Slavery Debate with Pastor
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-09-2016, 07:17 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(22-09-2016 06:08 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  My best guess is sometime between the actual words of Moses being spoken and the time that the mosaic law was put in written form.
You made an affirmative statement that it was men that lied. But now you're guessing? And, before you say the guess is not about the fact of it, but about the when, if you don't know when, you're lacking information and so what makes you sure it's true at all? Consider

(22-09-2016 06:09 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The contradiction is explained by the OT being a misinterpretation.
Please elaborate. Who is misinterpreting and what is the misinterpretation?

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
23-09-2016, 07:33 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 04:53 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(22-09-2016 06:08 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  My best guess is sometime between the actual words of Moses being spoken and the time that the mosaic law was put in written form.

We have no good reason to believe that there was an actual Moses. The Exodus did not happen, the stories about being enslaved in Egypt are nonsensical, and the evidence is that the Jews were Canaanites from the start. It's all so heavily mythologized that there is little worth taking as history.

(22-09-2016 06:09 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The contradiction is explained by the OT being a misinterpretation.

Perhaps it is your misinterpretation of the NT that is the problem. You have no reason for your beliefs so cherry-picking what agrees with you is pointless.

(23-09-2016 04:24 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Slavery being socially acceptable does explain why it isn't condemned in the OT to some extent,

Condemn slavery "to some extent" ? Laughat
What a tool.

Quote: but that doesn't refute the commands of the Christ, which in upholding, one would not have the capacity to own the life of another.

Except that "the Christ" assumed slavery as a fact of life and never condemned it. He also supposedly said that "not a jot or tittle" of the old law was to be ignored and that includes the rules on who can be enslaved. You select the bits that you can interpret in the way you like. You aren't getting anything from the bible, you are forcing the bible to conform to your views.
The law is written on the hearts of men through the selfless conscience. The wasn't removed or changed except in the way we receive it. And really I doubt that has changed as that would mean that the ancient Jewish had no conscience rather than just didn't use it.

I stand by my explanation that literally meaning or interpretation was and is wrong. This isn't cherry picking. It is verified in the OT, the NT, the conscience, and other core scriptures of the religious.

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-09-2016, 07:43 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 07:33 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The law is written on the hearts of men through the selfless conscience. The wasn't removed or changed except in the way we receive it.
Why would a god who can do anything give us the law in a manner where it's even possible to receive it in any form except exactly as intended by that god? Consider

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Impulse's post
23-09-2016, 07:46 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 05:14 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(23-09-2016 04:53 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Except that "the Christ" assumed slavery as a fact of life and never condemned it. He also supposedly said that "not a jot or tittle" of the old law was to be ignored and that includes the rules on who can be enslaved. You select the bits that you can interpret in the way you like. You aren't getting anything from the bible, you are forcing the bible to conform to your views.

Indeedy. Popsicle if you're correct, you'd a thunk JC aka "The Man" woulda said something like "Hey you fucks wrote the Bible wrong" before getting used as Roman abstract art.
Indeed the perspective of the Pharisees is spoken against by the Christ throughout the nt

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-09-2016, 07:53 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 07:17 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(22-09-2016 06:08 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  My best guess is sometime between the actual words of Moses being spoken and the time that the mosaic law was put in written form.
You made an affirmative statement that it was men that lied. But now you're guessing? And, before you say the guess is not about the fact of it, but about the when, if you don't know when, you're lacking information and so what makes you sure it's true at all? Consider

(22-09-2016 06:09 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The contradiction is explained by the OT being a misinterpretation.
Please elaborate. Who is misinterpreting and what is the misinterpretation?
I don't have all the answers. But the misdirection of the Jew is well documented in scripture. I don't have all the details such as exactly when the law was misconstrued, but I know it to be so based on the writings and the selfless conscience... You to have a conscience... Does what you read in the OT sound benevolent and for the peaceable advancement of all in all parts, or are there parts that you read that are quite obviously not based on morality, but greed?

As far as who instituted the misdirection; I have no clue, as far as why such was propagated; pride greed and fear.


Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-09-2016, 08:01 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 07:43 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(23-09-2016 07:33 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The law is written on the hearts of men through the selfless conscience. The wasn't removed or changed except in the way we receive it.
Why would a god who can do anything give us the law in a manner where it's even possible to receive it in any form except exactly as intended by that god? Consider
Because we are liable for our own actions. We have a sort of freedom to do our will, whatever it may be.

I cannot give a definitive answer to why GOD chose to lead people in such a way that they might veer from His chosen path. Again, my best guess has to do with potential and freedom.

Basically GOD didn't form us as robots but with freedom of sorts... The freedom to choose to be bound to one's own wants, pride, and greed; and also the freedom to set aside personal want in favor of what will benefit all towards the singular accord or harmony.

I appreciate your tone and honest short questions. I know my answers may not be what you want to hear, and further may not even make sense to you. Hopefully we can continue conversation though, and she'd more light on these things.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-09-2016, 08:22 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Because we are liable for our own actions. We have a sort of freedom to do our will, whatever it may be.
Freedom to do our will. Then your god can not be omniscient nor omnipotent.

(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I cannot give a definitive answer to why GOD chose to lead people in such a way that they might veer from His chosen path. Again, my best guess has to do with potential and freedom.
Veer from his chosen path? Freedom(to act)? So he can not be omnipotent nor be omniscient .

(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Basically GOD didn't form us as robots but with freedom of sorts... The freedom to choose to be bound to one's own wants, pride, and greed; and also the freedom to set aside personal want in favor of what will benefit all towards the singular accord or harmony.
Freedom of sorts, freedom to choose? Then he can not be omniscient nor be omnipotent.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
23-09-2016, 08:34 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(23-09-2016 07:43 AM)Impulse Wrote:  Why would a god who can do anything give us the law in a manner where it's even possible to receive it in any form except exactly as intended by that god? Consider
Because we are liable for our own actions. We have a sort of freedom to do our will, whatever it may be.

Free will is not a defense against a lack of clear instructions, you daft wanker.

An all powerful god could have made understanding it's will as innate as hunger. If it really exists, and is as powerful as is claimed, then it chose not to. If it then also chooses to punish those who cannot clearly understand it's instructions, then it's both inept and evil.


(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I cannot give a definitive answer to why GOD chose to lead people in such a way that they might veer from His chosen path. Again, my best guess has to do with potential and freedom.

You can be made aware of what the rules are clearly, without forcing compliance.

Plus, if the stories are to be believed, your god didn't have a problem forcing compliance (*cough* Pharoah *cough*) when it suited him.


(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Basically GOD didn't form us as robots but with freedom of sorts... The freedom to choose to be bound to one's own wants, pride, and greed; and also the freedom to set aside personal want in favor of what will benefit all towards the singular accord or harmony.

But if there is a rule book at play, but you cannot be sure of the rules; and you'll be judged by them all the same, regardless of ignorance? In that case, how much fucking freedom do you really have? What reasonable choice can be made when you're playing a game with rules you do not know or understand? It's the choice given by a sadist.

[Image: 3248744a5d135a41c61f5550b8540130.jpg]

Even Jigsaw gave better explanation of the stakes involved and the potential consequences of choice.


(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I appreciate your tone and honest short questions. I know my answers may not be what you want to hear, and further may not even make sense to you. Hopefully we can continue conversation though, and she'd more light on these things.

[Image: a778G8A_700b_v2.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
23-09-2016, 08:48 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
(23-09-2016 08:22 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Because we are liable for our own actions. We have a sort of freedom to do our will, whatever it may be.
Freedom to do our will. Then your god can not be omniscient nor omnipotent.

(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I cannot give a definitive answer to why GOD chose to lead people in such a way that they might veer from His chosen path. Again, my best guess has to do with potential and freedom.
Veer from his chosen path? Freedom(to act)? So he can not be omnipotent nor be omniscient .

(23-09-2016 08:01 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Basically GOD didn't form us as robots but with freedom of sorts... The freedom to choose to be bound to one's own wants, pride, and greed; and also the freedom to set aside personal want in favor of what will benefit all towards the singular accord or harmony.
Freedom of sorts, freedom to choose? Then he can not be omniscient nor be omnipotent.
That's just not true.

Just because we are instilled with a sort of freedom doesn't mean GOD isn't omniscient and omnipotent. It just means that we were given freedom. How did you conclude that one means the other?

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-09-2016, 08:51 AM
RE: Slavery Debate with Pastor
EvolutionKills, I didn't say free will was a defence to anything.

Your conflating freedom with presuppositions to sin, and further conflating ignorance with a just cause for eternal torment.

Neither are correct.

Pharaoh wasn't forced to comply at all.

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: