Original Sin?

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts

Quote: aceofspades

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts

I dismiss the other gods mainly because of what I perceive as the absence of the Incarnation, the Resurrection, a verifiable history, a demand to serve others especially those in need, a healthy understanding of humanity that explains our struggles and suffering while giving us hope.

That's a partial list for me but I still have no idea why you would reject mine.

Quote: FrGamble

The divine pedagogy seen in the Bible are the exact opposites of the desires, prejudices, ideals, ideas, and notions of people thousands of years ago.

You can say so, but it isn't so.

You knwo in ancient civilizations, including Greece and Rome, iT was common practice to abandon newborn children deemed "unfit" or "not worth raising." I could expound on the reasons for this, but I won't. Reasons or no reasons, I find it as abhorrent as anyone else today. I'll just point out there were many, many jurisdictions were abandonment was against the law.

The point is all societies and civilizations codify their morality into law, more or less (thankfully much less now), regardless of what source they claim. And this goes back to the days of Hammurabi millennia ago. The Bible is little different as a source than any others which preceeded it. In some respects it's worse, because poeple don't think they can oppose it in key points because "God Said So." Therefore you get people using the Bible to defend slavery as recently as 160 yearsa go. If you want a more recent eample, it's being used today to deny the recognition of equal rights for same-sex couples, adn even euql rights to people like me.

Quote:

A God who is one not many,

I thought he was three ;)

I'll get into the cult of the Saints as a substitute for polytheism some other time.

Quote: FrGamble

That's a partial list for me but I still have no idea why you would reject mine.

Becasue it's not such a good argument. There are many ways through and around it.

It makes for a great meme, though.

Quote: Nareed

You can say so, but it isn't so.

The point is all societies and civilizations codify their morality into law, more or less (thankfully much less now), regardless of what source they claim. And this goes back to the days of Hammurabi millennia ago. The Bible is little different as a source than any others which preceeded it. In some respects it's worse, because poeple don't think they can oppose it in key points because "God Said So." Therefore you get people using the Bible to defend slavery as recently as 160 yearsa go. If you want a more recent eample, it's being used today to deny the recognition of equal rights for same-sex couples, adn even euql rights to people like me.

The reading from Mass today was:
(Mk. 12:28-34)
One of the scribes came to Jesus and asked him,
“Which is the first of all the commandments?”
Jesus replied, “The first is this:
Hear, O Israel!
The Lord our God is Lord alone!
You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart,
with all your soul,
with all your mind,
and with all your strength.
The second is this:
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
There is no other commandment greater than these.”
The scribe said to him, “Well said, teacher.
You are right in saying,
He is One and there is no other than he.
And to love him with all your heart,
with all your understanding,
with all your strength,
and to love your neighbor as yourself
is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
And when Jesus saw that he answered with understanding,
he said to him,
“You are not far from the Kingdom of God.”
And no one dared to ask him any more questions.

How anyone could or can squeeze slavery and/or the denial of equal rights to someone out of this summary of the Bible by Jesus is beyond me?!?

The first one is meaningless, as there is no God to love or despise or feel indiferent about.

Quote: FrGamble

The second is this:
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

This sounds good, but it isn't. What if your neighbor is a horrible person? If you love him as yourself, that would indicate low self-esteem or high self-loathing. If you don't, you're disobeying the commandment.

That's simplistic. By "neighbor" I assume it means all other people in a community, other communities, other nations, and so on. A commandment that would apply only to the people in yout immeidate vicinity isn't much, after all. But my objection remains. Many, I like to believe most, other people the world over are decent people. But what about those who aren't? Would you demand or even advise a line of Jews, gays and Gypsies heading into a gas chamber to love their German, Polish, Hungarian and other murderers? How about a woman who is abused by her husband? I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

In my judgment, loving people who seek to hurt you is deeply immoral.

Quote:

How anyone could or can squeeze slavery and/or the denial of equal rights to someone out of this summary of the Bible by Jesus is beyond me?!?

Perhaps because they use other parts. I'm pretty sure there is more to even the New Testament than the portion you quoted. In any case, whether you understand it or not, thefact is that it happens.

Quote: FrGamble

Evenbob, I've noticed many times an aversion you have to the ancients. You seem to think they were dimwits

Not at all, I think they did their best with what
they had. Which wasn't much. They lived in a
very small world, they rarely ventured more than
30 miles from where they were born. To put what
they said above what is being said now is foolish.

We do that with nothing else. Not with science or
medicine or technology. We never say 'lets see
what they said about this 2500 years ago' before
we get started. Yet we do it with religious writings.
We care more about what some old fart croaked
in 400 BC than we care about modern writers. Age
does not give credence to anything, especially
religion.

Quote: www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn't know they were doing anything wrong.

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

So, even with those two greatest commandments, slavery was an accepted part of life even in the New Testament.

P.s. I have great respect for you, FrGamble, as it is you vs everyone else here.

Quote: Nareed

The first one is meaningless, as there is no God to love or despise or feel indiferent about.

Your problems with the second might find their roots here. We already lack the ability to follow perfectly the second due to original sin, without a loving and real relationship with God we also would lack the inspiration and constant encouragement needed to love others so much.

Quote:

This sounds good, but it isn't. What if your neighbor is a horrible person? If you love him as yourself, that would indicate low self-esteem or high self-loathing. If you don't, you're disobeying the commandment.

That's simplistic. By "neighbor" I assume it means all other people in a community, other communities, other nations, and so on. A commandment that would apply only to the people in yout immeidate vicinity isn't much, after all. But my objection remains. Many, I like to believe most, other people the world over are decent people. But what about those who aren't? Would you demand or even advise a line of Jews, gays and Gypsies heading into a gas chamber to love their German, Polish, Hungarian and other murderers? How about a woman who is abused by her husband? I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

In my judgment, loving people who seek to hurt you is deeply immoral.

Your point was driven home to me a few years ago when a woman told me she hadn't forgiven the person who raped her. She said the proof of this lack of forgiveness was because she couldn't stand being around him. She asked me when she would be able to forgive this man and be friends again?!? My jaw hit the floor and I said to her that I wanted her to forgive this guy but the next time she saw him she should punch his lights out. I was exaggerating of course, maybe I could punch him in the face for her. What followed was me trying to explain that the forgiveness God was asking from her had little to do with that man but rather was meant to free her from the haunting grip of the evil done to her. Not forgiving was allowing this person and the evil done to her to still have a grip on her, God wanted to set her free. She should forgive him and never have anything to do with that person ever again (and then there should be justice and he should go to jail). You can still love the immoral person and forgive them, not for them but for yourself - so that the evil of hate that oozed from them will never poison your heart.

First of all and very importantly we need to remind ourselves that what jumps to our minds when we hear the word slavery was not what was present at the time of the Bible. Secondly, I think its interesting that still today Christianity is criticized for being too political; yet here is a case where the Bible could have spoken out more clearly about the abuses of indentured servants (which was closer to reality than slaves as we understand it today) and we are lambasted for it. Thirdly,a quick look at the Acts of the Apostles showed that the earliest group of committed Christians lived very counter cultural and did not have these "bondservants" at all. They shared all things equally. Fourthly, do the handful of verses mentioning slaves (read servants) really hold more weight than the Gospel accounts of Jesus himself proclaiming equality of all, the Exodus event, and countless other passages pointing to major problems with slavery. Finally, I think we would all agree that the Bible read in its entirety would leave no sane person thinking it was pro-slavery in its teaching.