Every Generation Shall Have a Prophet.

Every Generation Shall Have a Prophet.

by William Joseph Published on September 17th, 2009, 1:11 pm Rift: Religion

Was it not William Wilberforce, a true Christian that turned the tide in Engalnd against slavery and was it not that tide that landed upon the shores of the U.S. some tme later.

Yes it was a Christian armed with a proper hermenutic and biblically centered conscience working out His convictions.

In the sceond world war when false Christians were succoming to naziism It was Dietrich Bonhoeffer a true Christian who understood the cost of Dicipleship and stood against everything false, humanism false christianity and idolitary surrounding Adolf Hitler.

Christ said that there would be the false. Wolves in sheeps clothing but that the true would be known by their works.
Not everyone who says to Me LORD, LORD shall enter into the kingdom of heaven but those who do the will of my father.

There are distinctions to be made for sure. Your point is perfect to show the difference.

[Greengitters]

Yes, I beleive that Adam was created fully mature and that Eve was created fully mature with the capacity to now procreate and give birth to children.

Science can understand and explore procreation and even modify the methods but it has no access to the original recipe as it were to create an original person . So there is no scientific method to observe and understand original creation.
If we had access to those things we would be God and we will never be.

Science has gone a lot further in explaining the creation of life than Creationists have. Here's a dumbed down version of it:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/origins/knoll.html

This question is for Questioner and William Joseph.

I was wondering how, as 'progressive Christians' let's call it (believers who don't believe in a 6 day creation, but are believers nonetheless), how you are able to believe at all? For instance, WJ said that he did believe in the creation of Adam and Eve at full maturity. Why is this believable and not a 6 day creation? It's kind of a picking and choosing form of faith. "I'll pick what I want to believe, and disregard what has been scientifically proven wrong."

I mean, how is it possible to reject some parts of the bible, and accept others. How do you pick what to believe and what not to?

Is it not like saying, "Well, I do believe in Santa, and that he can descend a chimney by touching the side of his nose, but it's scentifically impossible to travel the entire world in one night."

I know this is coming off as disrespectful, but I truly don't mean it to be. The belief of god and the holy trinity (and all that it encompasses) is as fantastical to me as the idea of Santa Claus and flying reindeer, which once again sounds disrespectful, but I don't mean it to be.

I respect your right believe whole heartedly, and believe as honestly in that as I do in my own right to believe what I believe. But I am honestly asking how you can believe in one aspect of your religion and disregard other aspects, especially when comparing two non-proven ideas, each as fantastical as the other (from a non-believing, objectional point of view). How do you choose what to believe and what not to?

I suppose blind faith is something that is beyond my comprehension

[BecauseHeLives]

For the record I believe that Adam & Eve were both created fully mature (as was the whole universe). I also fully believe in 6 day creation.

You do make some good points about some Christian beliefs. As a Christian I don't understand other Christians sometimes.

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

I mean, how is it possible to reject some parts of the bible, and accept others. How do you pick what to believe and what not to?

It depends on what you believe the Bible to be. Some fundamentalists claim there's a "Christian world view" that they have exclusive ownership of... a view that includes the ridiculous notion that the Bible was personally dictated to several writers and is completely consistent not only internally but with the universe as a whole. Simply reading the blasted thing will show you that this can't be a valid claim, yet an awful lot of people waste a LOT of time arguing from that point of view. They appear to be worshipping the book, which is one of the objections that Muslims have against Christians.

Other Christians have a more realistic view of the Bible... one that recognizes that the world and the Bible's statements about the world don't actually coincide. As I've heard it stated by a friend of mine, the Bible is seen as a record of past people of faith in their evolving experiences with the divine. Thus, the Old Testament is a tool for studying how ancient people lived their faith, but it doesn't necessarily have a connection to today's faith... other than perhaps to indicate some errors that the faithful made long ago. The obviously mythical parts, from the creation stories to the apocalyptic visions, are not seen as being needed as literal articles of fact. But Christians of a more liberal style still find them useful for more allegorical teachings. They aren't "rejected," really... only viewed as something other than fact. Which anyone with a little sense could hardly dispute.

[Greengitters]

I mean, how is it possible to reject some parts of the bible, and accept others. How do you pick what to believe and what not to?

It depends on what you believe the Bible to be. Some fundamentalists claim there's a "Christian world view" that they have exclusive ownership of... a view that includes the ridiculous notion that the Bible was personally dictated to several writers and is completely consistent not only internally but with the universe as a whole. Simply reading the blasted thing will show you that this can't be a valid claim, yet an awful lot of people waste a LOT of time arguing from that point of view. They appear to be worshipping the book, which is one of the objections that Muslims have against Christians.

Other Christians have a more realistic view of the Bible... one that recognizes that the world and the Bible's statements about the world don't actually coincide. As I've heard it stated by a friend of mine, the Bible is seen as a record of past people of faith in their evolving experiences with the divine. Thus, the Old Testament is a tool for studying how ancient people lived their faith, but it doesn't necessarily have a connection to today's faith... other than perhaps to indicate some errors that the faithful made long ago. The obviously mythical parts, from the creation stories to the apocalyptic visions, are not seen as being needed as literal articles of fact. But Christians of a more liberal style still find them useful for more allegorical teachings. They aren't "rejected," really... only viewed as something other than fact. Which anyone with a little sense could hardly dispute.

No, of course, I understand that.

My confusion came in the fact that one thing that seemed fantastical was disregarded (the 6 day creation of the earth and stars) and another was accepted (the creation of a fully matured Adam and Eve). This is the 'picking and choosing' that I mentioned in my origianl post that I don't understand.

P.S. It was quite late last night when I wrote my original post, and I didn't realize there were four more pages of posts. Mine must have seemed like it came out of nowhere. I apologise for that. Hey, it was 3:30 or something.

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

No, of course, I understand that.

My confusion came in the fact that one thing that seemed fantastical was disregarded (the 6 day creation of the earth and stars) and another was accepted (the creation of a fully matured Adam and Eve). This is the 'picking and choosing' that I mentioned in my origianl post that I don't understand.

Oh. Yeah, well that is part of the puzzle that is religion. I guess (and I have to stress that it is a guess) that for a few people, the desire is to hold to the Bible's claim of historical fact at all points possible, but they will defer to science when they think it's needed. The old universe is pretty well as accepted around the civilized world as the heliocentric model, so it's hard to tell people with a straight face that the universe is only 6000 years old. But they still can't accept this whole evolution business, so they take the tack that evolution is for all non-humans, but not for us.

Seems pretty weird to me...

[A Person]

Was it not William Wilberforce, a true Christian that turned the tide in Engalnd against slavery and was it not that tide that landed upon the shores of the U.S. some tme later.

Yes it was a Christian armed with a proper hermenutic and biblically centered conscience working out His convictions.

In the sceond world war when false Christians were succoming to naziism It was Dietrich Bonhoeffer a true Christian who understood the cost of Dicipleship and stood against everything false, humanism false christianity and idolitary surrounding Adolf Hitler.

Christ said that there would be the false. Wolves in sheeps clothing but that the true would be known by their works.
Not everyone who says to Me LORD, LORD shall enter into the kingdom of heaven but those who do the will of my father.

There are distinctions to be made for sure. Your point is perfect to show the difference.

Sorry, this post slipped off the radar.

You miss my point. It is precisely that modern Christians all agree that slavery is an evil, while prior to around 200 years ago, slavery was accepted as a normal, perfectly moral thing for Christians to engage in. All through the Old Testament and the New, slavery was never condemned, prohibited or censured. Rather it was regulated by the Bible and some limits placed on the cruelty permitted (it was OK to beat a slave but not hard enough to knock a tooth out, you must release a slave after a term, but you can keep his wife and children and if he loves them you can poke a hole in his ear and keep him forever etc)

The Bible didn't change 200 years ago. Society did. Christians and freethinkers alike.

Yes it was a Christian armed with a proper hermenutic and biblically centered conscience working out His convictions.

But how can you say it was a 'proper hermeneutic'? The 'hermeneutic' is an exterior, subjective, interpretation of the 'absolute word of God'. It is the application of human logic and reason.

And btw obviously NOT biblically centered conscience, the supporters of slavery used the Bible NOT the abolitionists.

If the Bible was supposed to provide God's word on the subject it failed miserably. For thousands of years before and after Christ - AND during Christ's time on this Earth, slavery was practiced with the approval of churches, society, governments and yes even the Bible. It wasn't some small sect or rouge priests - slavery was virtually universal. The rebels (described as 'fanatics' at the time) were those opposed to slavery.

To appeal to 'the true would be known by their works' again suggests using man's judgment to asses outcomes to censor the Bible. As we have seen in another thread we are then told that we are incapable of assessing God's ineffable plan. So what might seem to us to be a 'good thing' e.g. preventing suffering, might not to God who has absolute knowledge.

Given that

"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." Jefferson Davis

Perhaps by opposing what God sanctioned and Christ at least tolerated we are working against God's will.

When the Bible is your only source of moral guidance how can you declare slavery to be a bad thing?

[William Joseph]

Greengitters said

This question is for Questioner and William Joseph.

I was wondering how, as 'progressive Christians' let's call it (believers who don't believe in a 6 day creation, but are believers nonetheless), how you are able to believe at all? For instance, WJ said that he did believe in the creation of Adam and Eve at full maturity. Why is this believable and not a 6 day creation? It's kind of a picking and choosing form of faith. "I'll pick what I want to believe, and disregard what has been scientifically proven wrong."

In response let me say that i absolutely beleive in a 6 day creation just exactly according to the plain and simple teaching of scripture. I do not fall into the "progressive Chirstian" catagory.
sorry ifi had left any impression otherwise.

[william joseph]

A person wrote

And btw obviously NOT biblically centered conscience, the supporters of slavery used the Bible NOT the abolitionists

There are several aspects to this one is, that even the Bible explains that it can be missquoted or taken out of context. This is what you see in the temptation of Jesus where the scripture is misquoted in to Him in the temptation but that he requotes it in context or balances it out within the scope of the spirit of meaning based on his full inderstanding.
it was the faculty of Jesus conscience informed by the full scope of the texts that prevented him from falling.

Another aspect is that if the Christian faith is true that means that there is given to the truly converted "the Holy Spirit" who is said to lead us into all truth especially with regard to sin and righteousness. he can be ignored and not all people are truly converted in a spiritual way and therefore posess Him.

John newton ( the writter of the hymn "Amazing Grace" )was originally a slave trader and became a Christian he was insensitive at first to the scope of his terrible life but he became so terribly aware of it that he abandoned it and even stood firmly against it and encouraged emacipation in England.

[A Person]

William,

I am not disputing that some abolitionists were Christians.

You are carefully avoiding the issue, which is that a book on moral guidance that was 'wrong' for over 2000 years is either a) not moral or b) useless.

You seem to favour 'useless'

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

And btw obviously NOT biblically centered conscience, the supporters of slavery used the Bible NOT the abolitionists

There are several aspects to this one is, that even the Bible explains that it can be missquoted or taken out of context.

Odd that you would say that and then completely fail to show where the Bible may have been misquoted or taken out of context when used to support slavery. I've requested this may times, any quote from the Bible that even comes close to saying the slavery is not moral. Never yet had anyone even try to supply one.

Instead, the Bible not only supports slavery, but it makes slavery a basic model for human relationships with the supernatural. It says that all people have a master, either God or sin. To this day, the whole mindset of subservience to authority is a central hallmark of nearly all Christians' theology. Screw that. Society has outgrown it. Hopefully, forever.

[Willaim Joseph]

Southern fried infidel wrote

Instead, the Bible not only supports slavery, but it makes slavery a basic model for human relationships with the supernatural. It says that all people have a master, either God or sin. To this day, the whole mindset of subservience to authority is a central hallmark of nearly all Christians' theology. Screw that. Society has outgrown it. Hopefully, forever.

Am I to take this as an authoritative statement or can there be such a thing in your veiw? I confess that i say this toungue in cheek. We all recognise that there must be some form of authority in society. I can understand that as we look back we see the stark reality of slavery in a theocratic society. We see God even governing it in various aspects. God is dealing with the relaities in the world and the reality of sin.

The Bible is the progressive revelation of God. Remember that Christians beleive that Jesus Christ is the full revelation of God in human form. There is yet a final and perfect revelation of God yet to come " for we shall see him as he is" And yes as Peter indicated in 2 Peter There will be those who laugh, those who are angry and have given up all hope that Godf is faithful "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." Well we are going to have to serve somebody.

But for now since jesus is the fullest revelation of God and he has spoken last ,the sermon on the mount (Jesus Christ speaking) is the exposition of the 10 commandments dealing with both action and motive it is this today that is to be our guide tough not a means of self righteousness leading to salvation. self righteousness leads away from salvation and is rooted in pride.

The Old Testament is a part of that progesive revelation it is an important part of the past but the later instructions are the one binding upon us today. It seems that God did in fact govern issues including slavery.
The purpose is that, theocracy or not we, and i say we are an evil people we are the ones who do salvery we are the ones who do divorce and we are the ones who love to worship our own ideas.
God is not telling anyone today to have slaves but to treat those who we may be in authority under us in a gracious and merciful way. Do you oppose His fuller revelation or find fault with His involvement with sinners?

A person wrote

William,

I am not disputing that some abolitionists were Christians.

You are carefully avoiding the issue, which is that a book on moral guidance that was 'wrong' for over 2000 years is either a) not moral or b) useless.

You seem to favour 'useless'

I say that God governed the behavior of those people( the slave owners) for purposes related to the hardness of their hearts and that they would have on there own likely commited worse abuses whithout the instruction.
The words of Christ are to govern Christians today. Now if you accuse us of living hypocritically and not according to Christ ( as we should be today) then i accept that and i agree that this must change. I will start then withthe log in my own eye.

If i understand your question it is "Why did the view of so called Christians change in a lage scale way at some point in history though the bible still says what it always said. Is it even a moral guide at all ? and are Christians actually following it?
Society is always reforming (based on it's own desires and what is expedient for the moment)and the Christian Church is always reforming ( based on going back to the Bible and the teachings of Christ in context)Ther are times when in Christianity there are large sweeps of enlightenment based on this reformation. MartinLuther was a great reformer but no the only reformer. He is just a man that stood against the error of beleivers as a beliver. Yhis still happens. so to understand where and waht chiristians should be you must look to Jesus if you find fault with Him then so be it but understand He is a fuller revelation of God. why go back to the lesser revelation of God to see him in his fullness as if he had fully revealed himself?

[william joseph]

I have seen people submit videos of Stange and questionable preachers in a way that would imply that these are average Christians.

If you want to set up a strawman argument in which you can easily win based on a faulty understanding of what Christianity or christians are then carry on but since there are good speakers and good arguments why don't we engage the debate in it's highest form.

You are right about the fact that Ther christain world view is one that understands that all people will either serve God or sin so in fact there is a subserveint reality in either case.

Check out this link that does a great job of looking at this reality with a full engagement of a biblical text.

[url]http://thegospelcoalition.org/resources/video/The-Grand-Demythologizer-The-Gospel-and-Idolatry
[/url]

[A Person]

I can understand that as we look back we see the stark reality of slavery in a theocratic society. We see God even governing it in various aspects. God is dealing with the relaities in the world and the reality of sin.

What? God is incapable of providing guidance and direction? He has to deal with human 'realities'? And yet you claim God created reality?

God was pretty damn quick to smite all sorts of 'realities' and there is no shortage of commandments and instructions on how we must live our lives in accordance with His wishes, except that with slavery (unlike say adultery, praying to the wrong God, stealing, lying, envy, eating shrimp) he had to deal with the reality that slavery was endemic and popular with slave owners?

Your God who thunders "These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you" is incapable of saying "Slavery is bad, MKay?"

It's amazing that you think that 200 years ago man has discovered a Truth about the evils of slavery that even God was incapable of enunciating because of 'realities'

Because of God's 'dealing with reality' this scourge continued throughout human history.

to understand where and waht chiristians should be you must look to Jesus if you find fault with Him then so be it but understand He is a fuller revelation of God.

So where did Jesus say "Slavery is bad, folks, stop it now"? You and I both know he too was silent on the subject.
Jesus saw slavery all around him and even fixed up slaves for their master's enjoyment, yet he didn't think to say "Ok I'm curing this slave, but he is now free - go and do likewise, free all your slaves for no man should own another".

I think if I proposed a book on moral guidance that accepted the reality of rape and said "You can only rape on Tuesdays, and always leave a gift when you're done" you would rightly not have a very high impression of it.

[william joseph]

Because of God's 'dealing with reality' this scourge continued throughout human history.

So our sin is God's fault?



The 10 commandments were to guide all relationships even those which were based on master servant relationships. Finacial reversal or incurring a large debt would often put people into these relationships.
Often the one who owed the debt would be destitute if not for the arrangement of attaching oneself to his debtor and working of the debt so that neither party would be in a lose lose situation.

God deals in the real world full of sin ,mistrust, hate and rebellion against his authority.
How did Paul feel about salves?
Read this for yourself what Paul advises with regard to a run away slave that had stolen from his master. Under Roman Law (not God'sLaw") this slave could be killed.
Paul interjects a Christ centered aproach to bring about a reconncilliation.

Note also this salve was converted to Jesus Christ. Interesting hey. You refuse to beleive God because of a hypothetical situation (for you) yet this person embraced Christ and returned to find a loving acceptance.

Perhaps this slave understands thre total scope of his situation better than an onlooker. Or do you insult him who actually lived as a slave and yet came to Christ.

8Therefore, although in Christ I could be bold and order you to do what you ought to do, 9yet I appeal to you on the basis of love. I then, as Paul—an old man and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus— 10I appeal to you for my son Onesimus,[a] who became my son while I was in chains. 11Formerly he was useless to you, but now he has become useful both to you and to me.
12I am sending him—who is my very heart—back to you. 13I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel. 14But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do will be spontaneous and not forced. 15Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back for good— 16no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a man and as a brother in the Lord.

17So if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would welcome me. 18If he has done you any wrong or owes you anything, charge it to me. 19I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand. I will pay it back—not to mention that you owe me your very self. 20I do wish, brother, that I may have some benefit from you in the Lord; refresh my heart in Christ. 21Confident of your obedience, I write to you, knowing that you will do even more than I ask.

22And one thing more: Prepare a guest room for me, because I hope to be restored to you in answer to your prayers.

23Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings. 24And so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers.

25The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.

[william joseph]

A person said,

So where did Jesus say "Slavery is bad, folks, stop it now"? You and I both know he too was silent on the subject.
Jesus saw slavery all around him and even fixed up slaves for their master's enjoyment, yet he didn't think to say "Ok I'm curing this slave, but he is now free - go and do likewise, free all your slaves for no man should own another".

Jesus was primarily ministering to an enslaved people the Romans were over them. They didn't have slaves themselves they were enslaved in a manner of speaking.

Jesus did heal slaves and in particular a person who was genuinly concerned for his servant came to Jesus for the good of his servant.

Let's actully look at what it says in Matthew 8

5When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6"Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering."
7Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him."

8The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."

10When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

13Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour.


The centurion cared abiut his servant and jesus cared about both the centurion and the servant. Jesus cared even about those who would hear and fear his judgment so that they might excersise faith just as the centurion had.

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

Because of God's 'dealing with reality' this scourge continued throughout human history.

So our sin is God's fault?

Now you're touching on the very popular views of God's all-powerfulness. In a world where a god exists that is all-powerful and all-knowing, where does the responsibility for ANY event lie? With the god, of course.

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

A person said,

So where did Jesus say "Slavery is bad, folks, stop it now"? You and I both know he too was silent on the subject.
Jesus saw slavery all around him and even fixed up slaves for their master's enjoyment, yet he didn't think to say "Ok I'm curing this slave, but he is now free - go and do likewise, free all your slaves for no man should own another".

Jesus was primarily ministering to an enslaved people the Romans were over them.

It appears that you are saying that societal standards trump moral teaching. In other words, all of God's pronouncement on morality had to be tempered because God simply couldn't wean humans off of the slavery habit. Is this what you think is the reason for nothing in the Bible saying anything against slavery?

[A Person]

So our sin is God's fault?

The 10 commandments were to guide all relationships even those which were based on master servant relationships. Finacial reversal or incurring a large debt would often put people into these relationships.

What grounds do have for declaring slavery a sin? Or to put is another way: how is man supposed to know slavery is a sin? If God did not see fit to declare it a sin and indeed cursed all of an Ham's descendents into slavery because of something Ham did. God then regulated slavery, providing rules for how they shoulds be treated in both the Old and New testaments

Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money

Exodus 21:26-27 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake.

Exodus 21:1-4: If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

Deuteronomy 15:12-18: And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him.

Exodus 21:7: And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.

Leviticus 25:44-46 Thy bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you: of them shall ye buy bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land. And they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession, they shall be your bond-man forever.

Leviticus 25:48-53: After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him: Either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him, or any that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself. And he shall reckon with him that bought him from the year that he was sold to him unto the year of jubilee: and the price of his sale shall be according unto the number of years, according to the time of an hired servant shall it be with him.

If you want to look at the so-called ten commandments, where are slaves? In with the other lawful property, wife, ox, ass.

As for debtors, not only the debtor but his sons would become slaves

II Kings 4:1: Now there cried a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha, saying, Thy servant my husband is dead; and thou knowest that thy servant did fear the LORD: and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be bondmen.
New Testament

Luke 12:45-48: The master of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

Ephesians 6:5-9: Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Colossians 3:22 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.

Colossians 4:1: Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.

1 Timothy 6:1-3 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort. If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

So it is not as if God forgot to mention anything about slavery. God, Jesus and Paul all saw nothing wrong with it, nor with beating slaves, as long as they survived the beating for a day. What grounds do you have for declaring god wron and slavery a sin?

Fortunately even Christians are better than their God and realize that there is a superior morality to be found outside the Bible that overrides it.

[William Joseph]

This whole passage regulates how beleivers in the New Covenant are to operate whether they are a master or a slave an employer or the one employed.


Ephesians 6:5-9: Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

This arrangement and this behavior makes no sense apart from beleif in Christ as Lord over ones life. It is to apply to beleivers. People who do not follow Christ from the heart can do anything ,the unbeleiving master he can do anything and not think of God for the unbeleiving slave he can hate his master and kill him in his mind every day if he wishes.

.

This is consistent with God as he has revealed himself in Christ. Paul is not dealing with pie in the sky. he is showing how the reality of forgiveness in Christ and fellowship with God are achieved in the realities of life.

when you speak of a superior morality ( to the 10 commandments) or its fuller exposition in the sermons, healings teachings and parables of Christ what are you talking about? Objectively what are you talking about ? i say there is no such thing. You are blowing a ,moral trumpet into a vacuum.

If you beleive and practice moral relativism then ther is no such thing as moral absolutes.


I can understand wrestling with the topics that come up in certain portions of scripture but for the most part it is is a smoke screen for justifying a rejection of Christ.

The real question that is posed to us today is "Who is Jesus And does he have any legitimate claim upon my life"

In the end it is the only issue .
You are not comming up to speed Jesus is THE ONE who you must bring all of you objections to he is the one you must either discard or trust and once one knows of Him he will do one of the two.
To some he's the barrier to others he's the way.
He will be no other.
i am continually faced with service to the self life or serrvice to God through Christ.
I came to the conclusion years ago that my resistance to Christ was real and not imagined . I eventually faound him to be very real and very merciful.

[A Person]

when you speak of a superior morality ( to the 10 commandments) or its fuller exposition in the sermons, healings teachings and parables of Christ what are you talking about? Objectively what are you talking about ? i say there is no such thing. You are blowing a ,moral trumpet into a vacuum.

If you beleive and practice moral relativism then ther is no such thing as moral absolutes.

Duh. We have just shown that regarding slavery at least, there is no moral absolute - at least as far as your God (who has to deal with pragmatic realities and moral absolutes be damned) and Bible are concerned.

So where does this superior morality you appeal to, that declares the morality of the Bible and thousands of years of Christian thinking wrong, come from? We've just spent thousands of words showing it's not the Bible or you would be happy keeping slaves and beating them (but not so hard that they lose a tooth)

I do think there are moral ideals. Reducing suffering, maximising freedom, self-determination, happiness, honesty etc. The challenge is that different people place differing value to these ideals and they can conflict. Being honest can decrease happiness and cause suffering "Yes dear, that dress does make you look fat"

We all trade freedom for reduced suffering. I enter into servitude (fixed term contracts) where I agree to serve a master (client) in return he agrees to provide the means to sustenance. But it is my choice, even if those choices are constrained.

We make contracts, covenants and agreements with each other all the time. It's when the power is grossly uneven that immorality occurs. It's not immoral for a man to have sex with a woman however if the woman is not free to say no, e.g. she is economically dependent and you have power to affect that, then it is immoral. It is immoral to have sex with a child because the child does not have the ability to decline. Usury is immoral if the person is driven by circumstance to accept. Being conscripted is immoral if the choice is a firing squad. Stealing is immoral since the victim has no choice. It is immoral to deny food to a starving person, medical aid to a sick one or shelter to a homeless one. Is it immoral to steal food to feed a starving family? That needs a bit of thought and reasoning 'Thou shalt not steal' is no help. It would be best if he were not driven to steal, but most people would consider it the lesser of the evils. We would also expect that when the family is able to repay that they do so.

All of these things are based on circumstances, so what is moral and immoral is relative.
Applying reason, logic and values to a moral problem produces sensible answers. Applying the Bible results in silliness

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

when you speak of a superior morality ( to the 10 commandments) or its fuller exposition in the sermons, healings teachings and parables of Christ what are you talking about? Objectively what are you talking about ? i say there is no such thing. You are blowing a ,moral trumpet into a vacuum.

If you beleive and practice moral relativism then ther is no such thing as moral absolutes.

Why do you think that there should be such a thing as a "moral absolute"? There are some rules for moral behavior that are common across any society, simply because a society without them could not operate. But outside of those few sensible things, there are, as you say, no absolutes. Morality evolves, just as everything else in the human experience.

By and large, morality evolved away from the concept of slavery, as it was defined in the Bible. That evolution was not driven by any divine revelation. It came about through the workings of empathy, which is a social instinct.

If a God exists, it did nothing to foreshadow or lead anyone to that change in views. The written record of the religion says this plainly. It states unambiguously that slavery is acceptable, while eating shellfish is not. Go figure. I mean that as literal advice for you or anyone else who thinks that they can glean some absolute morality from "holy writings" set in stone 2000 years ago.

[Questioner]

My confusion came in the fact that one thing that seemed fantastical was disregarded (the 6 day creation of the earth and stars) and another was accepted (the creation of a fully matured Adam and Eve). This is the 'picking and choosing' that I mentioned in my origianl post that I don't understand.

P.S. It was quite late last night when I wrote my original post, and I didn't realize there were four more pages of posts. Mine must have seemed like it came out of nowhere. I apologise for that. Hey, it was 3:30 or something.

First of all, a true Christian is a follower of Christ. The old testament predated Christ, and while it does have some very useful stuff, like the 10 commandments, it is not part of my religion. Jesus was quite a radical in his day, you know. He fundamentally demanded of us that we live an honorable life, and especially that we behave in a socially kind and responsible way. He told us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the sick and generally comfort the afflicted in whatever way we can. The bible provides us with the only information we have about His teachings. And yes, I know that most of it was written somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-100 years after his death. People mostly do have faith in a god. If your life has not been blessed with faith, you probably cannot understand those of us who do have faith in God.

I think christians who want to force other people to follow a religion (typically their own) are dead wrong. Faith is a very personal thing.

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

Jesus was quite a radical in his day, you know.

Interesting, that. In his day, John Calvin was a radical as well. But today, he's a bastion of conservative thopught. Time does seem to change all sorts of things... thus a man who 2000 years ago agitated against the "establishment" and preached universal love is now the favorite guy to invoke when going to war or urging that people have a right -- nay eve a DUTY -- to own guns.

[Willimam Joseph]

Southern fried infidel wrote

Why do you think that there should be such a thing as a "moral absolute"? There are some rules for moral behavior that are common across any society, simply because a society without them could not operate. But outside of those few sensible things, there are, as you say, no absolutes. Morality evolves, just as everything else in the human experience.

Questioner wrote

Faith is a very personal thing.

This must be faith in a real and dependable object and i do not deny that there is a subjective component related to that faith.


These views are very , very appealing. These views have always been very appealing in fact as far as humanity is concerned these views (at least in an early and unevolved state) have been with us from almost the time of creation.
"Did God surely say that you should not eat of any tree in the garden?
" you will surely not die"
"God knows that if you eat of it you will be like God knowing the difference between good and evil"

In a nutshell "Don't listen to God there are no consequences for disobeying, you can decide for yourself what is right and wrong through the powers of your own subjective and independant self reasoning"

Satan was offering a different path to wisdom holding out the promise that people can dicern life on their own. His words suggest that however beautiful God's revelation, it is not really neccessary. Satan's wisdom places peoples lives in their own hands, so that they rely on their own ability to think, interpret, understand, and apply. The serpent is selling Eve the most attractive and cruelest of lies, the lie of outonomy and self sufficiency. He offers her wisdom that does not bow the knee to God.
from In[i]struments in the redeemers hands (people in need of change helping people in need of change)
[/i] Written by Paul David Tripp