dermdoc said:

---

Not speaking for the good reverend, but the proof of God is evident everywhere.

---

When you presuppose the proof of God is evident everywhere, then that makes sense.

dermdoc said:

---

Scripture says that God's laws will be etched on our hearts. And we have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us.
So it is not us or our wisdom, but actually God's wisdom imparted through us.

---

And Douglas Adams says the meaning of life is 42. That doesn't make it true. Again, I'm happy for you to believe in whatever you want, but at some point you, if you want to convince me there is any truth to what you are saying, you have to recognize that you have chosen the absolute worst way to do it. Its like your strategy is to just beat me over the head over and over with the same assertion until I get worn down and say "Fine, whatever, God is good. Yay"

To get us back on topic, the point behind the discussion on objective truth, was to point out that some thing are objectively bad, and some are objectively good. We have those siding with moral relativism, postmodernism, and queer theory(even if they didn't realize it), and those who believe that there is evidence for why traditional values objectively, and scientifically give better outcomes. I got this view from God's word, but it is confirmed by science, and is repeatable, and verifiable. The same cannot be said for Transitioning. The outcomes are horrible. Transsexualism is bad for society and we don't want it pushed. Obviously we believe traditional values are good.

This is the impasse of the whole discussion, and why we go round and round.

Yes. Your turn.

Why does god and the Bible condone it?

First of all this is off topic. Second, you don't believe in the book, or understand what it says, so spare me. Lastly, voluntary servitude is far different from kidnaping and enslaving by force. The bible unequivocally does not support the modern slavery that you are talking about. It's dishonest to suggest otherwise.

You answer the question, is slavery objectively bad?

Man its like pulling teeth. These people refuse to make any statement of truth. Is transsexualism good, or even ok? If so on what basis? Why is it ok? Is it harmful?

The follow-up is, do traditional values give the best outcomes?

I'm not interested in anything else.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

First of all this is off topic. Second, you don't believe in the book, or understand what it says, so spare me. Lastly, voluntary servitude is far different from kidnaping and enslaving by force. The bible unequivocally does not support the modern slavery that you are talking about. It's dishonest to suggest otherwise.

You answer the question, is slavery objectively bad?

Man its like pulling teeth. These people refuse to make any statement of truth. Is transsexualism good, or even ok? If so on what basis? Why is it ok? Is it harmful?

The follow-up is, do traditional values give the best outcomes?

I'm not interested in anything else.

---

Ah, the old 'slavery' wasn't the same back then. That is complete nonsense.

As for your second part, the answer absolutely has much to do with how you answer the question honestly.

Slavery back then was not 'better'. That completely ahistorical.


https://theconversation.com/dismantling-the-myth-that-ancient-slavery-wasnt-that-bad-205801

Macarthur said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

First of all this is off topic. Second, you don't believe in the book, or understand what it says, so spare me. Lastly, voluntary servitude is far different from kidnaping and enslaving by force. The bible unequivocally does not support the modern slavery that you are talking about. It's dishonest to suggest otherwise.

You answer the question, is slavery objectively bad?

Man its like pulling teeth. These people refuse to make any statement of truth. Is transsexualism good, or even ok? If so on what basis? Why is it ok? Is it harmful?

The follow-up is, do traditional values give the best outcomes?

I'm not interested in anything else.

---

Ah, the old 'slavery' wasn't the same back then. That is complete nonsense.

As for your second part, the answer absolutely has much to do with how you answer the question honestly.

Slavery back then was not 'better'. That completely ahistorical.


https://theconversation.com/dismantling-the-myth-that-ancient-slavery-wasnt-that-bad-205801

---

You are too cowardly to answer this. I will engage about slavery if you answer this:

Quote:

---

You answer the question, is slavery objectively bad?

Man its like pulling teeth. These people refuse to make any statement of truth. Is transsexualism good, or even ok? If so on what basis? Why is it ok? Is it harmful?

The follow-up is, do traditional values give the best outcomes?

I'm not interested in anything else.

---

The Bible 100% condones slavery. It does not distinguish between the 'okay kind' and the 'bad kind'.

DeProfundis said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

Is slavery objectively bad?

---

No, next question.

---

Then you have no room to lecture me on objective truth being proprietary to Christiantiy.

Macarthur said:

---

DeProfundis said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

Is slavery objectively bad?

---

No, next question.

---

Then you have no room to lecture me on objective truth being proprietary to Christiantiy.

---

How would it be proprietary to Christianity? Also, something can be subjective many things are subjective, that doesn't invalidate objectivity.

Killing is subjective; Murder is objective. Interrogation is subjective, torture is objective.

Don't engage. Don't let him weasel out of it. Make him answer the questions.

Quote:

---

You answer the question, is slavery objectively bad?

Man its like pulling teeth. These people refuse to make any statement of truth. Is transsexualism good, or even ok? If so on what basis? Why is it ok? Is it harmful?

The follow-up is, do traditional values give the best outcomes?

---

These people can't tell you what right, and wrong is. They cant define woman. Or Transsexualism. They have nothing to say except nothing is inherently good or bad, except you Christians.

Quote:

---

You answer the question, is slavery objectively bad?

Man its like pulling teeth. These people refuse to make any statement of truth. Is transsexualism good, or even ok? If so on what basis? Why is it ok? Is it harmful?

The follow-up is, do traditional values give the best outcomes?

---

Macarthur said:

---

You guys have spend pages on multiple threads telling us all that the God of the Bible is the path to objective truth and morality.

---

Objective doesn't mean correct, it's something based on a standard bereft of opinion or personal feelings. As I said, Vonnegut's spaghetti monster morality would make more sense than his "nothing matters except these random things" morality.

Macarthur said:

---

The Bible 100% condones slavery. It does not distinguish between the 'okay kind' and the 'bad kind'.

---

I read your linked article. It didn't address the claims made here at all. It simply took a survey of the historical world, Christian, Hebrew, and neither and lumped it all together as some generic rebuttal. There's a vague attempt to shoehorn in Gregory of Nysa and slavery being addressed in the fourth century but this is lazy scholarship and a link you should probably delete instead of pull out for debate.

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

The Bible 100% condones slavery. It does not distinguish between the 'okay kind' and the 'bad kind'.

---

I read your linked article. It didn't address the claims made here at all. It simply took a survey of the historical world, Christian, Hebrew, and neither and lumped it all together as some generic rebuttal. There's a vague attempt to shoehorn in Gregory of Nysa and slavery being addressed in the fourth century but this is lazy scholarship and a link you should probably delete instead of pull out for debate.

---

It was not lazy. Ancient slavery could be every bit as brutal as chatle slavery. It's foolish to argue otherwise.

Macarthur said:

---

DeProfundis said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

You guys have spend pages on multiple threads telling us all that the God of the Bible is the path to objective truth and morality.

---

Objective doesn't mean correct, it's something based on a standard bereft of opinion or personal feelings. As I said, Vonnegut's spaghetti monster morality would make more sense than his "nothing matters except these random things" morality.

---

So, God's objective morality can be bad?

---

No, because it's from God. But objective morality can be bad. Take Satanism for one

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

The Bible 100% condones slavery. It does not distinguish between the 'okay kind' and the 'bad kind'.

---

I read your linked article. It didn't address the claims made here at all. It simply took a survey of the historical world, Christian, Hebrew, and neither and lumped it all together as some generic rebuttal. There's a vague attempt to shoehorn in Gregory of Nysa and slavery being addressed in the fourth century but this is lazy scholarship and a link you should probably delete instead of pull out for debate.

---

It was not lazy. Ancient slavery could be every bit as brutal as chatle slavery. It's foolish to argue otherwise.

---

Why is slavery bad?

---

They won't answer because they can't. If anything is objectively bad; then they have to answer where the objectivity comes from. If they do that then they have to answer why that object should be listened to, rather than their own preferences. Then that takes them to a very scary place where they're not god.

SHUT UP BIGOT!