William Lane Craig in his debate with Peter Slezak, at 68 minutes in says: "I think that if you agree with me that there are certain things that are really right and wrong like child abuse, cruelty, and slavery then you will agree with me that we need God as a transcendent foundation for those objective moral values."I would like to hear where in the Bible is slavery (as perpetrated as one person owning another because they are better), cruelty, and child abuser are not just condoned in the Bible but prescribed as appropriate human behavior? Listen. Hear that? Yeah, me too. Nothing.
There is a problem though. The God that William Lane Craig is appealing to, Yahweh, does NOT condemn child abuse, cruelty, or slavery. So I simply cannot figure out how Craig's argument is supposed to work! Link
The reason why Loftus does not understand Dr William Lane Craig's argument because he does not understand who God is. It seems clear to me that Yahweh has never commanded anyone to abuse their children, enslave anyone the way Africans, Native Americans, and Asians have been enslaved and imperialized by Europeans and Americans throughout history, or to be cruel anyone! If Yahweh had commanded the enslavement of Africans and the genocide of indigenous populations of Africa and the Western Hemisphere then Loftus would have a reason to be confused as to Yahweh's existence.
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. - Romans 1:18-20Debunking Christianity: Can God Exist if Yahweh Doesn't?
I think the ultimate point is that the bible is rather confused about slavery. Paul tells slaves to be good slaves to glorify christ, and he sends an escaped slave back to his christian master, Jesus didn't condemn slavery (especially when given the chance (luke 12:45-48). Then there's the Old Testament which has whole chapters which are in essence a slave owners handbook.
ReplyDeleteYou can argue that Jewish slavery was not exactly the same as slavery in the new world. That's all well and good, but very besides the point and ignores all the passages where the Hebrews took slaves after battles (battles sanctioned by your god)...
Wrong, Ryan. The slavery experienced by those the Hebrews took as slaves is still not the same as slavery practiced in the New World. At no time in the Old Testament slavery condoned - what it does do is place limits on it. No one in the laws is ever put into slavery because they are somehow less than human than the Hebrews. Several places the Jews are reminded: You used to be slaves therefore watch how you treat others.
ReplyDeleteSlavery at its time, in the ancient context was not evil as it was when Europeans enslaved others because they thought that they were superior. The Battles were indeed sanctioned by God but mistreating and dehumanizing slaves is never sanctioned in the Bible. You should read the other articles I have written on the subject and definitely read Mariano's article on this
http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/06/does-bible-and-its-god-condone-slavery.html
So you are saying that Americans, today, would be justified in keeping African slaves so long as they did it exactly like the Ancient Hebrews did?
ReplyDeleteWhy can't American soldiers keep the young Afghani virgins whom they can bring back for their own use?
I'm saying that according the laws of Moses, slaves had better lives than many employees have now under capitalism or socialism. And if Afghani virgins were treated as proscribed by the Law, many would most definitely be better off.
ReplyDeleteRyan, you claim to know what the Bible says. Don't your realize that every 70 years in ancient Israel slaves were supposed to be set free if they wanted to be free from slavery and a redistribution of wealth along the same lines as to what they had when Israel first took over Canaan when they returned from Egypt? Name a better deal.
Good thing I'm not holding my breath for the 40 acres and mule my fore-bearers were supposed to get.
So you are saying you think slavery is ok but you favor socialism. OK, sort of two mutually exclusive systems, but hey, you're the guy that believes in the big bang but not evolution, so this shouldn't surprise me...
ReplyDelete