May 26, 2012 -- 11:10PM, costrel wrote:

May 26, 2012 -- 9:33PM, Kodiacman wrote:

May 26, 2012 -- 8:11PM, costrel wrote:

May 26, 2012 -- 8:02PM, davelaw40 wrote:

who on these boards approve of slavery?-name one

Kodiacman certainly does -- see his responses to me. He even argues that a slave's right to rebel must be based on the immorality of his or her master. If the master is immoral, the slave has a right to rebel. If the master is moral, the slave does not have a right to rebel and the slave's rebellion would be inappropriate (and probably also immoral) rebellion. Adelphe and 57 also appear to at least support the slavery as described in the Hebrew Scriptures. And if 57 asserts that God has not changed his views concerning slavery, it would seem that he also supports the once-legalized form of American slavery abolished in the mid-19th century as well as current slavery practices. 

Pure unadulterated emotionalism on display... Gotta love the pure logic in this...

the sky is falling! the sky is falling! the sky is falling!

Pluuueaaasse.

Perhaps when the emotional histrionics wear thin we can calmly and rationally talk about this....or not??

I shall await to see what happens.

blessings,

kodiacman

Where am I being emotional in my previous post? And where was I not being rational or calm in explaining what I consider to be yours, Adelphe's and 57's perspectives on slavery? You don't know what your talking about. And I bet you don't even know what "histrionics" means. 

This is the same crap that Christians point the finger at you when they lost the arguments.  Why do you hate God? Why do you attack Christianity? Your hardness of heart   … Pure unadulterated emotionalism…. Blah blah  blah  it is all and become about you... you… and you…. 

May 26, 2012 -- 9:43PM, Adelphe wrote:

May 26, 2012 -- 8:07PM, Qwesam wrote:

May 26, 2012 -- 8:02PM, davelaw40 wrote:

May 26, 2012 -- 7:52PM, mainecaptain wrote:

Ever wonder if those supporting the idea of slavery don't secretly desire to own slaves? I am certain it never occurs to those supporting slavery, that they themselves be a slave.

If that were the case they would be screaming about how slavery is completely wrong under any circumstances.

who on these boards approve of slavery?-name one

 Dave, why don't you go back to.. let say in 1900? and asked this question again?  with straight face!

This board wasn't around in 1900.

And if it was, We won't have a hard time to find the answer, right?

Kodiacman

I have a direct quote that states Yahweh does not change. Upon what basis does one view or understanding trump another view?

In the stories, Yahweh changes. We have these examples on the table -

One
Genesis 6
6 And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth [...]  7 So the Lord said, "I will blot out man whom I have created"

Two
Genesis 9
21 And when the Lord smelled the pleasing odor, the Lord said in his heart, "I will never again curse the ground because of man [..] neither will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done".

Three
And the wonderful dickering scene in Genesis 18:
23 Then Abraham drew near, and said, "Wilt thou indeed destroy the righteous with the wicked?
24 Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city; wilt thou then destroy the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it?
25 Far be it from thee to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from thee! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?"
26 And the LORD said, "If I find at Sodom fifty righteous in the city, I will spare the whole place for their sake."
27 Abraham answered, "Behold, I have taken upon myself to speak to the Lord, I who am but dust and ashes.
28 Suppose five of the fifty righteous are lacking? Wilt thou destroy the whole city for lack of five?" And he said, "I will not destroy it if I find forty-five there."
29 Again he spoke to him, and said, "Suppose forty are found there." He answered, "For the sake of forty I will not do it."
30 Then he said, "Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak. Suppose thirty are found there." He answered, "I will not do it, if I find thirty there."
31 He said, "Behold, I have taken upon myself to speak to the Lord. Suppose twenty are found there." He answered, "For the sake of twenty I will not destroy it."
32 Then he said, "Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak again but this once. Suppose ten are found there." He answered, "For the sake of ten I will not destroy it."

Four
Slavery.

Five
Being omnipotent, Yahweh can do anything he fancies whenever he likes/



On your side, we have -
A
Malachi 3
6 For I the Lord do not change.


Numerous examples show this isn't true.  It could be a deceit or a memory problem.

But the answer most consistent with the evidence is that it's another change of mind.

May 26, 2012 -- 11:31AM, Qwesam wrote:

And don't tell me that your God didn't know human are capable to own another human if he/she has money and power. For those Christians who insisted that there should be 10 commandments only then why not replace Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's (goods) with Thou shalt not own another human. Which is more moral?

Careful! You're going to be labelled a post-Enlightenment humanist with feminist sympathies engaging in cultural imperialism if you attempt to argue that viewing human slavery is immoral.