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

neologist wrote:

But there are some who use parts of the bible to 'prove' a point while ignoring those parts of the bible which controvert their argument.

Which is compelling evidence that scripture routinely and constantly contradicts itself.

snood wrote:

neologist wrote:

snood wrote:

neologist wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

But god "created" satan the same way he created jesus.

Hi, CI. good to hear from you.

You do know that Satan is not the rebel's actual name, don't you? We capitalize the word satan (resister) to indicate the quintessential rebel, but his real name is never stated.

Satan became Satan when he decided to rebel.

We don't have to believe in free will to understand that the bible clearly supports the idea that Satan had a choice just as did Adam and Eve.

So, what was Satan's original name?

Don't know. Never mentioned. I doubt we will ever know, since his name doesn't seem to deserve remembrance.

On what do you base your statement that it is not his actual name?

The Hebrew word satan is used to mean 'rebel' or 'resister'. But when it is used with the definite article ha satan, it refers to God's chief adversary. Similarly, the Greek ho satanas is the custmary expression for the satan, the resister known as Satan.

neologist wrote:

snood wrote:

neologist wrote:

snood wrote:

neologist wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

But god "created" satan the same way he created jesus.

Hi, CI. good to hear from you.

You do know that Satan is not the rebel's actual name, don't you? We capitalize the word satan (resister) to indicate the quintessential rebel, but his real name is never stated.

Satan became Satan when he decided to rebel.

We don't have to believe in free will to understand that the bible clearly supports the idea that Satan had a choice just as did Adam and Eve.

So, what was Satan's original name?

Don't know. Never mentioned. I doubt we will ever know, since his name doesn't seem to deserve remembrance.

On what do you base your statement that it is not his actual name?

The Hebrew word satan is used to mean 'rebel' or 'resister'. But when it is used with the definite article ha satan, it refers to God's chief adversary. Similarly, the Greek ho satanas is the customary expression for the satan, the resister known as Satan.

How does this indicate to you that Satan had another name originally?

Would you say it was unlikely for God to name one of his creatures Rebel? I would.

Setanta wrote:

neologist wrote:

But there are some who use parts of the bible to 'prove' a point while ignoring those parts of the bible which controvert their argument.

Which is compelling evidence that scripture routinely and constantly contradicts itself.

Or explains itself.

Good morning, Set.

neologist wrote:

Setanta wrote:

neologist wrote:

But there are some who use parts of the bible to 'prove' a point while ignoring those parts of the bible which controvert their argument.

Which is compelling evidence that scripture routinely and constantly contradicts itself.

Or explains itself.

Good morning, Set.

Good afternoon.

If the texts upon which they make their argument are "controverted" by other passages in the scripture, than by definition, the scripture contradicts itself.

You don't even get a nice try on that one.

But we all have to give neo credit for the perpetual "nice try" guy.

Neologist:

Quote:

Would you say it was unlikely for God to name one of his creatures Rebel? I would.

He might have. I don't know the mind of God and neither do you. It would have saved us a few posts if you'd just said you were guessing.

neo, I don't own any of those things you listed in your last post.

Setanta wrote:

neologist wrote:

Setanta wrote:

neologist wrote:

But there are some who use parts of the bible to 'prove' a point while ignoring those parts of the bible which controvert their argument.

Which is compelling evidence that scripture routinely and constantly contradicts itself.

Or explains itself.

Good morning, Set.

Good afternoon.

If the texts upon which they make their argument are "controverted" by other passages in the scripture, than by definition, the scripture contradicts itself.

You don't even get a nice try on that one.

Controverting one's argument does not necessarily involve controverting the scriptures spuriously used to support that argument.

satan means adversary....his original name was Lucifer. he was an angel who fell. Isaiah 14:12-17...he is also called King of Tyre in Ezekiel 28:11-19

Lu·ci·fer n.

1. The archangel cast from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan.
2. The planet Venus in its appearance as the morning star.
3. lucifer A friction match.
[Middle English, from Old English, morning star, Lucifer, from Latin Lucifer, from lucifer, light-bringer : lux, luc-, light + -fer, -fer.] (emphasis added)

snood wrote:

Neologist:

Quote:

Would you say it was unlikely for God to name one of his creatures Rebel? I would.

He might have. I don't know the mind of God and neither do you. It would have saved us a few posts if you'd just said you were guessing.

It is a leap into reckless conjecture to assert that his name is known to humans.

neologist wrote:

snood wrote:

Neologist:

Quote:

Would you say it was unlikely for God to name one of his creatures Rebel? I would.

He might have. I don't know the mind of God and neither do you. It would have saved us a few posts if you'd just said you were guessing.

It is a leap into reckless conjecture to assert that his name is known to humans.

Seems just as much a "leap into conjecture" to assert what you did about Satan's original name.

kate4christ03 wrote:

satan means adversary....his original name was Lucifer. he was an angel who fell. Isaiah 14:12-17...he is also called King of Tyre in Ezekiel 28:11-19

Lucifer is a Latin-origin name. It only appears in Christian texts because Latin was a commonly spoken language when Christians were making up their fairy tales. It could not possibly have even have been alleged to be the name of the putative "Satan" by Hewbrews who lived before the city of Rome was even founded, and if anyone was speaking Latin, it was a tribe a few dozen families in a remote and obscure region on the west coast of Italy.

It just fractures me how Christians make this sh*t up.

[url=http://www.answers.com/topic/lucifer][b]Answers-dot-com[/b][/url] wrote:

Lu·ci·fer n.

1. The archangel cast from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan.
2. The planet Venus in its appearance as the morning star.
3. lucifer A friction match.
[Middle English, from Old English, morning star, Lucifer, from Latin Lucifer, from lucifer, light-bringer : lux, luc-, light + -fer, -fer.] (emphasis added)