Do Christians support Gods acceptance of slavery?

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

haunting heaven

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

My stance is that we shouldn't worship something so inconsistent. I mean, yeah, we're all pretty inconsistent beings, but when you claim a being is all good, all powerful, and all knowing...

Not all Christians claim this. Just for the record.

Not all Christians do, but the book does.

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

bogosghost1

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

bogosghost1

Yes, I accept that slavery happened in the Bible. And yes, I accept that messed up stuff has happened and will happen in human history (people killing each other in wars, kids being born with incurable diseases). Christians accept that evil exists in the world and that corrupt institutions, practices, and governments are allowed to exist (for a time anyways).

Now you have to ask yourself, without any fear of being condemned to hell, if a an omnibenevolent, all knowing, and all powerful being would could create a world with free will and no evil(or any way for it to occur), and if said being could,

First of all, there are some things that God can not do, such as tell a lie or do something that goes against his holy character. Maybe it would be possible to create a world with free will and without the possibility for evil, maybe not I don't know. The fact that God is "holy" means that "unholy" exists or can exist by definition, at least in the realm of thought (the idea that God can be "disobeyed" in the first place)

Quote:

then why would they choose to create this?

I don't know for sure. I can tell you what I think, perhaps he wanted communion with like-minded people (friends, companionship, fellowship) and perhaps out of love (loved people enough to create them in the first place). The Bible does mention that man is the "pinnacle" of God's creation, people being created in the image of God.

But anyways as to why he would create a world that is messed up or where evil is allowed to exist, I can say perhaps a love out of free will would be more genuine, and the Bible notes that God tests people a lot. Also God and people would be more exalted by partaking in a story of redemption rather than people being perfect because they're perfect. Maybe it was in the plan since the beginning for redemption, or maybe it was never his intention that man sinned but still gave them the option. Also, the Bible says that God is perfect. It's easy to say how could this be or why would this happen, but perhaps it fits into the overall perfect plan, and if God really is the definition or author of perfection, than in the end God's plan is more perfect than what we can conceive of as being "perfect."

The term "perfect" doesn't necessarily mean good. You can come up with the perfect plan to screw something up. Perfect being as there is no way to alter the plan.

That, and you have to think. God gives you the will to follow him or not, but you go to hell if you don't follow him. That's like me holding you at gun point and demanding you to give me your money, but it's your fault you got shot.

[haunting heaven]

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

haunting heaven

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

My stance is that we shouldn't worship something so inconsistent. I mean, yeah, we're all pretty inconsistent beings, but when you claim a being is all good, all powerful, and all knowing...

Not all Christians claim this. Just for the record.

Not all Christians do, but the book does.

Actually, I would argue that it doesn't. There are certain passages that seem to suggest as much, but these can be interpreted as literary exaggeration. The OT describes the ending of nations as being the ending of "heaven and earth," for example. When you take into account the actual behavior of God, however, he is often shown as a being who does not know everything -- if he did, he could not feel regret, nor would he have to test the faith of his followers. It's harder to argue against omnipotence because regardless of what God does one can always argue that he could have chosen to do anything else in its place. But I would say that an omnipotent God would have to be omniscient, and that since he isn't omniscient, it follows that he is also not all-powerful. As for omnibenevolence, I don't think the Bible ever actually makes that claim at all. I think people infer it based on "God is love," but being defined by love doesn't necessitate perfect goodness.

[Toxic Solitude]

Hikarulawl

Toxic Solitude

Out of all the things you could complain about, this is what you choose? That not all Chrisitians believe the exact same thing? Wow.

All the things you can nitpick about, and this is what you choose?

Dude, the thing you're complaining about is literally your WHOLE point. I'm not "nitpicking."

Quote:

Quote:

First of all, stop saying "you" and "your" while talking to me. I never said I was a Christian. And the fact that you assume I am a Christian from what I said is very telling about what kind of person you are.

Fair enough. Still doesn't nullify my point about Christianity.

Maybe this doesn't, but it certainly makes you an assumptive a**, especially considering that you went on to mock me for supposedly being blasphemous.

Quote:

Quote:

Second, not all Christians believe that the Bible is infallible. There are plenty of Christians who will tell you that the Bible was written by men, that it may have been inspired by God but that humans will make mistakes and turn things around to their own interests and justifications.

I. AM. ********. Aware of that! Did the language change in a way that one can't articulate words that means the same damn thing without actually saying the phrase 'not all insert stereotype here'? I been repeating it several different ways to haunting numerous times. And here you go starting that s**t up again.

No, I didn't expect you to say "not all Christians," but you ouright said that Christians are SUPPOSED TO believe EVERY word of the Bible. That was your ******** claim, but it's WRONG. Christians do not have to believe every word of the Bible because, like I said, not all Christians believe the Bible to be infallible.

Quote:

Quote:

So, no, Christians are not "suppose[d] to believe every word of the bible." The only thing a Christian has to do is believe that Jesus died for their sins and accept him.

Yes I know of the only criteria of being a Christian. It's still doesn't nullify the hypocrisy from Christianity when prompt to explain why they believe in that particular religion. And I will gladly bet a 100 dollars that answer is the bible says. Which leads me back to Christians cherry pick their beliefs.

Dude, I can guarantee you that there are PLENTY of Christians out there that won't say that. Sure, there might me some Christians who use the whole circular reasoning bit to back up their beliefs, but to ascribe that problem to EVERY Christian makes no sense.

Now, I'm pretty sure you owe me a hundred dollars.

Plus, this doesn't have anything to do with Christians believing different things. What you seem to be complaining about here is the fact that Christians aren't giving you a sufficient answer for why they believe what they do.

But those are different things. And guess what? It doesn't matter if you're satisfied with their answers. They aren't Christians to please YOU, and people don't CHOOSE what they ******** believe, so maybe THEY don't even really know why they believe it; they just do.

Quote:

But every branch of Christianity will pick and choose what they want to follow and ignore what they don't agree with.

Quote:

Again, never said I was a Christian.

Love how you ignore the importance of the first sentence and just stick with reminding me of your not Christianity.

Love how you cut off the rest of my response even though it was part of what I said to the bolded quote above, but you know, if you aren't satisfied with how I answered something, I guess it just means I ignored it. rolleyes

Quote:

Quote:

Not agreeing with every word in the Bible doesn't mean a Christian doesn't agree with God. Remember, the Bible was written by MEN.

It's call cherry picking.

Um, no. Sometimes, Christians do cherry pick, but sometimes LOGIC entails that not everything in the Bible is true. If a Christian believes that God is all-loving, logically, they cannot also believe that he would condone slavery and rape and genocide.

Quote:

Quote:

And I'm not really seeing the issue. Christians are human. Yeah, they are going to believe different things. No group of humans is going to believe EXACTLY the same.

Of course you don't. You and haunting is so hung up on how humanity is guilty for falling for common fallacies like Appeal to Ignorance; while you all keep on ignoring the selected group I'm talking about.

I'm not ignoring the "selected group [you're] talking about." I'm pointing out your hypocrisy. Your current problem with Christianity is that they don't all believe the same thing, but this is not something that is done ONLY by Christians. YOU are the one who is ignoring THAT. Why is it wrong for Christians to believe different things but not other people?

Quote:

Quote:

Like I said before, Christians are not a hive mind and they aren't SUPPOSED to be a hive mind, either.

No s**t. Christianity have many different denominations of this religion. Which I mention countless times to haunting.

And yet you expect that they SHOULD be a hive mind. You claimed that they are SUPPOSED TO believe EVERY word of the Bible and that if they don't, they're committing BLASPHEMY.

Quote:

Quote:

And? That has nothing do with the fact there are plenty of Christians who are against it, which was my point and which was also the question asked: do Christians support God's acceptance of slavery.

And my point is the contradicting hypocrisy that Christianity as a whole is guilty of. Cristian A don't agree with slavery but agree with homosexuality being a sin. Christian B is in favor of slavery and would gladly use this holy text to support their suppose rights to slaves if it weren't for the law. B Christian don't agree with homosexuality being a sin. Both A and B will still be consider Christians.

Uhuh, yeah. But remember what I said before about the only thing you need to do/believe in order to be a Christian? Believing differently from another Christian doesn't mean ANYTHING.

Plus, this isn't hypocrisy. I think you're confused about what that word means. It would only be hypocrisy if Christians were saying that it's WRONG for people of a certain group to believe different things while they themselves were doing the exact same thing.

Quote:

Quote:

And, yes, there are Christians who will twist everything to back up what they as an individual believe (and there are certainly problems with that), but to say not every Christian believing exactly the same thing is the problem with Christianity just looks like you wanting to whine about and laugh at Christianity.

I'm running out of good head desk pictures to use.

Then maybe you should stop spouting bullshit and your head won't be so heavy that it falls down onto the desk.

Quote:

Quote:

I mean, that's why you made that thread asking about whether or not animals are religious, right? Because you thought their answers would "amuse [you]."

Not even damn close.

LOL! Really?

Hikarulawl

Yes I'm dead seriously about this question that no one have ever asked before. All you theists out there; do you believe that animals follows a religious belief in a god?

This should be interesting.

Suicide Suburbia

anywho, i think the more interesting question, tho, is why this question is directed only at theists?

Hikarulawl

This question is for anyone who wants to engage in discussion with me. I just really want to hear what a christian would say to this. It will amuse me.

You were saying?

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

haunting heaven

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

haunting heaven

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

My stance is that we shouldn't worship something so inconsistent. I mean, yeah, we're all pretty inconsistent beings, but when you claim a being is all good, all powerful, and all knowing...

Not all Christians claim this. Just for the record.

Not all Christians do, but the book does.

Actually, I would argue that it doesn't. There are certain passages that seem to suggest as much, but these can be interpreted as literary exaggeration. The OT describes the ending of nations as being the ending of "heaven and earth," for example. When you take into account the actual behavior of God, however, he is often shown as a being who does not know everything -- if he did, he could not feel regret, nor would he have to test the faith of his followers. It's harder to argue against omnipotence because regardless of what God does one can always argue that he could have chosen to do anything else in its place. But I would say that an omnipotent God would have to be omniscient, and that since he isn't omniscient, it follows that he is also not all-powerful. As for omnibenevolence, I don't think the Bible ever actually makes that claim at all. I think people infer it based on "God is love," but being defined by love doesn't necessitate perfect goodness.

Very true. In fact, love can make one do rather cruel things to people, but if God supposedly wants nothing but the most beneficial things to happen to his creation, then it would only make sense that he could do better than kill things and allow misery. Those are the opposite of beneficial. Playing metaphysical peek-a-boo with us isn't really beneficial either.

[Sugarbeary]

Paul in Romans 6 discusses the question lots of people have about 'fire insurance,' should I get saved to get to heaven and then just do everything like nothing changed. I present this to give the context of the passage.

In verses 16-18,

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

So, you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

[Arcoon Effox]

LoveLoud837

...you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.

LoveLoud837

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

...and the Bible says that slavery is OK. Are you saying that Uncle Tom's Cabin contains more credibility and value to Christian doctrine than the Bible does?

Because if you're not, this just feels like a red herring.

LoveLoud837

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

Non-sequitur.

The topic is not Christianity's influence on slavery, its whether or not Christians support their God's acceptance of it.

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

LoveLoud837

Paul in Romans 6 discusses the question lots of people have about 'fire insurance,' should I get saved to get to heaven and then just do everything like nothing changed. I present this to give the context of the passage.

In verses 16-18,

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

So, you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

Sin, by definition, is just anything that goes against Gods will. If it's a sin to refuse buying into a long story from a lack of sufficient evidence, then send me right to hell.

[Sugarbeary]

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

LoveLoud837

Paul in Romans 6 discusses the question lots of people have about 'fire insurance,' should I get saved to get to heaven and then just do everything like nothing changed. I present this to give the context of the passage.

In verses 16-18,

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

So, you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

Sin, by definition, is just anything that goes against Gods will. If it's a sin to refuse buying into a long story from a lack of sufficient evidence, then send me right to hell.

Well, you'd have to die first neutral

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

LoveLoud837

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

LoveLoud837

Paul in Romans 6 discusses the question lots of people have about 'fire insurance,' should I get saved to get to heaven and then just do everything like nothing changed. I present this to give the context of the passage.

In verses 16-18,

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

So, you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

Sin, by definition, is just anything that goes against Gods will. If it's a sin to refuse buying into a long story from a lack of sufficient evidence, then send me right to hell.

Well, you'd have to die first neutral

Sad how that's the only way to find out.

[Sugarbeary]

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

LoveLoud837

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

LoveLoud837

Paul in Romans 6 discusses the question lots of people have about 'fire insurance,' should I get saved to get to heaven and then just do everything like nothing changed. I present this to give the context of the passage.

In verses 16-18,

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

So, you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

Sin, by definition, is just anything that goes against Gods will. If it's a sin to refuse buying into a long story from a lack of sufficient evidence, then send me right to hell.

Well, you'd have to die first neutral

Sad how that's the only way to find out.

assurance

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

LoveLoud837

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

LoveLoud837

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

LoveLoud837

Paul in Romans 6 discusses the question lots of people have about 'fire insurance,' should I get saved to get to heaven and then just do everything like nothing changed. I present this to give the context of the passage.

In verses 16-18,

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

So, you are a slave to sin now if you are a nonbeliever, and if you become saved, you are a slave to righteousness. However you wish to paint the picture, we are slaves in this world. I would like to be a slave to righteousness.

Uncle Tom's cabin, the novel written that empowered America to stand against slavery, was written by a strong Christian and used Christian arguments.

internationally, slavery is the highest now than it ever has been in all of history, mainly through sex slavery, though there are areas with labor slavery. This means that the Christian influence is a non-factor.

Sin, by definition, is just anything that goes against Gods will. If it's a sin to refuse buying into a long story from a lack of sufficient evidence, then send me right to hell.

Well, you'd have to die first neutral

Sad how that's the only way to find out.

assurance

The thought that Jesus died for our sins removes the factor of owning up to our own wrongs. If you hurt somebody, Jesus's sacrifice should not remove your obligation to be forgiven by that person. I value the opinion of the person I've wronged more than the opinion of an unproven metaphysical being.

[Logic Not Included]

I haven't read anything in this thread, but I already know someone has said, "That's old testament stuff, so we can ignore that."

That argument doesn't hold up.

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

Logic Not Included

I haven't read anything in this thread, but I already know someone has said, "That's old testament stuff, so we can ignore that."

That argument doesn't hold up.

Surprisingly, nobody has actually said that. I've been waiting for it too.

[crystalpraise]

God has never accepted slavery in the bible😒