So why do christians like secular morality if the bible is the only source of it?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-07-2014, 08:00 AM
So why do christians like secular morality if the bible is the only source of it?
When reading through some websites on the internet I have notice a lot of christians say that slavery was indentured servitude. First ignoring the fact that you can beat them and they even have prices for the slaves in which was not indentured servitude. But then I go why does it matter if your god allows slavery? I mean I thought atheist had no morals to most of them, so why be bothered is slavery is biblical? Is it to look good to those who are not in their cult? Is it because they don't want other religions taking them down by showing the bible is not so moral? In fact now that I think about it would god allowing slavery and rape make him fake to christians? If he is real then if he found slavery moral it would be if you are a christian.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2014, 08:19 AM
RE: So why do christians like secular morality if the bible is the only source of it?
They take comfort (an easing of the cognitive dissonance) in thinking that modern morality has been derived from christian morality.

Around these parts, the 'indentured servitude' apologetic doesn't wash so it's rarely used. More often I get "that's the old testament".

Which means they might as well just open their legs, point to their crutch and invite me to "kick here".

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
30-07-2014, 08:27 AM
RE: So why do christians like secular morality if the bible is the only source of it?
(30-07-2014 08:00 AM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  When reading through some websites on the internet I have notice a lot of christians say that slavery was indentured servitude. First ignoring the fact that you can beat them and they even have prices for the slaves in which was not indentured servitude. But then I go why does it matter if your god allows slavery? I mean I thought atheist had no morals to most of them, so why be bothered is slavery is biblical? Is it to look good to those who are not in their cult? Is it because they don't want other religions taking them down by showing the bible is not so moral? In fact now that I think about it would god allowing slavery and rape make him fake to christians? If he is real then if he found slavery moral it would be if you are a christian.

Simple answer is that morality does not come from the bible. Morality is a logical extension of out empathy our our principles. We are principally against slavery and we feel slavery is no desirable for ourselves, and therefore not desirable for others. Christians, by calling it indentured servitude, are able to dress it up in a way that doesn't offend them. The slavery depicted in the bible is amoral, and christians MUST believe god is all good and his word is both true and moral, and so they do that thing they often do where they ignore any semblance of reality and choose to believe something else. Cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

I had a debate via PM with Jeremy about this very topic. I asked him to explain the amoral passages in the bible. We didn't get very far, I brought this up early and eventually he tried to turn it around on me, and then stopped responding. I have heard slavery in the bible discussed a few times in different forums (TV, internet, ect). I have yet to hear anything remotely satisfying as an answer.

The damning this is that the new testament also supports slavery, so they can't do that thing they do where they ignore the old books because they don't like what it says.

Quote:Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

Quote:Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

Quote: The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

I know it is not generally ok to post PMs publically, but I don't think Jeremy would be offended if he were here, and furthermore he is not, so I am going to post them. For those who are interested, my full dialogue (in nested quotes) with Jeremy on the topic (before he stopped responding to me anyway).

Michael_Tadlock Wrote:
Jeremy E Walker Wrote:
Michael_Tadlock Wrote:
Jeremy E Walker Wrote:
Michael_Tadlock Wrote:
Jeremy E Walker Wrote:
Michael_Tadlock Wrote:
Jeremy E Walker Wrote:
Michael_Tadlock Wrote:
Jeremy E Walker Wrote:
Michael_Tadlock Wrote:The question I can't help but ask is, if God did not approve of slavery (because slavery is evil), why did he choose not to condemn it? The bible says, several times, don't cook a lamb in its mother's milk. By comparison that seems a trivial decree before slavery. Why did god not choose to condemn slavery of every kind? It begs the questions, where these new testament books divinely inspired?

We can agree that God condemns that which is evil.

We can agree that God does not condemn that which is not evil.

Not all forms of slavery are evil. Some were indeed good as I already demonstrated.

Therefore, we should not expect to see God condemn all forms of slavery for if He had, He would have, in the process of condemning the evil, also been condemning something good.

God condemns the evil forms of slavery i.e. the kid-napping, man-stealing, "I am gonna work you like a dog just because your skin is a different color than mine" type slavery.

That form of slavery is condemned in BOTH testaments because it is manifestly evil.


Ok....

Now, the manifestly evil forms of slavery are condemned, and the "I am gonna work for you and be your servant for our mutual benefit" type of indentured servitude is condoned and regulated.

So the good and the bad are taken care of.

What about that "grey area" type slavery? Where it is not manifestly evil or obviously good?

Once again, we see God putting in place PRACTICAL regulations, laws, legislation, penalties, structure and order to try and get men to see that you cannot just treat another man any kind of way you want to just because of his economic or social status.

Could God have condemned this "grey area" slavery?

Hmm....now what would that have looked like?

Well, He could have just told His people that whenever they went to war and fought, to never take any prisoners and to always kill everybody. This would have been a surefire way to make sure there were no slaves who were prisoners of war.

That is one way.

Another thing He could have done would be to say: "You shall not allow any foreigners into your land to work for you but if they ask to work and live as your servants in exchange for protection and economic security, you are to kill them!"

But that would seem bizarre....to say the least.

I just have never been presented with a good argument from anyone as to why if God is Good, He would be obligated to condemn all forms of slavery at a time when many people survived by being slaves and indentured servants.

Another key element that is often overlooked here is that God has given men the ability to do things that are not good, but are evil. God has given men the ability to choose to either love their neighbor or hate their neighbor.

Then you might say: "Well if God were Good, He would not have made man this way."

To which I would ask: "Why not?"

I mean is it not good to be free to make one's own choices? Is not freedom to love a good thing?

Those who often times argue against my beliefs say things like: "Well you should leave people alone and let them make their own choices and choose their own way and their own lifestyle. People should be free to do whatever they want to do without someone trying to boss them around!"

But these same ones will then with their very next breath say something like: "God is evil for giving people choices to do good or evil!!!!!!!"


Come on Michael, can you not see that for such people, God can never please them?

I have a few problems with this argument. The first is, if the form of slavery God tolerated was actually a good thing, how do you reconcile that with these verse:

Quote:However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

Quote: When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

The first says, in no uncertain terms, that slaves are slaves for life, and can be inherited, bought, and sold. This does not seem becoming of a benign form of indentured servitude. In our modern times it does not seem offensive to provide food, housing, and work as a means to pay off a debt, but it does seem wrong to keep the person indebted for their life, as well as to indenture their wife, children, grandchildren, and so forth. If slavery was a means to settle debts then shouldn't there be a verse mandating all children of slaves are born free? There is no such verse.

The second verse I quoted very clearly allows for a master to beat their slave provided that they do not kill them. There is another verse that says if a slave is beaten such that they lose teeth or have broken bones they must go free, however this verse does not state that the slave master must be punished, only in the event that he beats a slave so bad they die within a couple days. In our modern times, beating anyone with a rod is wrong in every circumstance (unless of course the person was a danger to them self or others perhaps). Why is it not wrong in the bible? Would you agree that indentured people working to pay off a debt should be subject to beatings?

If we know that God is all good, and we know that the bible is the divinely inspired word of god, than why would the the bible allow for slavery that indentures children and allows a master to beat his slaves with a rod?

Furthermore, if all men are created equal, why are there different rules for the indentured servitude of jews and the slavery of foreigners? Wouldn't god have created the same rules for both peoples?

I see we are talking past each other now.

No response I give you is going to satisfy you, but if I were to give you one, or these verses were not in the Bible, would you believe it to be the Word of God?

You have an objection to Christianity. This much is obvious. And if I am right, this objection has nothing to do with a handful of verses out of the roughly 30,000 verses of the bible. If these few verses you have misgivings about were not even in the Bible, would you believe if to be the Word of God?

If not, then it seems to me that there is something else, some other reason(s) why you are hesitant to accept the Bible as the Word of God.

What is it?

It is precisely these reasons. If I can find a satisfactory answer to all of my objections than belief is possible. I have a hard time seeing the bible as an authority on morality when it advocates slavery. Very honestly I don't expect to be converted, but it would be nice to at least understand how belief in the bible is possible.

I don't believe I am talking past you. My questions have to do with the verses that regard people as property and allow beating slaves with rods. If I have been unclear or inconsistent on this point I apologize, but respectfully I don't know how I my messages could have be misconceived.

Your argument is that the Bible cannot be the Word of God because it contains passages that speak of the legislation and regulation of slavery.

Correct?

Very close yes.

The christian definition of god is the following:

Omnipotent
omniscient
all good

The bible is defined as:
The inspired word of god

Therefore what can be known about god is what can be read about him in the bible.

If slavery is bad, and god condones slavery, than god cannot be all good. Therefore a good with all the qualities described above does not exist.

Ok.

Support your premises. What reasons or evidence do you give to think they are true?

I am not sure what you mean? Support which premise?

Every argument we make has premises in them. We use arguments many times throughout the day but never really see them as such.

For example:

1. All men are mortal
2. Socrates is a man
3. Therefore Socrates is mortal

The above is a deductive modus ponens syllogism. Sentences one and two are called premises. Three is the conclusion.

Your argument can similarly be formulated thus:

1. If slavery is bad and the bible records God as having condoned slavery, then an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God cannot exist.
2. Slavery is bad and the bible records God as having condoned slavery.
3. Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God cannot exist.

This is your argument when broken down into a syllogism. Now what you must do is show premises one and two to be more plausibly true than their contradictories in order for the argument to be a good one by given additional reasons, arguments for each premise.

Ok, I think I see.

1 follows from the christian definition of god. It is a logical paradox for a god to do an evil dead if he is all good, afterall. If you want to contest that definition of god then you can, and I can restructure my argument.

2 is what I am trying to determine the true or falseness of. We agree that the bible condones slavery. If you take the stance that slavery is not evil, then god condoning it is not evil. This is how ancient peoples would have defended the this verse.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think we see the slavery as described in the bible as good. I think we agree that, informed with our modern understanding and our modern sense of morality, that slavery is in fact evil. The evidence I am providing is the verses of scripture I quoted earlier. If those verses constitute evil, then god condones an evil, and then he is not all good, which means a god by that definition does not exist.

You didn't challenge the structure of my argument. I am going to assume then you find it deductively sound. I would consider my burden of proof met then. In order to prove my conclusion false you must prove one of my premise false. Either that would mean a better interpretation of the scripture, in which determine (with good reasoning) that god does not in fact condone slavery. Or it would mean defining slavery as depicted in the bible as not evil, and therefore still becoming of a god that is all good. This includes the verses I took offense to earlier, so you would have to condone beating slaves, selling humane beings, and keeping children as slaves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2014, 08:34 AM
RE: So why do christians like secular morality if the bible is the only source of it?
I love questions like,

"If god asked you to kill your child for him, would you do it?"

The majority of responses (thank goodness) are: "God would never ask me to do that."
Then you get stuff like: "I couldn't do it, I am a failure as a follower of god."
And the scary stuff: "Of course! God's will is my will."

The first response blatantly explains that their morality is different from "god's" morality, however they deny the possibility that god's morality does not line up with their own.

The second response shows that again their morality doesn't line up, but instead paints the worshiper is immoral for deviating from god's will.

Then you have the third group. The True Believers. While they are scary, at least they are consistent with their own book.

I prefer fantasy, but I have to live in reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2014, 08:38 AM
RE: So why do christians like secular morality if the bible is the only source of it?
I also love questions and stuff about that. It basically revolves around the fact that no matter how terrible a god is that you believe in. You would do whatever they told you because god, then put their morality above the rest of the world.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: