Why does the god of the Bible consider slavery to be moral??

When you choose to use the bible to examine the bible, it dilutes your argument when you resort to the speculations of "mainline and liberal theologians".

Your argument about the 24 hour day fails again when you contemplate the time it must have taken for Adam to name all the animals. (Genesis 2:19, 20) If you imagine that Moses gullibly believed the six creative days lasted only 144 hours under the 'all things possible with God' speculation, then how would it be possible for a human to name the animals in only 24 hours?

. . .About as possible as a human putting all the animals in the world unto a single boat.

About as possible as making the sun stand still for 24 hours.

About as possible as seeing the four corners of the earth from a single mountain.

About as possible as God walking about on a solid firmament looking down on us as if we were grasshoppers.

I know. And, even more preposterous, would you believe the Eckankar folks believe the soul can actually leave the body and return?

neologist wrote:

I know. And, even more preposterous, would you believe the Eckankar folks believe the soul can actually leave the body and return?

Of course you don't believe it because the Bible told you so. Right?

Yeah, the funny part of all this is that everybody in heaven will be spirits without a physical body. But the biggest benefit is that they won't age, and they can't have sex. What! No sex?

xingu wrote:

neologist wrote:

I know. And, even more preposterous, would you believe the Eckankar folks believe the soul can actually leave the body and return?

Of course you don't believe it because the Bible told you so. Right?

Actually, I don't believe it because it's preposterous.

neologist wrote:

xingu wrote:

neologist wrote:

I know. And, even more preposterous, would you believe the Eckankar folks believe the soul can actually leave the body and return?

Of course you don't believe it because the Bible told you so. Right?

Actually, I don't believe it because it's preposterous.

Why is it preposterous?

neologist wrote:

xingu wrote:

neologist wrote:

I know. And, even more preposterous, would you believe the Eckankar folks believe the soul can actually leave the body and return?

Of course you don't believe it because the Bible told you so. Right?

Actually, I don't believe it because it's preposterous.

Why is it preposterous?

Because his religious dogma says so.

It works like this. If reincarnation is real then a sinner would not have to believe in God or Christ. If he got it wrong he would come back again and perhaps get it right. This means organized religion has no hold on him.

In order for the religious sect to chain the believer the dogma they tell him to believe or it's Hell and damnation for eternity. The only chance to be saved is to believe in the church. Ever hear of EENS (Extra Ecclesia Nulla Sallus)?

The religion has you by the balls. God, in his infinite wisdom and mercy, has given each individual one and only one chance to select and practice the right religion before they die. If that person fails to do so the most horrible consequences awaits them.

This creates some problems. God, in all his infinite wisdom, decides to write a series of books so confusing its able to give birth to thousands of interpretations. So now the question is what is the correct belief? What should one believe if they want to save themselves from the horrible fate that awaits them if they get it wrong? There is no second chance.

God has set the rules for his little game. You get one life. You had better make the right choice or you will pay dearly for it.

"Oh," says God, "did I tell you I love you?"

What's funny is there's a whole lot of riffraff out there who've made a cottage industry out of conning people into thinking they have the right answer. They know what God wants and what the Bible means. People like that are a dime a dozen. You can even find them on A2K.

While science is a step forward in that it is a refutation of superstition and blind faith, it encourages a materialistic view in which all effects are seen as the result of spontaneous and somewhat random physical processes. This tends to ignore or discredit the possibilities for spiritual transformation and self-transcendence.

xingu wrote:

neologist wrote:

I know. And, even more preposterous, would you believe the Eckankar folks believe the soul can actually leave the body and return?

Of course you don't believe it because the Bible told you so. Right?

Actually, I don't believe it because it's preposterous.

Why is it preposterous?

. . . Because his religious dogma says so.

It works like this. If reincarnation is real then a sinner would not have to believe in God or Christ. If he got it wrong he would come back again and perhaps get it right. This means organized religion has no hold on him.
. . .

Boy oh boy, I go away for a weekend and come back to find Neo calling someone else's deeply held spiritual truth preposterous?

He must have a new definition of preposterous in order to see any belief in the spiritual realm as unbelievable nonsense, that is, without recognizing that his own "spiritual truths" are just as preposterous.

Can you believe in OBE without believing in a god?

Setanta wrote:

. . . Why would an omnipotent imaginary friend be necessary to believe other silly things of a dissimilar character?

Are you saying that such 'disciplines' as Eckankar are silly?

Yup.

I agree. However my corresponding opinion has been scorned.

I'm an equal opportunity skeptic . . . i think all y'all are goofy.

. . . .I know he has a different definition of "Frank's word" moral. He just hasn't shared it with us yet.

I have a feeling he is sharpening his mincer trying to find just right tangent to cut off on and declare righteous his sense of the absurd.

Joe(the very idea)Nation

Wow, neo, you are talented. It's the first time I've heard these two words used together "unparalleled ambidexterity."

Ifeelfree wrote:

Quote:

While science is a step forward in that it is a refutation of superstition and blind faith, it encourages a materialistic view in which all effects are seen as the result of spontaneous and somewhat random physical processes. This tends to ignore or discredit the possibilities for spiritual transformation and self-transcendence.

You lost me here. One can achieve a great deal of insight, scientific and personal, by using one's mind. Thoughts, emotions and revelations appear as if out of nowhere, but the realist realizes that they all spring from within the same mind, the same being, the same brain. Our own.