It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: r0xor
I'm not asserting that Noah even existed, much less Utnapishtim of Epic of Gilgamesh lore existed, or that God directly caused it to even happen. I'm just saying there is some evidence that water levels rose high for a short time in the past XX,000 years, causing many homo sapiens to die.
The same evidence says that genealogically, the current Earth's population of humans descends from as small as 10% or less of a remainder of survivors.
The same bologna that gets tied in with the tales of Atlantis. If it seems like I'm reaching for new mythological books to draw from, it's only because my point is that the most recent big flood was not just a biblical or abrahamic idea.
Quite honestly, yes, it'd just take me a little bit of time. Let me get back to you on that.
The truth is, they are fanciful assumptions made by one homo sapien in his limited capacity to try to understand and describe the infinite that is the Creator of the Universe. That's all most religion really is, if you get down to it.
True in the sense that we do not know if God truly had a hand at all in any of the events that transpired during World War II. I'm simply presenting the idea that it is indeed possible, and maybe to some, probable.
All societies haven't come up with the same basic set of laws, far from it, that is IMO incorrect. In all of human history, really?!
But good point regarding Abrahamic faiths. They do come from a former time in history when things were much lower on that j curve of yours and they were written into text at that time. Set in stone from there on. Not subject to edit. Imperfect forever. Just like humans.
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Entreri06
The first link refers directly to the verse I was speaking of in 1 Timothy, that the "American model" of slavery was forbidden in the NT, it's where a person or some other steals/kidnaps a person and sells them into slavery. So when the member said the NT condones the American model that's wholly untrue. Men and women were stolen in Africa by slave traders and sold all over the world.
The term "servant/bondservant" in the NT is a "doulos", which is a bond servant/indentured servant. Someone who enters into that agreement of their own will and volition, and generally our of necessity. So when the statement is made that the New Testament affirms the "American model" of slavery that is completely false, it condemns it.
Dude you don't have to kidnap some one to own them as a slave!!!!!
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Entreri06
Dude you don't have to kidnap some one to own them as a slave!!!!!
I never said someone did only have to do that. I refuted the claim that the NT condones the American model of slavery. Which was men stolen from their homes in Africa and sold here as slaves. The NT most certainly condemns that.
You cannot overlook the fact that in that time millions of people entered into servanthood out of necessity. It was a fact of life, and in many place on Earth even a reality to this day. There wasn't bankruptcy court and there wasn't credit cards. People who went broke or who could not repay a debt often had that as an only option.
You also have the problem of English being a very lazy language compared to the Greek. In the Greek "doulos" was very specific, a bond servant or indentured servant. Someone when entered into that of their own choice. Yes, that person is still a "slave", but it doesn't carry the same definition of "slave" as in America, or like the Jews endured in Egypt. A bond servant was freed after their debt was satisfied or a certain amount of time had passed, the American slave had no hope of freedom.
So no, the NT in no way condones the American type of slavery.
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Entreri06
Dude you don't have to kidnap some one to own them as a slave!!!!!
I never said someone did only have to do that. I refuted the claim that the NT condones the American model of slavery. Which was men stolen from their homes in Africa and sold here as slaves. The NT most certainly condemns that.
You cannot overlook the fact that in that time millions of people entered into servanthood out of necessity. It was a fact of life, and in many place on Earth even a reality to this day. There wasn't bankruptcy court and there wasn't credit cards. People who went broke or who could not repay a debt often had that as an only option.
You also have the problem of English being a very lazy language compared to the Greek. In the Greek "doulos" was very specific, a bond servant or indentured servant. Someone when entered into that of their own choice. Yes, that person is still a "slave", but it doesn't carry the same definition of "slave" as in America, or like the Jews endured in Egypt. A bond servant was freed after their debt was satisfied or a certain amount of time had passed, the American slave had no hope of freedom.
So no, the NT in no way condones the American type of slavery.
Please where does the NT condone normal slavery??
Speaking of slavery, the New Testament says slavery is perfectly ok...and yes it was the same kinda slavery used in America.
I just looked it up and the OT is very clear on the fact non Hebrew slaves are completely fair game. Also a slave owner cannot be diciplined for beating a slave to death as long as he survives for 2 days. The children of slaves were born into slavery. Exodus 21:4 (NASB): If his master gives him a wife, and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone. This is refering to a Hebrew who was released after 3 years..... Saying his children belonged to his old master... Dispicable...
No where in the bible does it say you can only own indentured servants but true slavery is wrong. It just tells you to pay for your slaves or win them in battle, don't steal them. That's you deciding (rightly so) that it would be pretty jacked up if Christianity was cool with slavery... Because it is.
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Entreri06
Please where does the NT condone normal slavery??
Somehow what I have said several times is being lost in the English to English translation...
I said: The NT does not condone the "American model" of slavery. Here your statement that I challenged and refuted:
Speaking of slavery, the New Testament says slavery is perfectly ok...and yes it was the same kinda slavery used in America.
1. You said the "New Testament"
2. You said it condones the "American Model" of slavery.
The NT condones no such thing, if fact it does the OPPOSITE in Timothy, it expressly condemns "manstealers" (slave traders/theft of men for slavery). Why would the Bible condemn indentured servanthood or bond servants? That was a normal way of life in that time for a vast segment of the population, and likewise those servants entered into that means to support themselves or to repay debts by their own choice.
I just looked it up and the OT is very clear on the fact non Hebrew slaves are completely fair game. Also a slave owner cannot be diciplined for beating a slave to death as long as he survives for 2 days. The children of slaves were born into slavery. Exodus 21:4 (NASB): If his master gives him a wife, and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone. This is refering to a Hebrew who was released after 3 years..... Saying his children belonged to his old master... Dispicable...
That is all Old Testament ^^^^. Which has nothing to do with what you originally said, which was "New Testament". Don't change the goalposts in the middle of the game, and also ask the Jews about that.
Man stealer was how you acquired your slave!!! Not how you treated them!!!!! No matter how many times you pretend man stealer is refering to how you treat your slaves doesn't change the fact it's not true.
It does not go on to say " manstealing is treating your slaves like animals, slaves you treat well are indentured servants". You are 100% making that up!
Where does it say that?!?!? No where, it doesn't!!
No where in the NT does it say you shouldn't own human beings...
It says it's A OK to. Which is obviously discusting...
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Entreri06
Man stealer was how you acquired your slave!!! Not how you treated them!!!!! No matter how many times you pretend man stealer is refering to how you treat your slaves doesn't change the fact it's not true.
I never said it was. Are you even reading my posts??
It does not go on to say " manstealing is treating your slaves like animals, slaves you treat well are indentured servants". You are 100% making that up!
Actually, you made that up. I never said anything like that, you created a straw man of what I've been saying and tried to attribute it to me. You even put quotation marks around it.
Where does it say that?!?!? No where, it doesn't!!
You made it up, tell me where it came from, answer your own question.
No where in the NT does it say you shouldn't own human beings...
Nobody can prove a negative statement.
It says it's A OK to. Which is obviously discusting...
You keep ignoring that servanthood was a normal way of life for a vast segment of the population, as has been stated SEVERAL times people who could not repay debts or who went bankrupt often entered into servanthood. And even women who had been raped or who's husbands died also did this to be able to support themselves and their children.
Your SPECIFIC statement that the New Testament condones the American model of slavery is totally fiction, it doesn't condone it, and in fact, I've already proven that it condemns it in Timothy. You keep going back to the Old Testament.
Did you know that the Old Testament is not the New Testament?
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Entreri06
Please where does the NT condone normal slavery??
Somehow what I have said several times is being lost in the English to English translation...
I said: The NT does not condone the "American model" of slavery. Here your statement that I challenged and refuted:
Speaking of slavery, the New Testament says slavery is perfectly ok...and yes it was the same kinda slavery used in America.
1. You said the "New Testament"
2. You said it condones the "American Model" of slavery.
The NT condones no such thing, if fact it does the OPPOSITE in Timothy, it expressly condemns "manstealers" (slave traders/theft of men for slavery). Why would the Bible condemn indentured servanthood or bond servants? That was a normal way of life in that time for a vast segment of the population, and likewise those servants entered into that means to support themselves or to repay debts by their own choice.
I just looked it up and the OT is very clear on the fact non Hebrew slaves are completely fair game. Also a slave owner cannot be diciplined for beating a slave to death as long as he survives for 2 days. The children of slaves were born into slavery. Exodus 21:4 (NASB): If his master gives him a wife, and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone. This is refering to a Hebrew who was released after 3 years..... Saying his children belonged to his old master... Dispicable...
That is all Old Testament ^^^^. Which has nothing to do with what you originally said, which was "New Testament". Don't change the goalposts in the middle of the game, and also ask the Jews about that.
originally posted by: Entreri06
I see people ALL the time say "god is love". Well how can the atrocities of the Old Testament be attributed to a being that is love personified?
originally posted by: greyer
originally posted by: Entreri06
I see people ALL the time say "god is love". Well how can the atrocities of the Old Testament be attributed to a being that is love personified?
Exactly, the bible does not say God is love, the Old Testament often speaks of God's love, but does not say that God is limited to just one thing, such as love.
First of all, people do not know what love is, because their love is not unconditional.
People are hypocrites, it is just common reality in the world.
Religion was a priority to manipulate, because when a person believes in something with their heart, it makes their body chemistry produce chemicals that seem to confirm the belief is right and correct. They will fight with denial because they love what is false.
The whole world has been tricked. The Romans killed the first Christians because they did not want them to gain power. But the modern world listens to the lies of the Roman world in their Christianity. It is completely hypocritical. The Romans took what the Jews had, killed them, and claimed to own what they took from the Jews. Not only that, but they took their own practices from the pagan mystery religions and incorporated them in Christianity. And now, the first Christians are regarded as Heresy.
Well let me tell you this, Heresy was created to discredit the first Jewish Christians, the very apostles of Jesus. It was an elaborate scheme by the Roman world power. That is why we worship a GREEK New Testament. It is why our GREEK books were written by people who could not of witnessed Jesus, well after the fact. The first Jewish Christians strongly opposed Paul, yet nobody cares, nobody listens to them. And that is how we know they are God's true people, because everybody else in the ancient world stepped on them, over and over, and over, and over, to this very day, we disrespect the direct apostles of Jesus every day and we chose the Roman point of view, in direct opposition to the truth. that seems so sad, yet it is God's own plan to stay hidden from the world, hidden from those stubborn hypocrites because they don't deserve Him, and Paul didn't deserve Him.
2 Corinthians 13:11 Then the God of love and peace will be with you . . .
. . . the bible does not say God is love . . .
originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Entreri06
Well, I must say I think it's just maniacal when people who
don't believe in God, bother to judge him. I don't believe
in Islam but, I don't judge Allah or mock Mohammed. The thought
never enters my mind. And tghe fact that God can do what ever
the hell he sees fit. Is enough for me to keep my mouth shut.
Because our alternatives are nil and you know nothing of the
questions you ask. You are incapable of reasoning anything
about God and how he deals with the disobedient. So you might
consider not making a bad situation worse for yourself when you
can either shut your mouth, or go to hell. Simple really.
Don't let anybody tell you that biblical slavery was somehow less brutal than slavery in the United States. Without exception, biblical societies were slaveholding societies. The Bible engages remarkably diverse cultures -- Ethiopian, Egyptian, Canaanite, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman -- but in every one of them some people owned the rights to others. Slaveowners possessed not only the slaves' labor but also their sexual and reproductive capacities. When the Bible refers to female slaves who do not "please" their masters, we're talking about the sexual use of slaves. Likewise when the Bible spells out the conditions for marrying a slave (see Exodus 21:7-11).
Speaking of slavery, the New Testament says slavery is perfectly ok...and yes it was the same kinda slavery used in America.
Jerusalem was part of the Roman Empire , the Roman Empire practiced the exact same form of slavery as "American slavery".
Speaking of slavery, the New Testament says slavery is perfectly ok...and yes it was the same kinda slavery used in America.