I believe... - Page 4

inertia186 · 12-31-2012, 20:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japle

Second of all, yes, I do approve of nations protecting themselves from foreign invasion.
First of all, what’s that got to do with approving of slavery?

Your god not only allowed slavery to exist, he approved of it and set rules for slave owners. Trying to divert the conversation by bringing up war doesn’t change that.

You really don't know the connection between war and slavery?

Japle · 01-01-2013, 06:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japle:
Second of all, yes, I do approve of nations protecting themselves from foreign invasion.
First of all, what’s that got to do with approving of slavery?

Your god not only allowed slavery to exist, he approved of it and set rules for slave owners. Trying to divert the conversation by bringing up war doesn’t change that.

Quote:

Response by inertia186:
You really don't know the connection between war and slavery?

Once again trying to divert the conversation by talking about war.

If we're to believe the Bible, your god obviously approved of chattel slavery. Instead of telling his chosen people that slavery was wrong, he gave them a set of rules for keeping and buying and selling and killing their slaves. If you can't deal with that without changing the subject, just admit it.

inertia186 · 01-01-2013, 09:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japle

If you can't deal with that without changing the subject, just admit it.

What if I'm really not changing the subject? What if there is a valid rationale?

muscogee · 01-01-2013, 09:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by inertia186

What if I'm really not changing the subject? What if there is a valid rationale?

You're saying war justifies the abrogation of God's law.

inertia186 · 01-01-2013, 09:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by muscogee

You're saying war justifies the abrogation of God's law.

Isn't that generally what people believe?

muscogee · 01-01-2013, 09:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by inertia186

Isn't that generally what people believe?

If so, that makes them hypocrites. If they obey God's law when it's convenient and ignore it the rest of the time, then their beliefs have no credibility. All one has to do to ignore God's law is declare a state of war. War on poverty, war on drugs, the list goes on ad infinitum. All things can justify war and war can justify all things.

Japle · 01-01-2013, 09:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japle:
If you can't deal with that without changing the subject, just admit it.

Quote:

inertia186:
What if I'm really not changing the subject? What if there is a valid rationale?

Deal with the subject at hand or admit you can't handle it.
Using war to justify your god's approval of slavery won't work.

inertia186 · 01-01-2013, 10:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japle

Using war to justify your god's approval of slavery won't work.

Actually, that's how all of the nations went about it, not just the Hebrew nation. If you didn't enslave your enemies, you had to kill them. The alternative was to allow their culture to invade after the war was over.

Your critique of God is that He didn't use an anachronistic approach to break into human history.

Japle · 01-01-2013, 10:53

Quote:

Posted by inertia186:
Your critique of God is that He didn't use an anachronistic approach to break into human history.

Nope. My problem (well, one of them) with the god of the OT is that he didn't tell his people to stop slavery. He certainly could have done that, but he didn't. He told them how to conduct slavery.

He never said slavery was undesirable. He never said there was anything wrong with buying and selling people, breaking up families or killing slaves as long as it was done according to his rules.

Are you defending his advice on slavery? Do you think the Hebrews should have followed his laws and continued to be slave owners?

inertia186 · 01-01-2013, 17:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japle

Are you defending his advice on slavery? Do you think the Hebrews should have followed his laws and continued to be slave owners?

Do you have the same critique of the US Constitution?

Japle · 01-01-2013, 18:52

Tell the truth, 186, are you under 14 years of age? Do you seriously think the adults here can’t tell when you have no answers and constantly try to change the subject so you won’t have to admit it?

Animal Mother · 01-01-2013, 22:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by inertia186

Do you have the same critique of the US Constitution?

I don't recall anyone claiming either the US Constitution or the men who composed it were inerrant.

inertia186 · 01-01-2013, 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Animal Mother

I don't recall anyone claiming either the US Constitution or the men who composed it were inerrant.

Inerrancy is not at issue. Merely, is it valid to throw out an entire document that includes instructions that modern eyes view as objectionable? Or does that document have some concessions that are consistent for the time and place they were written?

NMG26 · 01-01-2013, 23:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Animal Mother

I don't recall anyone claiming either the US Constitution or the men who composed it were inerrant.

Inertia186 has never said that the Bible was inerrant. That is a fundamentalist belief. He did lead with fundamentalist doctrine, but does not seem to be able to argue it. A good thing really.

NMG26 · 01-01-2013, 23:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by inertia186

Inerrancy is not at issue.

The forum is "I believe".

So what do you say.

What do you believe about the Bible?

inertia186 · 01-01-2013, 23:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMG26

The forum is "I believe".

So what do you say.

What do you believe about the Bible?

I believe inerrancy, but as I said, that's not being debated.

Japle · 01-02-2013, 06:31

Inertia186 is in a tough spot. He (?) wants to believe the Bible in inerrant, but he can’t defend his god’s support of slavery. His only recourse is to do his best to avoid discussing that – and who can blame him – and discuss anything else.

Now, he says he believes in inerrancy, but won’t debate it. No wonder. Debating inerrancy would just lead him back to defending slavery.

Lowjiber · 01-02-2013, 06:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArrowJ

I thought it might be beneficial to have a thread for users to delineate their beliefs without addition of supporting evidence (or lack there of).

I believe that a Religious Issues Forum does not belong on a gun forum.

muscogee · 01-02-2013, 07:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMG26

Inertia186 has never said that the Bible was inerrant. That is a fundamentalist belief. He did lead with fundamentalist doctrine, but does not seem to be able to argue it. A good thing really.

How does one decide what parts are in error and which parts aren't? It seems to me that it comes down to personal opinion. If one's personal opinion is the criteria, they why does one need the Bible to decide right and wrong?

Japle · 01-02-2013, 08:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMG26;
Inertia186 has never said that the Bible was inerrant.

See post #91.

muscogee · 01-02-2013, 08:34

Beliefs can be based on fact or fiction. Belief in the supernatural has to be based on fiction. If there was factual evidence evidence for the supernatural, then it wouldn't be supernatural.

There is factual evidence for gravity, evolution, and so on. There's no factual evidence for a supernatural being. Since there's no factual evidence at the moment, the logical conclusion is that one does not exists.