Come and get me, right wingers!

Preach it, Brother B2P!

Have you figured out how you know slavery is wrong yet? I think that maybe Matthew 19 can shed light on this matter. Jesus was talking about how divorce is wrong and unpleasing to God. But some Pharisees pointed out to him that divorce was allowed by Moses on the Old Testament.
Check this out: I think the reason God allowed slavery in the Bible had something to do with this - peoples hearts were hard, and they would not be able refrain from slavery. God made a compromise - it was not what he wanted, but it was all he could realistically achieve while giving humans free will.I'll respond to your other points later - gotta go eat dinner

---

Pray for mercy from... PUSS! In boots. (Don't forget the Spanish accent!)

ROFL! Why didn't he just drown all their sorry asses again? That's just hilarious - all an omnipotent being could realistically achieve!

There is another possibility.The Bible was written by men and simply reflects the mores of the time.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

There is another possibility.

​

The Bible was written by men and simply reflects the mores of the time.

---

You are definitely right.A historical context is always needed. The chosen people were very recently the enslaved during the time the books where slavery is condoned are talking about. When a nation was defeated the only way the remaining people of that nation would've been spared is if they became slaves. You could consider it justice for the formally enslaved Iraelites to enslave their former captors. This type of slavery is quite a different kind of slavery from slavery as we've known it in America. The chosen people had to be delivered, it was his will.There's really nothing more to it. I was very troubled about some of the slavery verses I read, I found alot of them from evilbible.com, I spoke with people, some camp counselors, the speakers from a bible conference I went to. The New Testament definitely brings closure on the ways of old, shows that society was different, that it wasn't kill or be killed, enslave or be enslaved anymore.This message has been edited by messenjaH of oNe, 08-21-2004 12:01 AM

---

-chris

Purpledawn, I stand corrected. Thanks

First of all I wasn't really labeling anybody, sorry if you felt I was. I was trying to grab people's attention with a fiery title. Seems to have worked. No. I believe the Bible is the 'abridged' or 'edited' copy of God's word. No doubt there's some deep messages in those texts, but I'm positive humans have done some major tampering. After all, ruining other people's stuff is what we do best. Only by the blood of Christ was mankind saved. His blood's been shed. We're saved. I think that should count for everybody, not just those lucky enough to pick the right road to salvation out of the 1000s of offers out there. Excellent. Your chi has been honed to an impressive level. No no no... ugh! I shouldn't have put #5 in to begin with! I didn't say I'd preach about knees, elbows, and triangle holds; I was seeing who would condemn me to hell just for participating in a sport which happens to be set in a five foot steel cage. I was told by a fellow preacher-to-be that I was going to hell for practicing a violent sport and the church would have nothing to do with an evil doer like me. That's why I put that. Neither is tolerance, at least if we're including OT. According to the old testament, a good guy like you should have lots of foreign slaves and seven sexy heathen girls feeding you grapes. Please don't tag me on the details; you're intelligent enough to know what I meant.By the way, when I first came on this forum I read a few threads with your posts in it. You're certainly strong in your faith and competent enough to avoid circular reasoning, so I'm glad you've decided to participate with this topic.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Doesn't matter. If it's from God(which I believe it is), fine! It's certainly inborn, though, seeing as atheists can be just as moral. No matter where it's from, it's certainly not from the old testament.I said: Do you or do you not think that we should have slaves because the Bible says so? Yes or no?You didn't answer the question. Please answer it. Yes or no? From next post on I won't answer any of your questions until you answer this. It's okay to be detailed. I sort of agree. But people's hearts are still hard today. All that would be needed to end slavery was all the people up top demanding it to stop. I doubt God just said 'okay boys, getcher peasant girlies! After all, ya'll don't know no better.'NO. If I were the Divine High Counsel, I would've impeeched the yahoo who decided to slack off like that! The truth is simple:Those parts about slavery ARE NOT divinely inspired.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Let us assume that I've been having my foot in my mouth. In that case, then you must have been having your genital covering your good eye.Anyway, I'm not that flexible.I think there's been a miscommunication between us somewhere. Let me make it clear once and for all.Technically, the triangle slave trade was different than the slave trade in classical times. However, the spirit of it and the immorality of it remained the same. When I said they were the same, I meant the immorality of it, not the technical parts.I was fully aware of how slavery worked in classical times, and I am still convinced that it was as evil as it was during the 18th century. It ain't matter how the a person becomes a slave (someone else's property), it is still evil.Thus, my sense of morality is superior to that of Leviticus. Therefore, I don't have to give a rat's arse about what Leviticus has to say. Capice? Like I said, I don't care what kind of condition the slaves in the classical periods were in, slavery was, is, and always will be evil. I don't care if the slaves were treated like kings, it was as evil as the triangle slave trade.That is why I compared it to the technicality of of genocide. Just because the Cambodian genocide wasn't carried out with gas chambers doesn't mean it was any less evil than the Holocaust.

---

The Laminator
We are the bog. Resistance is voltage over current. For goodness's sake, please vote Democrat this November!

Yeah if I responded to you then I would
look like a "right-winger".Do you consider yourself a "christian"?Was the Bible an intrical part of your faith?Could you have heard the message of Christ without it?Why do you see in the Bible to lead you to believe there has been "major tampering"?

quote:

---

Only by the blood of Christ was mankind saved. His blood's been shed. We're saved. I think that should count for everybody, not just those lucky enough to pick the right road to salvation out of the 1000s of offers out there.

---

That's cool man but like I said before, The Bible has an objective voice, it speaks for itself, your opinion of salvation is not the one voiced in The Bible. I've always considered this collection of books the Word of God, quite literally, not that you have to, but the basis of your faith was founded for us in those pages.

quote:

---

Neither is tolerance, at least if we're including OT. According to the old testament, a good guy like you should have lots of foreign slaves and seven sexy heathen girls feeding you grapes. Please don't tag me on the details; you're intelligent enough to know what I meant.

---

Show me some verses from the OT that say this.This message has been edited by messenjaH of oNe, 08-22-2004 06:19 PM

One thing about the Bible is that you can find quotes within it to support nearly any imaginable position. But if you believe that GOD is a loving GOD, then those parts of the Bible that show all mankind will be saved, not just the few elite, resonate loudly.

quote:

---

If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus
Christ the righteous; and he is the perfect offering for our
sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole
world. John 2:1-2

---

The Bible came long after Christianity. It is still somewhat flexible, the canon varies considerably both over time and within various churches. The is the issue of whther or not the Apocrypha and other books should be included as well. There is also a large body of material outside and in addition to the Bible. There is the BCP, various Councils, edicts and letters.The clearest statement of what makes a Christian was laid down by the Council of Nicea in 323AD IIRC. No where does it mention the literalist nature of the Bible.Even today, 2000 years later there is still no one official Bible, or even one uniform Canon for all Christian Churches.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

One thing about the Bible is that you can find quotes within it to support nearly any imaginable position. But if you believe that GOD is a loving GOD, then those parts of the Bible that show all mankind will be saved, not just the few elite, resonate loudly.

​

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus
Christ the righteous; and he is the perfect offering for our
sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole
world. John 2:1-2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Jesus is the perfect offering for the sins of the world, this verse reflects nothing else outside of interpretation.

quote:

---

The Bible came long after Christianity. It is still somewhat flexible, the canon varies considerably both over time and within various churches. The is the issue of whther or not the Apocrypha and other books should be included as well. There is also a large body of material outside and in addition to the Bible. There is the BCP, various Councils, edicts and letters.

​

The clearest statement of what makes a Christian was laid down by the Council of Nicea in 323AD IIRC. No where does it mention the literalist nature of the Bible.

​

Even today, 2000 years later there is still no one official Bible, or even one uniform Canon for all Christian Churches.

---

The OT was obviously around long before Christianity. There were many prophecies of a coming messiah for our "inequities".There are many reasons why the Apochrypha is not in the majority of Bibles today. If you want me to elaborate on why they are not inspired I will.
There are many translations for there are many ways to interpret the Hebrew.For example:
the NASB is translated word by word, the NIV is translated phrase by phrase.You're right, The Bible technically has nothing to do with being a christian, however it has lead many people to christianity and has become a foundation for christians, it has words of many early christians, and of course Jesus. I would never of heard of the Christ, or God if it wasn't for the Bible. Without these books it would have been carried through word of mouth which as you know, if just by playing a game of telephone, people recount things differently then they were originally told. Words have been exagerated, augmented and not said at all. It is much harder to do these things when words are recorded on paper.

Why can't it mean what it says? We have a thread working on the apocrypha so come on over. We'd be happy to have your input. It's over here. Of course, that is exactly what did happen with both the OT and the NT. For centuries, millenia in the case of the OT, they were simply oral histories. They were exagerated, augmented and not said at all. In many cases, they even recount things that didn't really happen or that certainly, did not happen as described.But Christianity and the message of Christianity is far more than the Bible. The Bible is a guidebook. And like any map, if you find the road is closed, the bridge out, you can either say, "The map says it's open" and drive on, or realize that the Map is not the Territory and make a detour.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That's the thing, it means exactly what it says, it does not contradict the "confess with your mouth" thing at all.

quote:

---

Of course, that is exactly what did happen with both the OT and the NT. For centuries, millenia in the case of the OT, they were simply oral histories. They were exagerated, augmented and not said at all. In many cases, they even recount things that didn't really happen or that certainly, did not happen as described.

---

This is where we disagree, you sound like a theologian I know, he describes the same history of how the Bible came to be. I disagree I think the people that wrote the Bible were inspired by God that they were writing what actually happened. But also many characters wrote what happened. I believe Moses wrote his story.This is where the story-telling theory seems to unravel:Who was there to describe what happened in the early parts of Genesis? There are only two explanations to this. Either someone made up their origins in what is Genesis and passed it on. Or God actually did this and told someone. It doesn't seem plausible that Adam or Eve would know what happened in creation before they were concieved. How revelation was passed on wouldn't make much sense either would it? Who passed on what Isaiah saw in his entire life? Maybe Isaiah wrote it.-goin to bed got practice and i gotta finish that richard clarke bookThis message has been edited by messenjaH of oNe, 08-22-2004 09:36 PM

---

-chris

Actually, almost all of Genesis is simply cribbed from earlier religions. Of course you are free to believe whatever you want. But the belief that it is accurate falls apart about Genesis 2.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion