• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why will our lives be better if there was no Religion.

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Slavery apologetics is disgusting. They were still owned as property, could be beaten, and women were not released.
And he ordered the unborn be ripped from the womb, every man and child slain, every woman who has known a man slain, while the virgins were to kept as sex slaves/war plunder. Not even the cattle and crop were safe.
Witch executions are very much based in superstition and not often as a political reason.
Affirming slavery, repression of women, and condemning homosexuals are a good start.

Which Bible verses do you have in mind.
It is Not homosexuals but rather homosexual acts (fornication) which are condemned.
God loves everyone. Jesus died for all, but God set sexual guidelines for all.

In what way was Abraham's wife repressed when God made a promise to Sarah at Genesis 17:16
In what way was Sarah repressed when God told Abraham to listen to his wife Sarah - Genesis 21:21
How were the daughter's of Zelophehad repressed because according to Numbers 27:7; Numbers 36:2 when those daughter's (women) were rightfully given the inheritance.
Did the female followers of Jesus feel repressed.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
You're describing indentured servitude, which is a voluntary arrangement that involves a quid pro quo: "I'll work for you and my labor is payment for my debt." Unlike slavery,the indentured servant is not beaten to the edge of death or beyond at whim of an owner, nor is his labor being stolen, nor his children sold.
Which of those do you suppose these describe:
  • "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and you can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly ( Lev. 25:44-46, NIV)."
  • "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property (Ex. 21:20-21, NIV)."
  • "I (the Lord) will sell your sons and daughters to the people of Judah, and they will sell them to the Sabeans, a nation far away (Joel 3:8, NIV)"
Sorry, but the book speaks for itself. This is slavery in the rawest, cruelest sense, and it is fully supported by the scriptures.

Where is the slave-trade business supported in Scripture. Those nations involved in the slave-trade business did deal ruthlessly whereas Leviticus 25:46 does Not allow for ruthless dealings.

God freed the Israelite captives according to Joel 3:1
Those who captured the Israelites were doing wrong according to Joel 3:3
The Israelites were sold to the Greeks according to Joel 3:6
So, God was passing adverse judgement against those nations.

Salves were to be treated as a hired helper and should be treated accordingly according to Leviticus 25:39-40
Didn't the Jubilee Year return every man to his possessions - Leviticus 25:13
Nor did Israel castrate their salves as a lot of other nations did.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Where is the slave-trade business supported in Scripture.

Err, how about the very first example.

Lev. 25:44-46, (NIV)
"44 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. "
In case you aren't aware, selling and buying is considered a business transaction. Gotta say, your selective reading is most entertaining. Just like your ignoring those passages that say hell is eternal. Cherry picking may be fun, even necessary, but it certainly doesn't impress.

.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Where is the slave-trade business supported in Scripture. Those nations involved in the slave-trade business did deal ruthlessly whereas Leviticus 25:46 does Not allow for ruthless dealings.

God freed the Israelite captives according to Joel 3:1
Those who captured the Israelites were doing wrong according to Joel 3:3
The Israelites were sold to the Greeks according to Joel 3:6
So, God was passing adverse judgement against those nations.

Salves were to be treated as a hired helper and should be treated accordingly according to Leviticus 25:39-40
Didn't the Jubilee Year return every man to his possessions - Leviticus 25:13
Nor did Israel castrate their salves as a lot of other nations did.

Sorry, but I can't buy into slavery, even if Jehovah and Jesus support it. And some of us are slack-jawed at seeing Christians defending it.

The thread is entitled, "Why will our lives be better if there was no Religion." Your religion teaches you to think this way. You don't see the unbelievers here making excuses for slavery. We condemn the practice.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Err, how about the very first example.
Lev. 25:44-46, (NIV)
"44 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. " In case you aren't aware, selling and buying is considered a business transaction. Gotta say, your selective reading is most entertaining. Just like your ignoring those passages that say hell is eternal. Cherry picking may be fun, even necessary, but it certainly doesn't impress.​

What passages say biblical hell is eternal.
Biblical hell ends up in a symbolic ' second death ' for emptied-out hell according to Revelation 20:13-14.
The Bible's hell dies out of existence, thus enemy death will be No more according to 1 Corinthians 15:26.

Israelites were Not selling other Israelites as we see in the history of some nations selling their own.
Israelites did Not kidnap and sell people - Exodus 21:16
Originally there was No establishing of slavery of any form in the paradisical Garden of Eden.
Rather, later humans established such systems that were tolerated for a temporary time.
That is why God gave instructions regulating the treatment of slaves to be in a humane manner.- Exodus 21:20; Exodus 21:26-27
The Bible does Not condone the mistreatment of slaves - Leviticus 25:39-40.
They were Not to deal ruthlessly with slaves - Leviticus 25:46 B
When a slave was released the master was to be generous toward him - Deuteronomy 15:13-14
They did Not castrate slaves as other nations did.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Sorry, but I can't buy into slavery, even if Jehovah and Jesus support it. And some of us are slack-jawed at seeing Christians defending it.
The thread is entitled, "Why will our lives be better if there was no Religion." Your religion teaches you to think this way. You don't see the unbelievers here making excuses for slavery. We condemn the practice.

Slavery was part of the economic system under the human Roman Empire, and 1st-century Christians were stuck living under that system of things. Jesus never taught to be an abusive slave owner. Slaves were to be treated as ' brothers ' according to Philemon 10:17; Philippians 2:3. Jesus nor any of this followers promoted slavery, so slavery is Not defended by Christians, but merely stating how it was under the temporary Constitution of the Mosaic Law.
The Golden Rule does Not allow for mistreatment of anyone.
There is Nothing in Genesis that enslavement of humans by other humans was God's purpose.
So, Christians condemn that out-dated system of slavery.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Slavery was part of the economic system under the human Roman Empire

It was also a part of the economic system of the antebellum American South. That's not a defense.

and 1st-century Christians were stuck living under that system of things.

Were they forced to own slaves?

Jesus never taught to be an abusive slave owner.

He never taught that slavery was immoral.

Slaves were to be treated as ' brothers ' according to Philemon 10:17; Philippians 2:3.

Apparently, there is no Philemon 10:17, and Philippians 2:3 says, "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves" Not much about treating slaves as brothers there.

Jesus nor any of this followers promoted slavery, so slavery is Not defended by Christians, but merely stating how it was under the temporary Constitution of the Mosaic Law.

Non sequitur. Besides, you can't know what Jesus' followers did.

The Golden Rule does Not allow for mistreatment of anyone.

The Golden Rule is mostly ignored. Most slave owners in the American South were Christians. The Golden Rule didn't help them much.

Nor was it much use to loving same sex couples that wanted to marry or even to get a wedding cake. The church fights homosexuals tooth and nail and defends the right of Christians to discriminate against them.

In America, Christians are presently trying to impose Christianity and its values on non-Christians by piercing the church-state wall and diverting public funds to the teaching of creationism, for example. Not very neighborly.

Evangelical Christians voted overwhelmingly for Trump, who promised to take away the health insurance of the working poor (Obamacare).

And then there's this from Trump supporter thought president would only deport ‘bad hombres.’ Instead, her husband is being deported. :

"a successful businessman, respected member of his Indiana town and father of three American-born children - languishes in a detention facility with hardened criminals as he awaits his deportation back to Mexico, the country he left in 1998 when he entered the United States illegally ... Supporters say the 43-year-old has never broken the law and doesn’t have so much as a parking ticket on his record. The mayor of South Bend, Ind., the conservative community that the Beristains call home, called him “one of its model residents."

That's how evangelical Christians voted. Where's the Golden Rule there?

The way that you and many other Christian apologists see and depict Christians and Christianity is not the way either appear from the outside looking in.

Humanists, who seem to have a much better developed moral compass, embody the Golden Rule much more faithfully than Christians. For example, humanists don't want to force their religious views on anybody. They support secular government and freedom of and from religion. That's what the Golden Rule would have one do.

There is Nothing in Genesis that enslavement of humans by other humans was God's purpose.

There is nothing anywhere in the Bible condemning slavery, and much to promote it.

So, Christians condemn that out-dated system of slavery.

America had slavery until the mid-19th century. And Christians fought Christians who defended the practice with their Bibles to abolish it
 
Last edited:

Thumper

Thank the gods I'm an atheist
...There is Nothing in Genesis that enslavement of humans by other humans was God's purpose...
But it is in Exodus when God is speaking directly and sets out rules concerning slavery, beginning at Exodus 21. This would actually be the 11th Commandment.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
That's pretty much how they started. There was no interest in a socialist transition or even rule by the proletariat. These nations we call Communist pretty much started as iron fist dictatorships.
The Atheism people under the name "communism" did try to experiment with a "No-God" rule but they failed miserably. They might try another time under the name "Secular Humanism". Is there a guarantee to have success this time?
Regards
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The Atheism people under the name "communism" did try to experiment with a "No-God" rule but they failed miserably. They might try another time under the name "Secular Humanism". Is there a guarantee to have success this time?
Regards

Secular humanists don't have a "No-God" rule for society, just for themselves. Secular humanism advocates church-state separation and freedom both of and from religion, but is averse to oppressing religion. The hope is that by promoting reason over faith, faith will wane. Making that case in the marketplace of ideas a very peaceful, tolerant, and democratic method.

Humanists deplore totalitarian regimes:
  • "We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others.
You're already been living under the secular humanist ideology and benefiting from it. The US Constitution was crafted with humanist ideals in mind.

Its preamble is consistent with a humanist worldview regarding government. Hence, instead of laws against blasphemy and worshiping a particular god, we have freedom of speech and of religion.

Under a theocratic government, you'd probably be out of luck if your religion wasn't the state religion. Humanism will protect you from that.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
It was also a part of the economic system of the antebellum American South. That's not a defense.
Were they forced to own slaves?
He never taught that slavery was immoral.
Apparently, there is no Philemon 10:17, and Philippians 2:3 says, "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves" Not much about treating slaves as brothers there.
Non sequitur. Besides, you can't know what Jesus' followers did.
The Golden Rule is mostly ignored. Most slave owners in the American South were Christians. The Golden Rule didn't help them much.
Nor was it much use to loving same sex couples that wanted to marry or even to get a wedding cake. The church fights homosexuals tooth and nail and defends the right of Christians to discriminate against them.
In America, Christians are presently trying to impose Christianity and its values on non-Christians by piercing the church-state wall and diverting public funds to the teaching of creationism, for example. Not very neighborly.
Evangelical Christians voted overwhelmingly for Trump, who promised to take away the health insurance of the working poor (Obamacare).
And then there's this from Trump supporter thought president would only deport ‘bad hombres.’ Instead, her husband is being deported. :
"a successful businessman, respected member of his Indiana town and father of three American-born children - languishes in a detention facility with hardened criminals as he awaits his deportation back to Mexico, the country he left in 1998 when he entered the United States illegally ... Supporters say the 43-year-old has never broken the law and doesn’t have so much as a parking ticket on his record. The mayor of South Bend, Ind., the conservative community that the Beristains call home, called him “one of its model residents."
That's how evangelical Christians voted. Where's the Golden Rule there?
The way that you and many other Christian apologists see and depict Christians and Christianity is not the way either appear from the outside looking in.
Humanists, who seem to have a much better developed moral compass, embody the Golden Rule much more faithfully than Christians. For example, humanists don't want to force their religious views on anybody. They support secular government and freedom of and from religion. That's what the Golden Rule would have one do.
There is nothing anywhere in the Bible condemning slavery, and much to promote it.
America had slavery until the mid-19th century. And Christians fought Christians who defended the practice with their Bibles to abolish it

Remember Jesus forewarned us that MANY would come ' in his name ' but prove false - Matthew 7:21-23 -
so, it should Not surprise that evangelical Christians don't apply the Golden Rule.

I see I need a proof reader, thanks for picking up about Philemon. It should be in connection to Onesimus at Philemon 1:16-17. Paul made an appeal for slave Onesimus who was to be treated as a brother, a friend.

We don't live under that 1st-century arrangement. The slavery of the South was part of a slave-trade business.
Until the soon coming ' time of separation ' of Matthew 25:31-33 there will be the genuine ' wheat ' Christians along with the fake ' weed/tares ' Christians both growing together until the coming harvest time. So, it was Not the genuine wheat Christians defending any slavery practice. Genuine Christians do Not impose Christianity, but merely present the good news about God's kingdom government as the coming solution to mankind's problems.
- Matthew 24:14; Acts of the Apostles 1:8
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
But it is in Exodus when God is speaking directly and sets out rules concerning slavery, beginning at Exodus 21. This would actually be the 11th Commandment.

Exodus was after man's fall from the paradisical Garden of Eden, Exodus is dealing with fallen mankind.
If a master mistreated, then the slave was No longer a slave but now free according to Exodus 21:26-27
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Remember Jesus forewarned us that MANY would come ' in his name ' but prove false - Matthew 7:21-23 -
so, it should Not surprise that evangelical Christians don't apply the Golden Rule.

I see I need a proof reader, thanks for picking up about Philemon. It should be in connection to Onesimus at Philemon 1:16-17. Paul made an appeal for slave Onesimus who was to be treated as a brother, a friend.

We don't live under that 1st-century arrangement. The slavery of the South was part of a slave-trade business.
Until the soon coming ' time of separation ' of Matthew 25:31-33 there will be the genuine ' wheat ' Christians along with the fake ' weed/tares ' Christians both growing together until the coming harvest time. So, it was Not the genuine wheat Christians defending any slavery practice. Genuine Christians do Not impose Christianity, but merely present the good news about God's kingdom government as the coming solution to mankind's problems.
- Matthew 24:14; Acts of the Apostles 1:8

I think that you and I have different ideas of what a genuine Christian is. It's all of them - anyone who calls himself a Christian and means it - not just the ones you approve of. Christians are what Christianity generates for better or worse.

Genuine Christians owned and beat slaves, and then picked up weapons to defend the right to continue doing so. They still haven't gotten over the defeat, and they're genuine Christians just like you.

And it is genuine Christians trying to pierce the church-state wall. Not all of them, but the ones that are are genuine Christians.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
I think that you and I have different ideas of what a genuine Christian is. It's all of them - anyone who calls himself a Christian and means it - not just the ones you approve of. Christians are what Christianity generates for better or worse.
Genuine Christians owned and beat slaves, and then picked up weapons to defend the right to continue doing so. They still haven't gotten over the defeat, and they're genuine Christians just like you.
And it is genuine Christians trying to pierce the church-state wall. Not all of them, but the ones that are are genuine Christians.

Jesus too had different ideas of what a genuine Christian is by giving us his illustration about the wheat and the weed/tares growing together until the harvest time. A harvest comes at the end of a growing season before there is separation. Jesus will be doing that separating according to Matthew 25:31-33,37

No, to me genuine Christian do Not try to pierce the church-state wall.
Jesus and his followers were always neutral in the affairs of the world.
They did Not even try get involved with the issues of the day between the Jews verses the Romans.
They did Not preach about piercing, but about the good news message about God's coming kingdom government in the hands of Christ Jesus as the coming solution - Matthew 24:14; Luke 4:43; Daniel 2:44
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Jesus too had different ideas of what a genuine Christian is by giving us his illustration about the wheat and the weed/tares growing together until the harvest time. A harvest comes at the end of a growing season before there is separation. Jesus will be doing that separating according to Matthew 25:31-33,37

No, to me genuine Christian do Not try to pierce the church-state wall.
Jesus and his followers were always neutral in the affairs of the world.
They did Not even try get involved with the issues of the day between the Jews verses the Romans.
They did Not preach about piercing, but about the good news message about God's coming kingdom government in the hands of Christ Jesus as the coming solution - Matthew 24:14; Luke 4:43; Daniel 2:44

Then it's agreed: We have different defintions of "genuine Christian."
 

Jeremiahcp

Well-Known Jerk
On the RF you constantly see the religious count down. More and more people leaving religion. Religion isn't necessary. Religion causes problems for everyone.

What I need to know is why is a world without religion going to be better.

Will Russia the US and China suddenly get along.
Will Pakistan and Israel suddenly become friends
Will North Korea become a paradise.
Will the US no longer have Women, Immigrant, Black, Gay rights problems.

Please give me you best thoughts for why a world without religion is going to be better. I am extremely curious.

I'll give you 2 problems
The RF will no longer exist.
You won't be able to use religion as your fall back for why everything is bad.

"
The RF will no longer exist.
You won't be able to use religion as your fall back for why everything is bad."

Eh, we can always substitute in politics.

I don't care what people believe just so long as they are practical about it and that goes for believers and non-believers. And I have never seen any real evidence that there is much of a difference in intellectual capabilities between the two groups.

Understanding is something you have to constantly work at, and I don't think everyone gets that, they form an opinion and then they stop. But we must never stop striving to understand the world around us, because what we believe is almost certainly wrong in some way.

No one here has the truth, and that is what our goal should be, the truth. But too many people, both atheist and theist, are more concern with their own opinions than truth. There are lovers of opinion and lovers of truth, and my opposition is to lovers of opinion. Don't get me wrong, it is OK to have opinions, just as long as they don't leave you stranded in the dark.

That said I do acknowledge that uncovering the truth is not always the easiest thing in the world, and sometimes it is easy to get lost in our beliefs. True understanding is actual work, something you have push for; however, it is very easy to have an opinion.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
"
No one here has the truth, and that is what our goal should be, the truth. But too many people, both atheist and theist, are more concern with their own opinions than truth. There are lovers of opinion and lovers of truth, and my opposition is to lovers of opinion. Don't get me wrong, it is OK to have opinions, just as long as they don't leave you stranded in the dark.
.

I personally believe and know a truth can be found and I believe many others have found it. The problem with the truth is that it is explained to you by your experiences with life. The answer is personal and not conveyable to others. The other problem you have is that it does nothing other then give you peace of mind. Its not a mystic revelation that takes you beyond this realm or gives you special powers. It just is a truth. You still have to deal with life as it is or choose to end this life. No one will believe you know it because you can't explain it to them, they have to find it themselves.
 

Jeremiahcp

Well-Known Jerk
I personally believe and know a truth can be found and I believe many others have found it. The problem with the truth is that it is explained to you by your experiences with life. The answer is personal and not conveyable to others. The other problem you have is that it does nothing other then give you peace of mind. Its not a mystic revelation that takes you beyond this realm or gives you special powers. It just is a truth. You still have to deal with life as it is or choose to end this life. No one will believe you know it because you can't explain it to them, they have to find it themselves.

I think I already shared my thoughts on that way of thinking.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Please give me you best thoughts for why a world without religion is going to be better. I am extremely curious.

I'll give you 2 problems
The RF will no longer exist.
You won't be able to use religion as your fall back for why everything is bad.

Faith based truth has never helped humanity.
There be science forums.
Religion is not acceptable as an excuse for anything.
 
Top