SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I'm sitting here trying to figure out what this has to do with anything I said or posed to you.
Thanks for recognizing that I come from a place of sincerity though.
-
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!
Christianity v. Secular Humanism
- Thread starter BilliardsBall
- Start date
Thanks for recognizing that I come from a place of sincerity though.
Then why the persistent on arguing that biblical morality is absolute?
Then can you answer these questions that I asked.
Before you answer, remember this biblical law (I'm paraphrasing), "obey your master with respect, fear and sincerity of your heart, just like you would for Jesus Christ."
It's not a violation of biblical law to beat a slave as long as the slave doesn't die within two days, knocked out a tooth, or damaged one eye to the point where the slave is blind in that eye. And none of those laws have anything to do with owning a human being as property. Also, a slave is not your "neighbor" that is why a slave does not have the same rights as a fellow Christian or Hebrew.
So, slavery violates the wellbeing of another human being, the slave, therefore slavery is immoral. Is that clear enough for you? Or are you still going to do more gymnastics and using irrelevant information to justify slavery?
BTW,
You do realize that you are saying that the Christians who believe that slavery is immoral, are in fact, immoral for disobeying God.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
I can cut to the chase. Morality outside the Bible (individual morality) is subjective. I started a thread to say de facto secular morality pales to the Bible (atheists break half the ten commandments daily, for example).
You claim morality comes from wellbeing for others, my wellbeing would be better if secularists left RF. I'm using an honest, raw example here, not to offend you, but you to show you that "wellbeing" is a moving target.
I hear your outrage against "Roots" slavery loud and clear. In a pre-industrial ANE, some slavery was horrid, but slavery in Israel was an economic exchange, with food and shelter for workers. I give up freedom almost daily to be on a job(s) and I see coworkers more than family. I AM a slave for wages.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Because biblical morality IS absolute. You are conflating "absolute right and wrong" with "right and wrong with nuances/degrees applied". Murder is absolutely wrong, we feel moral outrage when someone is a serial murderer, murders for lust rather to satisfy hunger, etc.
I don't understand what is wrong (inherently) with obeying a master. The Bible says all Christians are to (try to) do EVERYTHING as unto Jesus Christ. And you're not the first secularist to quote a verse about a slave being good to their master but no verses about the master being wonderful to a slave. Abraham pleaded with God to leave his vast wealth to his slave Eliezer, even after God told him he'd have a natural born son!
It IS a violation of biblical law and precept to knock out someone's tooth. RETRIBUTION is limited. There are also more laws condemning slavers than any other OT people group!
A slave IS your neighbor. You've missed extraordinary Bible verses like "Be kind to the Egyptian, for you resided in his land [as SLAVES!]!"
Usury is not permitted to Israelites, only Gentiles also. Is that because Jews show privilege in the horrible crime of usury to Jews? Do you own a credit card? USURY! USURY!
Do you want 1,000 other verses besides "Jews set free after seven years, Gentiles slaves for life" to show God provides for His Chosen above pagans and the unrighteous?
I hear where you're coming from on this emotional issue of slavery, and I sympathize, believe me, I do--I even appreciate your righteous anger, but I feel like I'm leading a Bible study for a person who has been saved two weeks, read half of a passage and two other verses on some secularist website, and got upset.
"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. 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...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) . . . " -- Source: http://christianthinktank.com/qnoslave.html
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
All morality is subjective, to some extent. In fact, I would say that morality is situationally-based.
I know this is true, because even among Bible believers like yourself, you guys can't even agree on all aspects of morality, and your interpretations of Biblical morality vary quite widely among the different sects of not only Christianity, but other religions as well. Your interpretation of morality from the Bible is indeed your subjective interpretation of morality.
No. I'm saying that's what morality is about. I don't know what else it would be about.
I never did get you to answer my question as to what you believe morality is about. I'm really quite interested in your answer to that.
Your well being is not lessened because you yourself have chosen to interact with other people on a message board that is free to the public. You don't have to be here. You choose to be here.
Slaves don't get to choose to be slaves or not.
That wasn't my example, but I would say that slavery, as described in the Bible is horrid and immoral and not that far off from "Roots" slavery. Even if it wasn't, owning human beings as property still isn't moral.
I'm tired of this, it was "nice slavery" excuse or attempts to frame it as "indentured servitude" (which I also find immoral, by the way). It wasn't. No slavery is "nice." Also, comparisons to being employed don't cut it either, as our employers don't own us as property and we are free to leave at any time. Kind of like your example about how your well being would be better if secularists left RF, when you yourself have made the choice to come here and are free to leave at any time.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
What's wrong with obeying a master?
How about the fact that you aren't thinking for yourself and therefore aren't even exercising morality to begin with. Morality has to do with considering and weighing the distinctions between right and wrong actions in light of the given situation. If you're simply obeying orders, you are not doing that; you are acting amorally, in that case.
And whose to say that the orders you are following are moral in the first place? You have to have made your own subjective moral decision that this entity your worship and obey is moral to begin with, based on your subjective interpretation of ancient texts.
Slaves aren't their neighbours; they are their property. They are people bought and sold from surrounding nations and tribes that lost wars to them. Also, as you've continually pointed out, we can clearly see the distinction between the way Hebrew slaves were treated and allowed to be freed after a certain time period, compared to captured/purchased slaves who were owned for life, and could be passed down to their masters heirs as property, including their wife and children.
There's no need for you to continue trying to convince us into believing that you know what you were talking about. You've already convinced us that you don't know what moral absolutism is, the moment you contradicted yourself. I suggest that you set aside your ego and admit that you didn't have a full understanding of what moral absolutism is, and because of that, your claim that biblical morality is moral absolutism, was in fact, wrong. By doing that, you might just learn and understand what "moral absolutism" is, and use it correctly in the future. What you've just said, is in direct contrast to moral absolutism.
Posting irrelevant ramblings, does not help your argument. It only helps to show that you are deflecting away from what is being discussed at hand.
Irrelevant. Asking whether or not it is immoral for a human being to treat his property in a certain way, is not the same as asking whether or not it is immoral for a human being to own another human being as property. Posting irrelevant ramblings, does not help your argument. It only helps to show that you are deflecting away from what is being discussed at hand.
Posting irrelevant ramblings, does not help your argument. It only helps to show that you are deflecting away from what is being discussed at hand.
Posting irrelevant ramblings, does not help your argument. It only helps to show that you are deflecting away from what is being discussed at hand.
Posting irrelevant ramblings, does not help your argument. It only helps to show that you are deflecting away from what is being discussed at hand.
Projection does not help your argument. Why would I get upset when I was able to constantly point out and explained why you're wrong every single time that you suggested that you were correct? And just because you are upset that I disagree with you about slavery and you weren't able to give a justifiable reason why slavery is moral in one case but immoral in another (morally right for a group of people but morally wrong for another group to be slaves), doesn't mean that I'm also upset, especially when I was able to give a justified reason for why slavery is immoral, exactly what you asked me. But you still haven't answered my questions. Are you unwilling to answer those questions because you're upset by those questions being asked? If you are, then you've proven my point. And saying that they're irrelevant to this discussion without giving a justified reason as to why, further proved my point. You are not willing to have your wellbeing be violated, which is relevant to the discussion, hence why slavery is immoral.
Posting irrelevant ramblings, does not help your argument. It only helps to show that you are deflecting away from what is being discussed at hand. I clearly specified the "type" of slavery in the bible that I was talking about, that is, the same one that is in an episode of Roots, which you initially agreed on it being immoral before you started your back peddling. It's like I'm teaching biblical slavery to a Christian who never read the bible before and is surprised and in denial to hear what is actually written in the bible.
PS
Instead of dodging my point by not answering my questions, how about you address my point by answering the questions that I asked. After all, I did answered your question, it's only fair for you to do the same. If you are upset by those questions, it's understandable, just simply tell me that you are upset with those questions being asked and we can leave it at that.
I believe that I've found the answer. Well, at least one of them, since there were numerous occasions of backpedaling.
So one variation of morality that BilliardsBall holds to is, whether or not it's against the law of your government.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
All personal/individual morality is subjective, however, differing interpretations of a text do not exclude the text itself from having an objective morality. Here is an example of such text: Rape is always wrong. Interpret that as you please and the text remains framed as an absolute using the word "always".
Morality (to me) is about how closely a person adheres to biblical morality. How did you not understand this before asking me this question again . . . ? Jesus said His words will judge people on Judgment Day. How much do I love my neighbor? Evangelize? Show fidelity to my spouse? Honor my parents, etc. That's a reason for me posting that secularist are inherently immoral, a cursory look at the decalogue confirms their lack of adherence to biblical standards.
Most of what you worry about concerning slavery in ancient Israel (or choice and this forum) applies to modern employment. Choice of work assignment, work location, hours of work, etc. are not in our realm of choice.
As quoted in my source, Israelite slaves were much closed to employees. Several thousand words on the subject, including most of the other questions you might or will pose, are here: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
If you follow orders, you're not acting morally. True, and there are many subtleties in how one obeys orders, for example, this NT passage, "Bondservants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing God. 23 And whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not to men," - Col 3 -- an opportunity for the slaves you worry cannot act as moral agents to work as moral agents--a passage from the Bible I've tried to use at work--do good work even when you're not being watched. Do you follow that standard in relationships (fidelity) and at work?
Do you have a ancient or modern Jewish source or Talmud passage that says a slave isn't a neighbor? I disagree with your interpretation and I've never, never, never heard a born again say a person in modern slavery or ancient, sex trafficking or human trafficking, isn't a person. That's one reason my wife and I support an agency that rescues young people from sex trafficking overseas. We've given them thousands of dollars because sex slaves are PEOPLE, not PROPERTY, of course!
And the very first paragraphs here show you are misunderstanding the word "property" in the passages being discussed: Christianity v. Secular Humanism
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
I will respond better if you are kind in your words. Demonizing your debate opponent ("you're rambling") not only loses, not wins, most arguments in the eyes of the debate audience, but shows you lack the moral strength (yes, I get the irony) and facts to debate your side.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Morality of an individual is measured by their adherence to biblical morality. Jesus said His words will judge us both, on Judgment Day.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Let's stick with slavery please. Please point out the part of the Bible that says "Slavery is always wrong."
If none of the readers of the text can come to a consensus about what objective universal morality is actually outlined within it, then it's not all that helpful, is it?
I'd prefer to move beyond Iron Age ideas and understandings about morality because they are of little use to people living in the 21st Century who fully recognize that slavery is immoral, regardless of what ancient texts have to say about it being okay.
Then we are not talking about the same thing at all. I don't think morality has anything to do with adhering to Iron Age ideas about the human condition. I think we've moved well beyond that. Thankfully.
Also, this is the umpteenth time you have ignored my argument that blindly obeying orders is not an exercise in morality at all, as morality involves making thoughtful decisions about the consequences of our actions in regards to the wrongness or rightness of said actions. If we're following orders, we are not doing that.
However, you have used your own judgment to decide that the moral giver (the God you worship) is moral in the first place. Your views don't appear to be as objective as you make them out to be.
If I ask you a question, it's because I'm not clear on your position. Let's face facts here, you often do not answer my questions at all.
And here's that sugar coating I was talking about ...
None of what I said applies to modern employment. Nor does it apply to anything you've listed here. Not one thing.
Modern day employers do not own any of their employees as property. That's the main point here.
If the morality in the Bible is objective and absolute, then it should apply today the same as they did thousands of years ago. It doesn't though, does it? You don't own any slaves, right?
Employment is not slavery in any sense of the word. Employment is definitely not what is described in the Bible when it comes to slavery.[/QUOTE]
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Notice there's no passage that says slavery is wrong in this text that supposedly touts absolute morality.
Whoa, whoa. I didn't say the Bible says slaves aren't people. You've changed the argument here.
Can you find a passage that says slaves are our neighbours? Like, an actual passage that is talking about slaves and not something else?
Slaves are people who have been kidnapped and/or purchased. As property. They are not the equivalent of your next door neighbour. Does the Bible state somewhere that you can beat your neighbour within inches of his life without punishment? Does it say you can own your neighbour as property and pass them and their children down to your heirs?
Because you lack the moral capacity to think independently in real life, therefore being unable to find the answer in the bible, you got upset and resorted to making ad hominem attacks against your debate opponent. This just shows your lack of moral strength.
Let's look at the facts and see if your accusation holds.
The evidence shows that you made a false accusation. So your ad hominem resulted in not just showing your lack of moral strength, but also you committed an immoral act by being a false witness, giving a false testimony, accordance to the bible.
Let's see if are truly a man/woman of your words. So I'll kindly ask you to please answer my questions below.
1. Are you willing to be someone's property and obey to do whatever they want you to do?
2. Are you willing to get beaten simply for being what you are?
3. Are you willing to curse at your God?
4. Are you willing to denounce your God and worship a different God of another person's choosing?
5. I don't know if you're married or have any children but, are you willing to give your wife and children to someone else? What if I was that someone else? (Don't worry, I'm not going to commit an immoral act, so I won't perform any sexual acts with them without their consent)
6. Are you willing to defecate on the bible 5x a day if someone tells you to do it?
7. Are you willing to let someone perform a sexual act on you whenever they want to?
Can you not ignore these questions because they relate to wellbeing. So please kindly answer my questions honestly so this discussion can progress further.
May Allah bless you with honesty when answering these questions.
So you've once again changed your stance regarding morality by contradicting yourself, saying that biblical morality is not morality.
So slavery is "always" right, got it. With that being said, I would have to ask, "why is slavery wrong when a Hebrew takes another Hebrew as a slave?" I always thought (no pun intended) that "always" means, "at all times; on all occasions." So why is it wrong on the occasion in which the would be slave happens to be a Hebrew?
Kindly answer those questions with sincere honesty please.
Wrong. Choice of work assignment, work location, hours of work, etc. ARE in our realm of choice.
The modern employment where I'm from(USA), I have the choice to refuse the work assignment given to me if it is a potential danger to my physical wellbeing, my physical life. It's called, work ethics.
I have the choice to work for an employer in Los Angeles or in New York, whereas a slave can't choose to be the slave of a slave owner in Los Angeles if he was sold to a different slave owner in New York. Of course that slave can choose to run away, but obviously, that means that that person is no longer a slave to his previous owner.
I have the choice to work part-time or full-time, a slave cannot choose to be a part-time slave.
I my boss introduces me to a co-worker and I decide to marry her, if I quit my job or gets fired, my wife has the choice to quit the job and leave with me, if a slave owner chooses to utilize the loophole, he can introduce slave A to slave B hoping they will marry each other. And once they do end up marrying each other, the slave owner can purposely free slave A (knowingly that both slaves won't leave the other one behind to continue the life being a slave), since slave A is no longer a slave and have become known as person A, in order for the couple to live their lives together, person A must become a slave once again, but this time the slave owner owns slave A forever.
Why are you and your wife supporting an agency that is committing immoral acts, in accordance to your moral beliefs; biblical morality.
See, I was right about you this whole time. Your sense of morality is superior to your much beloved biblical morality that you have been defending. And you were just being dishonest once you started defending biblical morality, more specifically, biblical slavery, and made excuses in an attempt to justify biblical slavery.
Admit it now, you do believe that secular morality is superior to Christianity morality, aka, biblical morality. Evidence of this is you and your wife choosing to give thousands of dollars to help support an agency that is in opposition to biblical morality. You wanted to help prevent the violations of the wellbeing of those people that are recognized as sex slaves.
Looks like this discussion has come to its close once honesty was introduced.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
[/QUOTE]
Before proceeding to your fresh questions, I've answered you in detail regarding prior questions--despite what you wrote here. Did you not read. for one example, what I wrote about morality not having to do with obeying straight orders (aka I AGREE with you) but that also there are subtleties of obedience for any slave/servant/employee, for example?
I want to have a discussion with you, not hear rhetoric and false accusations.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
I don't agree with your obfuscation of the obvious word "neighbor" and you are forgetting both OT and NT examples, like the Good Samaritan parable where a persecuted, subjugated person by class (Samaria resident) treated a Jew AS his neighbor.
--The Bible DOES state there is a LIMIT on the punishment for beating a fellow Jew who is a free citizen and not a slave, yes. The Bible says love your neighbor also.