- This topic is empty.
- Posts
bodhitharta wrote:
Quote This is why I am saying that your ideas are based upon your arbitrary emotions and not based in any absolute sense of Holiness. Against my better judgment, I am going to ask:
What exactly is “holiness”?
bodhitharta wrote:
Quote God destroyed all the people in Noah's day Did he have the right to?
Sure, if you believe that your god owns people like a slave owner owns slaves, then he certainly has a “right” to do whatever he wants with his property. But, it certainly doesn't make it right.
According to the bible, a slave owner could beat his slave to within an inch of his life for no reason at all. I call that evil, you may call it “holy” if you like.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 11 2010,14:32) bodhitharta wrote: Quote This is why I am saying that your ideas are based upon your arbitrary emotions and not based in any absolute sense of Holiness. Against my better judgment, I am going to ask:
What exactly is “holiness”?
bodhitharta wrote:
Quote God destroyed all the people in Noah's day Did he have the right to?
Sure, if you believe that your god owns people like a slave owner owns slaves, then he certainly has a “right” to do whatever he wants with his property. But, it certainly doesn't make it right.
According to the bible, a slave owner could beat his slave to within an inch of his life for no reason at all. I call that evil, you may call it “holy” if you like.
WhatIsTrue,Holy means to be set apart from common use or purpose.
For some reason you seem to assume to know better than God even according to your own description of God.
Does your understanding of God(we all have the same God, only our understanding differs) allow for God to do whatever whenever for whatever reason or does your understanding of God bind him to your personal whim?
bodhitharta wrote:
Quote Holy means to be set apart from common use or purpose. So, the president's toilet could be considered holy in a sense? Perhaps a bomb set aside to dropped on a specific group of women and children could be considered holy as well?
You're right. That definition certainly doesn't imply anything about the “goodness” of the object ascribed to be “holy”.
Quote For some reason you seem to assume to know better than God even according to your own description of God. No, I only claim to recognize evil, and slavery is evil. The god of the bible is either incapable of recognizing evil or actively embraces it.
Quote Does your understanding of God(we all have the same God, only our understanding differs) allow for God to do whatever whenever for whatever reason or does your understanding of God bind him to your personal whim? My personal understanding of God does not inlcude the kind of god that is terribly interested in smiting random people such as the god of the bible does, but to address your real question:
Evil does not become less evil because it's perpetrated by a higher authority. If the bible claims that your god did something that I consider evil, I will call it evil.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 13 2010,14:49) bodhitharta wrote: Quote Holy means to be set apart from common use or purpose. So, the president's toilet could be considered holy in a sense? Perhaps a bomb set aside to dropped on a specific group of women and children could be considered holy as well?
You're right. That definition certainly doesn't imply anything about the “goodness” of the object ascribed to be “holy”.
Quote For some reason you seem to assume to know better than God even according to your own description of God. No, I only claim to recognize evil, and slavery is evil. The god of the bible is either incapable of recognizing evil or actively embraces it.
Quote Does your understanding of God(we all have the same God, only our understanding differs) allow for God to do whatever whenever for whatever reason or does your understanding of God bind him to your personal whim? My personal understanding of God does not inlcude the kind of god that is terribly interested in smiting random people such as the god of the bible does, but to address your real question:
Evil does not become less evil because it's perpetrated by a higher authority. If the bible claims that your god did something that I consider evil, I will call it evil.
The problem is how are you determining what is or is not evil?I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.
Isaiah 45:6-8Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
Isaiah 5:19-21And assuming you are correct about slavery being evil(I'm not for slavery myself) what makes you think that an evil doesn't produce a good?
And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.
Exodus 32:13-15And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite.
2 Samuel 24:15-17Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him at all to death? did he not fear the LORD, and besought the LORD, and the LORD repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus might we procure great evil against our souls.
Jeremiah 26:18-20And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.
Jonah 3:9-10I won't be like the others here and attempt to delete what they don't like in order to defend what they don't understand.
Perhaps slavery is evil and perhaps that evil can produce good.
Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure
Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 13 2010,16:31) Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure
Hi Bod,
Usually you give a lot of thought to your answers, but
slavery is a system in which PEOPLE specifically are the property of others.
You only confuse the question with your statement about animals.Tim
bodhitharta,
It's a bit silly to use the bible's justifications for evil to convince me that the bible isn't a book about a god that advocates that men behave in evil ways.
Quote And assuming you are correct about slavery being evil(I'm not for slavery myself) what makes you think that an evil doesn't produce a good? An evil act can produce good. The holocaust is full of such stories. But, that doesn't make the evil acts any less evil, nor does it make the people who perpetrated the evil acts any less guilty.
Quote Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure Ditto to what Tim said. I have no problem with men owning cattle. I do prefer to buy meat from farmers who treated their animals humanely though.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 14 2010,07:16) bodhitharta, It's a bit silly to use the bible's justifications for evil to convince me that the bible isn't a book about a god that advocates that men behave in evil ways.
Quote And assuming you are correct about slavery being evil(I'm not for slavery myself) what makes you think that an evil doesn't produce a good? An evil act can produce good. The holocaust is full of such stories. But, that doesn't make the evil acts any less evil, nor does it make the people who perpetrated the evil acts any less guilty.
Quote Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure Ditto to what Tim said. I have no problem with men owning cattle. I do prefer to buy meat from farmers who treated their animals humanely though.
Treat the animals humanely and then slaughter them for your pleasure, the fact is you accept the idea of “lower Species” murder for your pleasure, so the question is why?Quote (TimothyVI @ Aug. 13 2010,23:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 13 2010,16:31) Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure
Hi Bod,
Usually you give a lot of thought to your answers, but
slavery is a system in which PEOPLE specifically are the property of others.
You only confuse the question with your statement about animals.Tim
I understand that people are not animals but I brought in the context of animals to see where the boundaries of his morality extend for instance Stu doesn't eat animals because he thinks it's wrong.The context in which WhatIsTruth understands God is unknown to me so I must ask questions to help me form a better understanding of him, not to judge him but to move forward in a clearer dialogue.
I want to know what is so detestable about slavery to him. Children are slaves they cannot do whatever they want until a certain age when there parents free them. Parents chastise and hit their children to various degrees and often make them do chores under the threat of punishment.
Is what I am saying true although it may sound uncomfortable?
Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 14 2010,16:22) Quote (TimothyVI @ Aug. 13 2010,23:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 13 2010,16:31) Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure
Hi Bod,
Usually you give a lot of thought to your answers, but
slavery is a system in which PEOPLE specifically are the property of others.
You only confuse the question with your statement about animals.Tim
I understand that people are not animals but I brought in the context of animals to see where the boundaries of his morality extend for instance Stu doesn't eat animals because he thinks it's wrong.The context in which WhatIsTruth understands God is unknown to me so I must ask questions to help me form a better understanding of him, not to judge him but to move forward in a clearer dialogue.
I want to know what is so detestable about slavery to him. Children are slaves they cannot do whatever they want until a certain age when there parents free them. Parents chastise and hit their children to various degrees and often make them do chores under the threat of punishment.
Is what I am saying true although it may sound uncomfortable?
Hello All,God used slavery of His people as a way to teach them lessons.
Conquerors sold people as slaves. Take a choice: death or slavery.
People work for a wage and are fearful for their lives especially if they lose the job. They are slaves.
Abraham had at least 413 slaves.
Who has it better, the slave that is going to be fed, clothed and housed or the master that has to provide?
Joseph was sold as a slave and preserved the nation of Israel.
Slaves serve your Master as you were doing service to the Lord. Employees work hard for your employer and do not defraud him and give him an honest day's work for the pay. Soldiers be happy with your pay and do not extort. Judges be honest and give justice.
No one in the Bible ever spoke against the “evil” of slavery but acknowledge its existence and its purposefulness.
So, NO slavery is not wrong.
The Professor
Quote (davidbfun @ Aug. 14 2010,15:17) Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 14 2010,16:22) Quote (TimothyVI @ Aug. 13 2010,23:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 13 2010,16:31) Do you eat meat? Those animals were enslaved, fattened up and killed for your personal pleasure
Hi Bod,
Usually you give a lot of thought to your answers, but
slavery is a system in which PEOPLE specifically are the property of others.
You only confuse the question with your statement about animals.Tim
I understand that people are not animals but I brought in the context of animals to see where the boundaries of his morality extend for instance Stu doesn't eat animals because he thinks it's wrong.The context in which WhatIsTruth understands God is unknown to me so I must ask questions to help me form a better understanding of him, not to judge him but to move forward in a clearer dialogue.
I want to know what is so detestable about slavery to him. Children are slaves they cannot do whatever they want until a certain age when there parents free them. Parents chastise and hit their children to various degrees and often make them do chores under the threat of punishment.
Is what I am saying true although it may sound uncomfortable?
Hello All,God used slavery of His people as a way to teach them lessons.
Conquerors sold people as slaves. Take a choice: death or slavery.
People work for a wage and are fearful for their lives especially if they lose the job. They are slaves.
Abraham had at least 413 slaves.
Who has it better, the slave that is going to be fed, clothed and housed or the master that has to provide?
Joseph was sold as a slave and preserved the nation of Israel.
Slaves serve your Master as you were doing service to the Lord. Employees work hard for your employer and do not defraud him and give him an honest day's work for the pay. Soldiers be happy with your pay and do not extort. Judges be honest and give justice.
No one in the Bible ever spoke against the “evil” of slavery but acknowledge its existence and its purposefulness.
So, NO slavery is not wrong.
The Professor
That's not true otherwise Moses wouldn't have been sent to free Israel from Egypt so slavery is wrong but that doesn't mean it lacks purpose. God does even say that if Israel is disobedient that type of “evil” will be upon them.Evil is something God has the right to inflict or allow to be inflicted on whomever HE wills for ONLY GOD knows the purpose:
Job 42:7 (Contemporary English Version)
7The LORD said to Eliphaz:
What my servant Job has said about me is true, but I am angry at you and your two friends for not telling the truth.What did Job say that was the truth?
Job 42 (Contemporary English Version)
Job 42
1Job said:
2No one can oppose you,because you have the power
to do what you want.
3You asked why I talk so much
when I know so little.
I have talked about things
that are far beyond
my understanding.
4You told me to listen
and answer your questions.
5I heard about you from others;
now I have seen you
with my own eyes.
6That's why I hate myself
and sit here in dust and ashes
to show my sorrow.
bodhitharta wrote:
Quote Treat the animals humanely and then slaughter them for your pleasure, the fact is you accept the idea of “lower Species” murder for your pleasure, so the question is why? Good question.
I don't think of other animals as a lower species so much as I think of man as a unique species. Man, unlike animals, has the unique ability to create new things and to alter the world around him in profound ways. From the first person who controlled and used fire to the creators of the internet, man has transformed the world into a technological oasis that has made it easier for more people to live well across the globe. Whether it be a great work of art or a more productive way to produce food, man exhibits a unique gift for advanced thinking not exhibited by other animals. One may see it as evidence of the “divine spark” within us (as I do) or the crowning achievement of evolution, but there really is no debate about our status on the planet.
As such, in my opinion, it is uniquely criminal to enslave a man. By doing so, you are putting into a cage that which is naturally free and capable of profoundly impacting the world. If there were another species on the planet that exhibited these qualities, I would not condone slavery for that species either. But, cattle do not change the world. They graze on grass, grow old, and die. From one generation to the next nothing changes, and more importantly, there doesn't even appear the possibility that anything could change. I do not hate or dislike cows, but by eating one, I do not feel like I am in danger of depriving the world of that particulars cow's unique contributions. In fact, that cow is actually serving its purpose in the natural order of things as part of the food chain. By contrast, I would not roast Einstein on a spit and serve him to my family. It would be a crime against humanity to deprive the world of his unique gifts.
Thanks for asking the question. I never had to think that through until just now.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 15 2010,13:42) bodhitharta wrote: Quote Treat the animals humanely and then slaughter them for your pleasure, the fact is you accept the idea of “lower Species” murder for your pleasure, so the question is why? Good question.
I don't think of other animals as a lower species so much as I think of man as a unique species. Man, unlike animals, has the unique ability to create new things and to alter the world around him in profound ways. From the first person who controlled and used fire to the creators of the internet, man has transformed the world into a technological oasis that has made it easier for more people to live well across the globe. Whether it be a great work of art or a more productive way to produce food, man exhibits a unique gift for advanced thinking not exhibited by other animals. One may see it as evidence of the “divine spark” within us (as I do) or the crowning achievement of evolution, but there really is no debate about our status on the planet.
As such, in my opinion, it is uniquely criminal to enslave a man. By doing so, you are putting into a cage that which is naturally free and capable of profoundly impacting the world. If there were another species on the planet that exhibited these qualities, I would not condone slavery for that species either. But, cattle do not change the world. They graze on grass, grow old, and die. From one generation to the next nothing changes, and more importantly, there doesn't even appear the possibility that anything could change. I do not hate or dislike cows, but by eating one, I do not feel like I am in danger of depriving the world of that particulars cow's unique contributions. In fact, that cow is actually serving its purpose in the natural order of things as part of the food chain. By contrast, I would not roast Einstein on a spit and serve him to my family. It would be a crime against humanity to deprive the world of his unique gifts.
Thanks for asking the question. I never had to think that through until just now.
I appreciate your honestySo it seems you just made a case for enslaving mentally retarded or down syndrome people since they generally will not contribute to society or change the world.
Also as you said an intelligent man may profoundly impact the world so what if such a beings impact would be profoundly against your best interest to have them be free
davidbfun wrote:
Quote God used slavery of His people as a way to teach them lessons. If I tried to teach my children to behave by beating them everyday, would you consider me a good father?
Oh wait, the bible advocates that too.
Proverbs 20:30 Blows and wounds cleanse away evil, and beatings purge the inmost being.
Quote Conquerors sold people as slaves. Take a choice: death or slavery. Conquerors, (i.e. people who are taking other people's stuff or property), are inherently evil. Slavery is a suitable practice for such people.
Quote People work for a wage and are fearful for their lives especially if they lose the job. They are slaves. Do not overstate your case. My boss can not legally beat me, (Exodus 21:20-21), nor can he keep me from changing jobs if I find a better one, (Leviticus 25:44-46).
Quote Abraham had at least 413 slaves. Sounds like a bad role model.
Quote Who has it better, the slave that is going to be fed, clothed and housed or the master that has to provide? Who has it better Donald Trump or the person that cleans his toilets?
As for your question, I think the guy that can afford a slave is probably a little better off.
Quote Joseph was sold as a slave and preserved the nation of Israel. Sometimes good can come from evil.
Quote Slaves serve your Master as you were doing service to the Lord. Employees work hard for your employer and do not defraud him and give him an honest day's work for the pay. Soldiers be happy with your pay and do not extort. Judges be honest and give justice. What? No instructions for slave masters or employers? Oh right, here's one:
Exodus 21:20 If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
Quote No one in the Bible ever spoke against the “evil” of slavery but acknowledge its existence and its purposefulness. My point exactly.
Quote So, NO slavery is not wrong. So, let me see if I understand you correctly:
Slavery should still exist in the United States and you would have no problem taking part in it?
Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 15 2010,08:56) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 15 2010,13:42) bodhitharta wrote: Quote Treat the animals humanely and then slaughter them for your pleasure, the fact is you accept the idea of “lower Species” murder for your pleasure, so the question is why? Good question.
I don't think of other animals as a lower species so much as I think of man as a unique species. Man, unlike animals, has the unique ability to create new things and to alter the world around him in profound ways. From the first person who controlled and used fire to the creators of the internet, man has transformed the world into a technological oasis that has made it easier for more people to live well across the globe. Whether it be a great work of art or a more productive way to produce food, man exhibits a unique gift for advanced thinking not exhibited by other animals. One may see it as evidence of the “divine spark” within us (as I do) or the crowning achievement of evolution, but there really is no debate about our status on the planet.
As such, in my opinion, it is uniquely criminal to enslave a man. By doing so, you are putting into a cage that which is naturally free and capable of profoundly impacting the world. If there were another species on the planet that exhibited these qualities, I would not condone slavery for that species either. But, cattle do not change the world. They graze on grass, grow old, and die. From one generation to the next nothing changes, and more importantly, there doesn't even appear the possibility that anything could change. I do not hate or dislike cows, but by eating one, I do not feel like I am in danger of depriving the world of that particulars cow's unique contributions. In fact, that cow is actually serving its purpose in the natural order of things as part of the food chain. By contrast, I would not roast Einstein on a spit and serve him to my family. It would be a crime against humanity to deprive the world of his unique gifts.
Thanks for asking the question. I never had to think that through until just now.
I appreciate your honestySo it seems you just made a case for enslaving mentally retarded or down syndrome people since they generally will not contribute to society or change the world.
Also as you said an intelligent man may profoundly impact the world so what if such a beings impact would be profoundly against your best interest to have them be free
Reread my post. You will notice that I always refer to species, or mankind. Because of the status of the species as a whole, I don't think that any member of the species should be enslaved.But, directly to your point, anyone who is capable of living independently should be allowed to do so. Their contributions to society may not be as grand as Einstein's, but their individual choices will help move society forward, even if in the smallest of ways. Children and incapacitated adults should be cared for, not enslaved. Because they are part of mankind, they should never be treated like property. The “divine spark” still exists within them, even if we can't fully see it.
I am editing this post to answer the other question from your post.
Criminals should be punished. So, all men are free to use their intelligence as they wish so long as it does not harm or defraud another human being.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 15 2010,14:12) Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 15 2010,08:56) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 15 2010,13:42) bodhitharta wrote: Quote Treat the animals humanely and then slaughter them for your pleasure, the fact is you accept the idea of “lower Species” murder for your pleasure, so the question is why? Good question.
I don't think of other animals as a lower species so much as I think of man as a unique species. Man, unlike animals, has the unique ability to create new things and to alter the world around him in profound ways. From the first person who controlled and used fire to the creators of the internet, man has transformed the world into a technological oasis that has made it easier for more people to live well across the globe. Whether it be a great work of art or a more productive way to produce food, man exhibits a unique gift for advanced thinking not exhibited by other animals. One may see it as evidence of the “divine spark” within us (as I do) or the crowning achievement of evolution, but there really is no debate about our status on the planet.
As such, in my opinion, it is uniquely criminal to enslave a man. By doing so, you are putting into a cage that which is naturally free and capable of profoundly impacting the world. If there were another species on the planet that exhibited these qualities, I would not condone slavery for that species either. But, cattle do not change the world. They graze on grass, grow old, and die. From one generation to the next nothing changes, and more importantly, there doesn't even appear the possibility that anything could change. I do not hate or dislike cows, but by eating one, I do not feel like I am in danger of depriving the world of that particulars cow's unique contributions. In fact, that cow is actually serving its purpose in the natural order of things as part of the food chain. By contrast, I would not roast Einstein on a spit and serve him to my family. It would be a crime against humanity to deprive the world of his unique gifts.
Thanks for asking the question. I never had to think that through until just now.
I appreciate your honestySo it seems you just made a case for enslaving mentally retarded or down syndrome people since they generally will not contribute to society or change the world.
Also as you said an intelligent man may profoundly impact the world so what if such a beings impact would be profoundly against your best interest to have them be free
Reread my post. You will notice that I always refer to species, or mankind. Because of the status of the species as a whole, I don't think that any member of the species should be enslaved.But, directly to your point, anyone who is capable of living independently should be allowed to do so. Their contributions to society may not be as grand as Einstein's, but their individual choices will help move society forward, even if in the smallest of ways. Children and incapacitated adults should be cared for, not enslaved. Because they are part of mankind, they should never be treated like property. The “divine spark” still exists within them, even if we can't fully see it.
I am editing this post to answer the other question from your post.
Criminals should be punished. So, all men are free to use their intelligence as they wish so long as it does not harm or defraud another human being.
So “unique” species should be exempt from harm or enslavement but common species such as cattle are not exempt am I understanding you correctly?Some people consider cows sacred and unique are they simply wrong?
bodhitharta,
To answer your question, yes.
I specifically addressed the cow thing in my previous post. I don't see cows as having a “divine spark”. However, if someone wishes to (non-violently) convince me otherwise, they are free to try.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 16 2010,05:21) bodhitharta, To answer your question, yes.
I specifically addressed the cow thing in my previous post. I don't see cows as having a “divine spark”. However, if someone wishes to (non-violently) convince me otherwise, they are free to try.
So when you say “divine spark” that includes all of mankind no matter what they believe?Also, Can someone lose this “divine spark”?
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Aug. 17 2010,01:08) Yes, to your first question, and no, to your second question.
Okay, I see so then what you are saying is that although everyone has the divine spark it simply may be undeveloped in some and highly developed in others i.e a matter of degree but none the less still present in all Humans?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
