- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by SuzianneNo we can't move on.
NO.
Can we freaking move on now? Please?
Good grief, if this is all you atheists have to try and turn people against God, then you have a long, uphill fight ahead of you. I don't know how much more clearly I can say it: For (hopefully) the last time, mosaic laws do not apply to Christians.
Nor anyone in this day and age, but this is in my humble opinion only.
If the mosaic laws ever applied and were ever proscribed or condoned by your god then
that god is liable to be judged by those laws.
Those laws not only condone but advocate slavery.
We recognise that slavery is not, and never was moral.
Thus if your god ever endorsed (let alone authored) the mosaic law then your god was and
is not moral.
If god did not condone or author those laws then what the hell are they doing in your holy book.
Your god is evil. Your holy book proves it.
We are thus lucky it's also non-existent.
Originally posted by googlefudgesomeone , somewhere might care.
No we can't move on.
If the mosaic laws ever applied and were ever proscribed or condoned by your god then
that god is liable to be judged by those laws.
Those laws not only condone but advocate slavery.
We recognise that slavery is not, and never was moral.
Thus if your god ever endorsed (let alone authored) the mosaic law then your god wa ...[text shortened]...
Your god is evil. Your holy book proves it.
We are thus lucky it's also non-existent.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobieis it okay to tackle such an important moral such as slavery in such a brief way, leaving most of it down to insinuation? can you imagine the chaos if rather than having clear laws we had a bunch of insinuated laws?
because the verse is cited to demonstrate that inhumane treatment is punishable, not to determine any type of degree of severity of punishment as has been insinuated.
Originally posted by FMFyou know it is not. you simply take the opinion of one of the most fundamentalist and disconnected with reality posters on this website (who happens to be a christian) in order to trigger a response from normal christians/theists/atheists.
On page 14 of this Thread 150734, robbie stated that his version of God permits him to own slaves [as long as it does not break local secular law].
[b]FMF: What about twenty first century Christians? Are they permitted by God to own slaves?
robbie: If its not against the law, yes.
It came at the end of a lengthy dialogue.
Is this o ...[text shortened]... ion about the legitimacy of slavery even until this day a commonly held belief among Christians?[/b]
yes, fmf, it is wrong to own slaves.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by ZahlanziYet the bible doesn't seem to think that it is.
you know it is not. you simply take the opinion of one of the most fundamentalist and disconnected with reality posters on this website (who happens to be a christian) in order to trigger a response from normal christians/theists/atheists.
yes, fmf, it is wrong to own slaves.
The bible advocates keeping slaves.
Originally posted by googlefudgethe bible advocates me killing you for not believing exactly what i do. yet killing non-believers is not so mainstream anymore.
Yet the bible doesn't seem to think that it is.
The bible advocates keeping slaves.
the bible says a lot of things. think of it as a man who did drugs when he was young (and advocated slavery and genocide) but got very nice and wise later on..
then he went senile and talked about revelations.
the thing is, one must take what is good from the bible and from anything else in life, and dismiss the bad. just like you must not use rjhinds or robbie to judge all the christians in the world. or use dasa to judge whatever religion he is yelling at us over and over.
3 edits
Originally posted by Zahlanzithat is all very well, but the question is, does the Bible permit a Christian to own slaves and the answer is yes, you cannot escape it and i resent your portrayal of my spirituality because I have simply and honestly stated what the scriptural record states.
the bible advocates me killing you for not believing exactly what i do. yet killing non-believers is not so mainstream anymore.
the bible says a lot of things. think of it as a man who did drugs when he was young (and advocated slavery and genocide) but got very nice and wise later on..
then he went senile and talked about revelations.
...[text shortened]... ristians in the world. or use dasa to judge whatever religion he is yelling at us over and over.
You are however correct in one point, FMF is an internet troll who simply seeks to post here in order to solicit some kind of emotive response as is evidenced by making the issue personal to me and his failure to distinguish between oppressive forms of slavery and the principles under which it was permitted in the Bible. There are many types of modern slavery, from abduction, to sex trafficking, none of which would be permitted under Biblical conditions, that also is a gross misrepresentation and simply another reason why he is a slanderer. Frankly he is best kicked into touch, you will learn nothing from the emptiness of his posts other than to avoid them, period.
your estimation of the book of revelation betrays nothing more than a lack of scriptural knowledge, its not so hard to understand when put in the context of the entire Bible, in fact, it contains not a few direct quotations from elsewhere in the inspired cannon, but i understand we cannot know everything and study time may be at a premium.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis has not been discussed. It is not the topic at hand. I therefore have not failed to "distinguish" anything. The only "emotional" response there has been here is your apparent anger at being forced out into the open about your views on the legitimacy of slavery.
[FMF has failed] to distinguish between oppressive forms of slavery and the principles under which it was permitted in the Bible.
There are many types of modern slavery, from abduction, to sex trafficking, none of which would be permitted under Biblical conditions, that also is a gross misrepresentation and simply another reason why he is a slanderer.
In what way have I been guilty of "misrepresentation" of your views on "abduction" and "sex trafficking"? I have not discussed either with you. There has been no "slander".
Originally posted by FMFI have provided reasons, they have provided nothing but opinions, theirs, unsubstantiated at that, but i understand that opinion is the currency that you deal in and has somehow found legitimacy in your mind, so be it, the scriptural record stands and so far not a single person is able to refute it.
Thanks for responding.
1-2
robbie reckons yes.
Suzianne and Zahlanzi reckon no.
Any more Christians have a view on robbie's stance as laid out in the OP?