to suit the nature of its people.

Much like a gardener, one could argue that God instilled us with a nature that would grow and evolve, but like a trellis to a vine, the bible (and other religious scripture) were designed to guide that process into a desirable end.

[Ephemerance]

Good vid.

If moral issues were what you were talking about earlier (in regards to the bible being undefendable), I'm not sure everyone would agree (religious or secular alike).

The bible-slavery issue was important from an anthropological sense because just as legalizing alcohol helped regulate consumption and content, so the bible helped regulate the way slaves should be handled. Slavery happens whether or not it's legal, but if it is legal and not underground, society can control it.

[garethac81]

Well done for calling this joker Brock on all his bullshit.

Your rebuttal is thorough, well supported, and destroys every point Brock makes.

[chessdawgz]

You rock, sir

[dewonthegrass]

You showed how ridiculous he sounds, point by point.

Thank you for doing that.