Jump to content


Photo

God Debate 2

Craig vs Harris

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
11 replies to this topic

#1 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5790 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 16 June 2012 - 11:55 PM




Craig owns Harris with his introduction, many of the things Craig covers is repeated by Harris. He even shows how Harris' admits (at the end of his book) that psychopaths defy his moral landscape idea. Harris attempts to besmirch God with sweeping generalizations, not sure where the Bible claims slavery is good?

Its funny to read the comments (its moderated so all atheistically inclined).

#2 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 17 June 2012 - 08:49 AM

I have heard people ignorantly claiming that the Bible supports slavery, as if God Himself condones oppressive, abusive slavery. Slavery is not synonymous with oppression and abuse. In Biblical times, slavery was more like indentured servitude, where people were taken care of (food, clothes, shelter, and still allowed to have families) in exchange for labor instead of getting a salary. So the argument these people are making is ignorant of vital details, particularly what God allows and what He does not allow in the Bible.

#3 Gerson

Gerson

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Age: 25
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • El salvador

Posted 17 June 2012 - 12:49 PM

I have heard people ignorantly claiming that the Bible supports slavery, as if God Himself condones oppressive, abusive slavery. Slavery is not synonymous with oppression and abuse. In Biblical times, slavery was more like indentured servitude, where people were taken care of (food, clothes, shelter, and still allowed to have families) in exchange for labor instead of getting a salary. So the argument these people are making is ignorant of vital details, particularly what God allows and what He does not allow in the Bible.


yeah after a few years they could choose if they want to leave or stay with their boss a lot of them choosed stay because they had everything there. slavery is how hitler used the jews in the factories like animals or worst. but of course we are the ignorant in youtube theres a lot of "high intellectual" atheist they think they are smart and modern because they listen metal music, have read the origin of the species , and ahve liberal/radical thought against any goverment and they watch the atheist experience every week , and they do whatever they want because the life is short and you live just once. average atheist

#4 Portillo

Portillo

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Sydney

Posted 18 June 2012 - 12:49 AM

Slaves in Ancient Rome were no different to regular citizens.

#5 Peter

Peter

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Age: 35
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Oxford

Posted 19 June 2012 - 10:21 AM

Slaves in Ancient Rome were no different to regular citizens.

If this were true then they would not be called 'slaves' - they would be called 'regular citizens'.

#6 Hawkins

Hawkins

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Hong Kong

Posted 19 June 2012 - 10:48 AM

Slavery is a human establishment and practice once commonly accepted by humans. The Jews themselves once were slaves so they should be familiar with that practice and it's no surprised that they would adapt that practice. And they were no saints before they entered Canaan. God didn't demand them to be the saints at that time. He only taught them first to be faithful to God and be obedient. Only after they successful survived their way to Canaan and start to firmly abide by God's commandments, they started to be the 'good people'.

Considered that the Jews' neighbor the Egyptians, they killed their slaves' children on sight when they consider them over-populated. God just demanded (as a startup) that they should treat their slaves better than what their neighbors did.

#7 aelyn

aelyn

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Denver, Colorado

Posted 19 June 2012 - 02:01 PM

If this were true then they would not be called 'slaves' - they would be called 'regular citizens'.

Indeed I don't know that much about slavery in Rome (other than hearing about this "Spartacus" guy), but just reading a few works by ancient Greeks like Plato or Aristophanes shows that slavery there wasn't innocuous. It was a very different phenomenon from the US institution of slavery of course, but slaves in Ancient Greece clearly did not have the same rights as citizens and weren't thought of the same way.

#8 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 19 June 2012 - 05:43 PM

Indeed I don't know that much about slavery in Rome (other than hearing about this "Spartacus" guy), but just reading a few works by ancient Greeks like Plato or Aristophanes shows that slavery there wasn't innocuous. It was a very different phenomenon from the US institution of slavery of course, but slaves in Ancient Greece clearly did not have the same rights as citizens and weren't thought of the same way.


That is true. Still to say that the way the Bible deals with slavery is evil, because it attempts to give guidelines and does not condemn it outright is to say "there can be no mutually beneficial case of slavery, it is all evil". The conclusion is flawed because it is based on a flawed premise.

#9 Portillo

Portillo

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Sydney

Posted 23 June 2012 - 01:15 AM

If this were true then they would not be called 'slaves' - they would be called 'regular citizens'.


The Bible says "Slaves, obey your masters", which obviously means that the Bible condones slavery. However this ancient form of slavery is not the slavery that we think of in the modern world. We think of slavery as the 17th, 18th and 19th New World race-based and African slavery.

In the 1st century Greco-Roman world:

1) "Slaves were not distinguishable from others by race, speech or clothing. They looked and lived like most everyone else, and were not segregated from the rest of society in any way."

2) "Slaves were more educated than their owners in many cases and many times held high managerial positions."

3) "From a financial standpoint, slaves made the same wages as free la­borers, and therefore were not usually poor. Slaves could ac­crue enough personal capital to buy themselves out."

4) "Very few slaves were slaves for life. Most could reasonably hope to be manumitted within ten or fifteen years, or by their late thirties at the latest."

5) "In contrast, New World slavery was race-based and its default mode was slavery for life. Also, the African slave trade was begun and re­sourced through kidnapping, which the Bible unconditionally condemns in 1 Timothy 1:9-11 and Deuter­onomy 24:7."

#10 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5790 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:22 PM

The Bible says "Slaves, obey your masters", which obviously means that the Bible condones slavery. However this ancient form of slavery is not the slavery that we think of in the modern world. We think of slavery as the 17th, 18th and 19th New World race-based and African slavery.

In the 1st century Greco-Roman world:

1) "Slaves were not distinguishable from others by race, speech or clothing. They looked and lived like most everyone else, and were not segregated from the rest of society in any way."

2) "Slaves were more educated than their owners in many cases and many times held high managerial positions."

3) "From a financial standpoint, slaves made the same wages as free la­borers, and therefore were not usually poor. Slaves could ac­crue enough personal capital to buy themselves out."

4) "Very few slaves were slaves for life. Most could reasonably hope to be manumitted within ten or fifteen years, or by their late thirties at the latest."

5) "In contrast, New World slavery was race-based and its default mode was slavery for life. Also, the African slave trade was begun and re­sourced through kidnapping, which the Bible unconditionally condemns in 1 Timothy 1:9-11 and Deuter­onomy 24:7."


So almost like a live-in farm hand ;)

#11 Salsa

Salsa

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1231 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 57
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Uppsala, Sweden

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:36 AM

If this were true then they would not be called 'slaves' - they would be called 'regular citizens'.


Are you an 'employee' or a 'regular citizen'?
  • gilbo12345 likes this

#12 Portillo

Portillo

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Sydney

Posted 25 June 2012 - 01:50 AM

So almost like a live-in farm hand Posted Image


I assume some people would have probably preferred to live as a slave, rather than die of starvation on the streets.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users