Who's Right About Slavery in the Bible? | Deep Discussion

[@Josh-ch3nv]

Skeptics in Glasses vs Apologists with cinematic lighting

[@nathanjasper512]

😂

[@alextl2514]

The shirts vs skins of theology

[@myjunedayya]

Then I think Alex O'Connor aligns more with the Apologists?

[@JesseMeijer]

The ones that want to see well vs the ones that want to look good.

[@13shadowwolf]

Educated people questioning Quacks.

[@GlovesOff_jc]

I said this in the live stream but Gavin and Trent are essentially arguing that God made slavery more chill and based.

[@metagalaxy-go-the-distance]

As per bible God made human. Not slavery

[@GlovesOff_jc]

@@metagalaxy-go-the-distance Even if I go along with this story, did God not have the foresight to create a state of affairs that would not allow for slavery? Or, even if it is all man’s fault, why couldn’t God bring himself to outright ban slavery in his perfect revelation?

[@konohagakurejonin4461]

Yep. Bullshit right? ​@@GlovesOff_jc

[@metagalaxy-go-the-distance]

​@@GlovesOff_jc you want everything done by miracle? Jesus should have freed all slaves and build bungalow, provide everything for them by miracle?

[@GlovesOff_jc]

@@metagalaxy-go-the-distance Jesus is God in this scenario right? If so, then it seems the least he could do is command that ownership of other human beings as property is a grievous sin. But again, it seems probable that a truly all powerful, all loving God could create a world where slavery never came to pass.

[@SnakeWasRight]

God can give a TOTAL BAN on idolatry (which Israel also cannot quit doing) and wearing of mixed fabrics, and will get SO ANGRY he wants to WIPE THEM OUT COMPLETELY for these offenses, but slavery? "Just don't be SUPER mean to slaves, it's fine, also enslave the people you're colonizing," is the literal extent of God's commentary on the subject in his inspired book to serve as a guide for all people of all time.

[@mrmaat]

This god also thought it was important to give thousands and thousands of words about the construction and maintenance of his palace but only a few sentences about slavery. It shows what his priorities were.

[@SnakeWasRight]

@@mrmaat yup, and if you look at any "bad guys" he defeats or people he helps, it almost always says right after, he did it so that people could marvel at his greatness. This is literally just clinical narcissism. Unsurprising as it was probably written by men tripped out on their own grandiose narcissism. P.s. God also raises up "bad guys" and mind controls them to be "bad" so that he has an opponent to easily knock down and look super strong.

[@Nexus-jg7ev]

The Greeks and the Romans found Judaism to be barbaric. This is evident in the writings of people like Celsus who criticised these religions a great deal. It's not like their deities were great but they at least were honest about their shortcomings instead of praising them as perfect.

[@drjtrekker]

@@mrmaat SO this is where the CHURCH BUILDING programs came from???!!!!

[@thetruest7497]

@@SnakeWasRight funny part about it is half the time those easily knocked down "bad guys" were handing Yahweh his a$$ 🤣 let us never forget those chariots of iron 💪💪💪

[@neilhart5775]

I think Josh put his finger on what this was about: academic analysis of the text within historical context versus theological justification for a given position.

[@erickasimonewat]

Theology is man’s interpretation of scripture retrieved by The Holy Spirit… It’s the difference of believing 666 is a scientific equation of chromosomes and The Holy Spirit saying, “ Nope, it is actually a system designed by satan on rebellion to GOD making mankind dominant over the earth.. So since the fallen can’t destroy mankind without mankind he use Mankind (6) born on the sixth day of creation and uses them against Mankind (6) to cause Mankind (6) to become extinct… like Yuvi Noah Harrarri (who happens to be next in line to take the WEF position of Klaus Schwab) who believes mankind would better serve the earth if we were depopulated and AI was put in the earth instead…. The Kings of The Earth as is referenced in Revelation, are carrying out the mission of the WEF, and poisoning our foods, medicine, minds , and unity… So THE ALMIGHTY GOD is right on point!!!

[@thescoobymike]

7:00 Discussion starts 9:30 Kipp and Josh Presentation 16:30 Trent and Gavin Presentation 24:50 Josh steel man’s their position 30:15 Gavin and Trent Respond 39:00 Kipp responds 40:30 Trent and Gavin do slavery apologetics Edit: I got tired of tryna make time stamps and couldn’t finish the video cause it’s really long

[@MrArdytube]

Thanks! Appreciate the effort to find a good natured clarification

[@SaffronHammer]

Dr. Josh's explanations are so spot on and backed by evidence, that only Believers who are determined to misunderstand in favor of their belief system cannot see the obvious.

[@erickasimonewat]

That’s simple…Dr Josh , not the believers on this panel identified WHO GOD said was the slave… The Slave is THE BORROWER from the lender so if you use GOD’s lens instead of the snake infested lens of man’s ego… You’ll see that GOD was saying to the Israelite ( Follower) How to maintain the harvest, when to reserve the sabbath and how to prepare so that they can live on the harvest even in the hour that they would be told to be still and reflect on the provisions… And when the foreigner comes amongst you, you are to keep them an employee and do not share the wisdom of how you get your increase ( because they are influenced by the beast and his system and they will use what you know against you… but if one of your brothers becomes a hireling train him for six years let him go and in the seventh year give him assistance in buying his own company.. But do not do this with the foreigner ( as we in America have done with The Federal Reserve System that now enslaves us) It is only man that doesn’t know GOD that would interpret man’s lack of self control as a green light to hit… HE just said if you cause a slave to be blind or break their tooth, you are not only obligated to let them go but you are also obligated to compensate them for their handicap caused by your..

[@oftenincorrect]

Christians: nothing is impossible for God Also Christians: well, God couldn’t do it that way because…

[@memyselfandi8544]

Christians- the Bible is the word and power of God. Scripture explains everything. The world lies about what is in the Bible. Don’t believe anyone who says they are a Christian and is rich. A true Christian praises God constantly and devotes himself to Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is Lord. God is great

[@CroElectroStile]

Yes, both statements can be true. God can do anything logically possible, but achieving specific goals in the world might exclude actions we think are simpler. Saying "He could have done it that way" ignores His intended interaction with the mortal realm as revealed in the inspired texts. With enough understanding of God's intentions, we can see why some actions would contradict His purposes, hence we can say He "couldn't do it that way because...."

[@oftenincorrect]

@@CroElectroStile was it logically impossible for god to forbid slavery? You can only say “god can’t do X” if X is contradictory, so contradiction please…?

[@CroElectroStile]

@@oftenincorrect God forbidding slavery outright would have caused many issues with the chosen nation that He wanted to preserve and ensure their survival so they could bring about the final covenant which we can trace from the marriage of Adam, to the household on Noah's ark, then to the tribes of Abraham, the kingdom of David, and finally to a universal Church. Without slavery, that progressive growth, which would ultimately deliver the full message of God (the Incarnation), would have been impossible. The nation would have been defeated by other pagan nations that didn't follow the same rules. So it's not logicaly impossible to outwardly ban slavery, but it does contradict reason since it contradicts his intention when taking the plan into account, the plan in broad strokes being that Israel is the remnant that God wants from His Edenic family. God started over with a new humanity, a new family with Abraham and his descendants. God was determined to fulfill His promise to bless the world through Abraham by creating a people capable of conveying His truth to the world, Christ establishing a church in the end was meant to undo the divisions among humanity caused by sin. These divisions began with Adam's sin, but were universally manifest at the Tower of Babel. Pentecost is the supernatural reversal of Babel, which is why the Church is the anti-Babel. (Parenthetically, this is why it is fitting that the Church is built on Rome, which Peter refers to as Babylon, and which is the natural kingdom taken over by Christ's supernatural Kingdom, according to Daniel's prophecy.)

[@oftenincorrect]

@@CroElectroStile 🤦‍♂️

[@BigDaddyMan83]

I really enjoyed this discussion amongst the opposing sides after watching the prior videos. It's excellent hearing both sides together.

[@markrichter2053]

As an atheist with a Christian background I really appreciated the conversation and had bags of respect for both sides. I was very impressed with the tone of the conversation and the mutual respect and goodwill in the room. I also felt the Christians arguments were well thought out and articulated eloquently. I disagree with some of their conclusions but I did feel that they were cogently argued and sincere.

[@FloydFp]

It seems that Gavin and Trent are determined to find something unique in the Bible about slavery that somehow would make Biblical slavery more acceptable than other forms.

[@RonDeKiller]

All four debaters did a great job. Bravo for an educated, calm and respectful dialogue.

[@zach2980]

Although important to highlight the Bible’s condoning of slavery, it’s nothing in comparison to a god creating most people who are predestined to hell.

[@smitty1647]

Yes the new testament actually makes God more evil not less

[@annb9029]

Only Calvinist believe that nut all Christians Orthodox and Catholics don’t believe that have a great day

[@Scalpaxos]

usually believers try to counter that by invoking "free will", so you chose it, too bad for you, which is a weird excuse if you think about it a little bit since the outcome depends on you being convinced of Jesus/Allah/(insert your favorite mythological character) which is not even a choice in the first place, a gullible person who has a tendency to believe anything would benefit from it and more skeptical types would be at a disadvantage, so this system literally rewards gullibility and punishes skepticism and prudence but even if we ignore that beliefs aren't choices, this god created and is creating billions of people knowing that they will not believe what he wants them to believe then punishes them for it in the most horrendous and barbaric way for eternity...

[@zach2980]

@@Scalpaxos the main point I am making is that if one’s destination is known in advance, then free will is an illusion and a god was fine creating most people predestined to hell. In other words, he’s a sadistic psychopath.

[@stewartpatton2179]

Yep. This is referred to as The Problem of Hell, and it's the main thing that allowed me to rid my brain of Christianity.

[@efont81]

Love the respectful candor and steel manning. Thanks for a great conversation, everyone. I wish the convo can go on for another 20 hours. Albeit, I still find the Christian argument specious and arbitrary. I get their stances but it's so foreign and unconvincing to me. I'll concede that it may convince others though. Cheers!

[@BatTCK]

Great discussion! I actually came here from Trent’s channel, just bouncing around to like each individual’s video. While I do hold to Trent and Gavin’s view, I felt that this debate was not only informative, but polite and well researched as well. I love hearing civil discussions about complex topics from various points of view, and I genuinely appreciated this conversation. Anyway, just wanted to show my appreciation!

[@Noir_Nouveau]

Why did they(the believer) struggle with the reality of permanent (chattel) slavery in OT. A Hebrew could PURCHASE a male slave from a neighboring nation and keep them forever under God's instruction.

[@bortiz11]

The initial discussion of definitions, especially whether slavery is moral, was very good! The only thing missing is that if an all- knowing and -powerful deity is the one planning all this, there should have, and probably was, another way. Screw whether the people liked or engaged in slavery. If I was the deity, I would have just ended slavery, if that was my desire. Well, I wouldn't have put the damn tree within access of the children - that was a foreseeable mistake... but I wasn't the god then. Which should be evidence that it doesn't exist OR it is pretty stupid, since lowly creatures like us can think of solutions to the major biblical screwups.

[@SaffronHammer]

Just like in antebellum South , it was illegal to harm and kill a slave--and yet they did--and so what? Owning a human is disgusting and immoral. Yes, slavery in ancient Israel was exactly like in the US south.

[@rabbitpirate]

1:52:00 so let me just say that I am very glad that the abolitionist movement read Genesis in such a way that they concluded slavery was wrong. That’s great. The problem is the slave owners read other parts of the Bible and concluded that slavery was perfectly ok. Even if we accept Trent and Gavin’s argument that God was somehow constrained and had to take baby steps when it came to doing away with slavery, the Bible never explicitly says it is wrong. Could God, when he was apparently unable to just say not to do it, not have said something like “As I freed you from slavery in Egypt so shall you not keep slaves. However, I know man is wicked in all things and you will seek to follow the nations around you, so here are my rules for keeping slaves, though the practice is abhorrent in my eyes”??? Does anyone think that the practice of slavery in the Christian world would have lasted as long as it did if people were able to point to places where God explicitly condemned the practice?

[@rabbitpirate]

So we are all in agreement then? The Bible does indorse slavery?

[@konohagakurejonin4461]

Yep.

[@metagalaxy-go-the-distance]

Yes! it talk about good/bad things about life at that time.

[@rabbitpirate]

@@metagalaxy-go-the-distance so you agree slavery is a bad thing? Well that puts you ahead of Gavin and Trent, who were both unable to say that slavery is bad.

[@hissupremecorrectfulnessre9478]

​@metagalaxy-go-the-distance The question isn't whether or not slavery is "talked about" in the Bible. The question is whether or not slavery is endorsed by the Bible. And the answer to that question is yes.

[@smitty1647]

@@metagalaxy-go-the-distance yes like how the confederacy "talked about" slavery. ie built it in as a pillar of society, like the bible

[@northernbrother1258]

Can we agree that leaving slavery out if the ten commandments while including idolatry and lying was a huge blunder?

[@HaleyStark.]

AND that if a god can blunder he is no god.

[@o165o]

@@HaleyStark. What is good and what is evil?

[@HaleyStark.]

@@o165o whatever I say.

[@o165o]

@@HaleyStark. How do you know that?

[@HaleyStark.]

@@o165o I can't know it. But at least there is real evidence I exist. At least people can speak to me and ask me questions about my beliefs and I can explain myself. That makes me and my opinions infinitely better than a fairytale about an imaginary god.

[@michaelhenry1763]

1:23:57 this debate is frustrating because the Christian apologists are unable to simply answer “yes” or “no” questions if it makes the Hebrew Bible look bad. Is it better to serve 3 years or 6 years? “ I don’t know. Let me give you a false analogy about mortgages.” They are debating in bad faith.

[@jonathanramsey]

23:05 the only pro-Bible argument I’ve ever heard so far that is honest and conveys an idea that is missed in atheist discussions: in a time without prisons, time bound involuntary servitude isn’t worse than incarceration from the past hundred years. It still doesn’t deal with non-Israelite involuntary chattel servants, but it’s a point I’ve not generally heard.

[@sparrowthesissy2186]

God wasn't smart enough to have figured out prisons by then, apparently.

[@LukeNAndo]

I thought this was an excellent point too. Better argument than I am used to hearing from apologists! Still doesn’t suffice as an explanation for me though, it’s too easy to conceive of ways god could have done more to avoid another 1500+ years of slavery post NT!

[@smitty1647]

@@sparrowthesissy2186 with a fine you would still be obligated to work to pay for damages, but you choose who to work for (possibly yourself) and aren't owned as property. god is kicking himself for not thinking of this

[@SaffronHammer]

Except that God instructed his people to buy slaves from the other nations, and to take the virgins of their war victims as sex slaves. This has zero to do with prison and incarceration.

[@KC-sd7nh]

As a woman I think prison sounds a lot better than being regularly raped and forced to bear children for my rapist for the rest of my life just because my dad decided to sell me to some rich old lecher.

[@poon999able]

consent is a human right

[@M4ttNet]

RE: The slave code stuff early on. I really wish when Josh said the Exodus 21 was about debt slaves and then briefly mentioned 2-6 that he actually read it, since that really clears up the context of what is to follow If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free. 5 “But if the servant declares, ‘I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,’ 6 then his master must take him before the judges.[a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life. In which case Gavin and Trent are trying to make the case that “An owner who hits a male or female slave in the eye and destroys it must let the slave go free to compensate for the eye. 27 And an owner who knocks out the tooth of a male or female slave must let the slave go free to compensate for the tooth. Is unique because it is all about protecting the slave from the master. Though if in context to a debt slave this isn't the case. It's just a transaction and what is collateral like the law of Hammurabi references. The debt slave lent their physical body to their master for a set service. If the master damages this borrowed property they owe that debt to the owner of that property, which just happens to be the debt slave itself. This has nothing to do with life long slaves and protecting their physical bodies due to some sort of ethics, this seems pretty clearly pretty similar to the Hammurabi references of collateral and restitution to the owner of some debt and unjust taking of payment for it etc. At least that's my take, which means little.

[@rabbitpirate]

1:20:30 I'm sorry, but are we just ignoring Exodus 21 20-21 here? Gavin is claiming that the Bible does not allow a slave owner to harm their slaves, and yet these verses explicitly talk about beating your slave and as long as they recover "within a few day" then there are no consequences because they are your property. I'm sorry, but if you beat someone bad enough that it takes them several days to recover from it, then I am pretty sure you have caused them harm.

[@OldMotherLogo]

I think the restriction is that if they die within 2 days, then the slave owner is punished, but if they survive, the slave owner is not punished. So if they die five days later, the slave owner is not punished. I could be wrong.

[@rabbitpirate]

@@OldMotherLogo that’s how I read it again. If they recover enough to go back to work and then drop dead a few days later from a brain haemorrhage caused by the beating then that’s fine, their owner faces no repercussions for causing their death. And yet Gavin reads that as the Bible not allowing slave owners to cause their slaves harm. And of course this all completely ignores the fact that, for example, they could just sleep with a female slave when ever they liked. I’m sure that didn’t cause any harm.

[@rabbitpirate]

@@OldMotherLogo that’s how I read it again. If they recover enough to go back to work and then drop dead a few days later from a brain haemorrhage caused by the beating then that’s fine, their owner faces no repercussions for causing their death. And yet Gavin reads that as the Bible not allowing slave owners to cause their slaves harm. And of course this all completely ignores the fact that, for example, they could just sleep with a female slave when ever they liked. I’m sure that didn’t cause any harm.

[@Ryan-ww5xt]

Lord, if you are real.. please give me the patients displayed by dr. Kip and dr Josh. Hearing these christians apologize for the way you enslaved people back in the day really chafes my balls lord.

[@isaiahreno]

😆

[@davidfrisken1617]

A big thank you to Derek for making this happen.

[@misterenergy]

suggesting that back in the day they’d put a thief into forced servitude and saying “we don’t do that today” tells me this guy Trent knows nothing about modern prison labor

[@OldMotherLogo]

Trent comparing slavery to having a mortgage . . . this makes me sick. If this is an example of the best apologists have to offer, they don’t have much. 2:30:00 The long, detailed discussion about whether it is better to be a debt slave for 3 year and no provisions or six years with provisions totally misses the point. The Hebrew Bible was not that different than laws of neighboring cultures. IF God’s law was a *significant* improvement, shouldn’t it be obvious? I thought folks like Trent and Gavin are opposed to moral relativism. Isn’t this moral relativism at its worst? Future discussions: Trent and Gavin defend polygamy and genocide? Bottom line: Atheist/scholars - slavery is immoral. Christian apologists - slavery is not so bad and we support Biblical slavery.

[@MrArdytube]

I just opened this video… i like how it is starting. Good work innovating Derek

[@JohnCamacho]

"Why are we having this conversation again - about slavery in the bible" Because this topic will never be resolved. One side has too much to lose, to admit any possible immorality in the bible, and the other side has spent a ridiculous amount of time reasoning their position. Do not forget! One side has wayyy more to lose! Some will hate this comment. Sorry not sorry.

[@SaffronHammer]

Because there are people who still believe the Bible is god’s words and commands, and believe we ought to live by it as an arbiter of morality.

[@wakkablockablaw6025]

@@SaffronHammer I mean, it's working out so far.

[@wakkablockablaw6025]

Not true. Some atheists want to make the Bible look bad for ideological purposes. Even Dr Bowen in his book had to push back on atheists who went too far and said that slavery was worse in the Bible than it actually is.

[@toptester301]

@@wakkablockablaw6025 25,000 Humans die of starvation daily. There are no loving Gods.

[@wakkablockablaw6025]

@@toptester301 I don't understand your point. Christians believe in an afterlife.

[@SaffronHammer]

The definition of slave= humans as property to be sold or passed down as chattel .

[@oftenincorrect]

54:07 thank you Kipp for making this point to Trent

[@PrometheanRising]

One of the Apologists took a shot at Mindshift, but it is important to note that Mindshift literally put together a very long point-by-point list of the many ways in which Biblical slavery and antebellum slavery are the same.

[@postpunkjustin]

I was excited to hear this discussion was happening and it did not disappoint. I'm firmly on the side of Joshua and Kipp here, but I have a lot of respect (and even fondness) for Gavin and Trent so I love that they were there to present their perspectives. At the same time, I feel that defending the practice of slavery is something that debases the person doing it. The idea that one human can own another is not just morally wrong, but factually wrong. People are not, and cannot be, property. It pains me to see two people who I consider to be kind and intelligent defending-to any extent-such a practice. I agree that Gavin and Trent took the strongest position that is compatible with biblical inerrancy, but ultimately I think that's just the wrong move.

[@Nexus-jg7ev]

Good to see other moral realists around. It seems so rare, unfortunately.

[@nathanjasper512]

The comparison to factory farming doesn't really work. Sure things like the invention of the cotton gin made it easier for us to move past slavery but it wasn't really some new technology that made it possible to not enslave people. an agrarian society is fully capable of not using slaves, and this is just making excuses for slavery. Even if you think it was necessary for that society couldn't the creator of the universe reveal a way to create a society without slavery? If not, why is his Revelation worth following?

[@Nexus-jg7ev]

@@nathanjasper512 Are you sure that your responded in the correct thread? Because neither OP nor me were trying to defend slavery.

[@kneelingcatholic]

PPJ, I disagree that the discussion did not disappoint... I tried several times to listen thru it.....but kept dozing off!😂 Regarding defending slavery... I could not find where-if they ever got around to the NT's being OK with slavery. ( and what about our Lord's parables with slaves? )

[@wakkablockablaw6025]

What if I purchased a slave so that he doesn't receive capital punishment for all of his debts? Am I still debasing myself? Am I also debasing myself for even attempting to conjure a scenario where it might be moral to own a slave? It is thanks to the teachings of the Bible that the world views slavery in such a negative light. You are an example of the Bible's influence. Tom Holland's book made a strong case for this. So, it isn't at all debasing yourself to understand why there was biblical slavery. Also. I don't think they were "defending" slavery. To me, it seemed like they were just debating the extent to which the ancient Israelites saw slaves as property. "The idea that one human can own another is not just morally wrong" I assume you aren't a theist or a deist. How did you arrive at that conclusion?

[@bobbydobalina]

At the tail end of the video around 2:22 hours: Trent Horne asserting that the people group would be concerned about the resources consumed by a runaway slave is an odd point seeing that this same people group have a god that has miraculously produced quail and manna for his people for 40 years while they wandered the desert.

[@FloydFp]

I think Gavin makes too big of a deal with Genesis 1 saying that humans are made in the image of God. Many cultures viewed gods as super humans with human-like bodies and the ancient Jews were no different. He is just putting his theological spin on to it by claiming it means that every human is special and should be treated equally because we are "God's image bearers". God in the Bible seems to have no problems killing his image bearers.

[@Atomus242]

Yahweh in the Bible doesn't seem to care that much creating lots of his image bearers already predestined to damnation and horrendous murder filled with pain and agony. But no worries, he can do as he wants no matter the consequences and the pain, and ignoring all empathy for your creatures because he is soo powerful that we can't do nothing about it 🤷

[@decades5643]

Israelites weren't the only culture that believed humans were made in the image of god. The Egyptians believed that long before Genesis.

[@FloydFp]

@@Atomus242 Yet we are told...Psalm 145:8-9 The LORD is gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love. The LORD is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made. Sure doesn't seem that way. Go figure.

[@theflakes4701]

What I hear the apologists arguing for, at best, is a very limited god. A god limited by culture, by the time, by the bible passage writer's bias. Having to delve into all this nuance to try and defend this only further diminishes an omni-max personal god.

[@Jidom_101]

Really good convo, I think the part where josh brings up how the bible has a worse law for the slave than in hammurabi’s laws really gets at the core of the debate. Why would god make a law worse for a slave? And if he’s all powerful, couldn’t he just will it to be so that his slaves, under any circumstance, is treated better than other slaves in the world?

[@sarahrosen4985]

Wouldn't an all powerful god just make the world more equitable and not allow situations where people, especially women, can be taken into slavery?

[@Jidom_101]

@@sarahrosen4985 Yep, but since the convo is mainly comparing the bible’s slave laws to other near east laws, I ignored this obvious issue lmao

[@omnikevlar2338]

@Ape-shapedCarbonSo I think what they are trying to say is this is God trying to slowly push the Jews into the right direction. But this is a terrible assumption of a perfect God imo. I see Christians saying these are the rules if you don’t like it there’s the door. It’d be one thing if God communicated this but because of God’s incoherence we’re left with apologists freely assuming to make them feel good.

[@malirk]

It was great.

[@Jidom_101]

@@omnikevlar2338 Yeah, it seems to imply that god allowed slavery since it was the way the world ran at the time, but made it the “best version” by having nicer slave laws. I just don’t see why an all powerful god would need to appease anything though, and just make it so that in any circumstance slavery isn’t necessary for the israelites

[@wanderingthedesert5599]

I've got to say that I really enjoyed the discussion between all four participants. I'm only really familiar with Trent Horn and knew of Kipp Davis and Joshua Bowen briefly. I think I may have heard of Gavin but never inquired. With that said, and kind of a sad commentary on overall online culture, it was certainly different to see people having an honest to God dialog rather than trying to impute bad motives to one another. I hope that in the future there could be more discussion between all parties involved with different topics as I think the honest inquirers stand to benefit for more than to lose out.

[@rabbitpirate]

TL:DR version - the best the all knowing all loving God of the universe could do was create a system for governing slavery that was, possibly, marginally better than the systems used by the surrounding nations. Slavery is never explicitly condemned in the Bible, though if you squint at some unrelated verses you can get that idea. Oh and slavery is not always bad, because it it was then the Bible would be supporting something immoral. I think that pretty much sums up Gavin and Trent’s arguments here.

[@ItsSageof]

God being all powerful and all, Could god had stopped the entire institution of slavery altogether? And give them or even command them to use a different system?

[@smitty1647]

No he had to focus on important things like circumcision and not working on the sabbath. Minor issues like slavery were put on the back burner

[@rabbitpirate]

1:37:45 If God can supernatural create grain to compensate the debt slave at the end of the six year period, then how are people falling into debt slavery in the first place? Surely God could just give them the stuff upfront and bypass the whole debt slavery bit entirely?

[@drjtrekker]

You're presupposing that everyone just sat there and worked, worked their land, had no issues, etc?

[@rabbitpirate]

@@drjtrekker no, not at all. What I’m saying is that, when they ran into issues why didn’t God supernatural create the things they needed to overcome those issues then and there? Why let the people fall into debt, forcing them to sell themselves into slavery, and then, once their time as debt slaves was over, supernaturally provide them with the supplies that would have kept them from debt slavery in the first place? Either God is stupid, or he wanted people to sell themselves into slavery. That or he doesn’t exist.

[@jonathanh954]

Good dialogue.

[@sidmogh2539]

It is painful to watch … easily I can imagine trent in 200 hundred years ago arguing for slavery because black people will have better lives here than in Africa … that’s how religion destroy people consciences … at least Gavin doesn’t want to go with Trent into that dark hole … very sad

[@thetruest7497]

Ah a more reasonable comment section. I found myself in that other channel's section with all the theists. It was a nightmare.

[@gagnepower]

Same…

[@DanielTate-wt9jt]

So, around 1:03:45, Dr Josh brings up Exodus 21 verse 20 and 21 and says it's talking about debt slaves. Gavin objects by saying it's not only talking about debt slaves. I don't understand Gavins objection here. The verse is saying you can beat your slave with a Rod as long as they survive the beating for a day or two after you beat them. So Gavin objects that this verse is only talking about debt slaves? In other words, Gavin thinks the bible is not only okay with you beating debt slaves with a Rod, but it's okay with you beating any slaves with a Rod as well. I'm not sure how that makes the bibles position more moral. If anything, it makes it less moral. See, being permitted to beat even more people with Rods = even less moral.

[@OldMotherLogo]

Trying to hang in there but my tolerance for listening to “Christians” make excuses for slavery is pretty low. Why can’t they just admit that owning other human beings is wrong?

[@harrispinkham]

Same

[@smitty1647]

@@sw3783 i'd actually like to hear your position on that. presumably, you oppose exploitative business practices, but since you live in a society that is built on those you can advocate for changing them while making use of their products. so in the bible, the people of god should have been activists for abolition even if they traded in grain and other products produced by slaves in other countries out of necessity. what did god say against slavery? what steps did he take to abolish it?

[@Josh-ch3nv]

2:19:00 They have Harper on be kind to the runaway slave because you came out of Egypt. 1) Why not don’t do slavery because you were slaves in Egypt. 2) What about the command that says if you want slaves go to your neighboring countries? So, a free individual of a neighboring country it is cool to kidnap and make a slave, but a runaway slave from a foreign country treat as a traveler? What if I apply the first law and say the lord has blessed me with a slave from a neighboring country?? Who will know? How does this slave have the ability to take me to court?

[@Josh-ch3nv]

And @digitalhammurabi brings it home 2:21:00

[@terrorsaurus8683]

42:29 There are lots of people, even whole organizations that oppose the slavery that is the US prison system. The US makes billions of dollars every year on the back of free prison labor. They left that caveat in the 13 amendment on purpose so they could act like they were abolishing slavery, but still allow for it. Slavery is wrong in all of it's forms and that 1000% includes the US for profit prison system.

[@harrispinkham]

The mental gymnastics the apologists have to do on this one… nah dude.

[@byew-byew]

Their argument is essentially “well God’s version of slavery wasn’t AS BAD as the others, and PLUS it was for the sake of the ECONOMY”

[@smitty1647]

@@byew-byew STONKS!

[@ATOK_]

​@@byew-byewit's weird how humans were able to make better laws than God

[@rabbitpirate]

2:07:46 look how quickly he scrolls verses 20-21 off the screen as they completely undermine his entire argument.

[@DahweedNYC]

Great interview! My only critique, which I am more than certain that I am not the only one who wonders this is why you did not have at least two (2) Sacred Scriptural scholars that are Black descendants of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade to give their own exegetical presentations. That would have offered an outstanding insight into the Sacred Scriptures. This is something that I suggest that you do in the immediate future. It will also help your channel to attract more Black people, & Black academics to be a part of the conversation. One suggestion is Dr. Kenneth Howard who is a professor at EcumenicalTheological Seminary.

[@bnanadana7459]

Dr Josh, have you done a video on the Ethiopian Bible ?

[@michaelhenry1763]

40:48 wow, the Christians cannot say “ slavery is immoral” without qualifiers and asking the the definition to be re-read as if they in the final round of a spelling bee.

[@OldMotherLogo]

They also cannot handle the term “chattel slavery.” The amount of evasiveness is astounding.

[@CroElectroStile]

@@OldMotherLogo He didn't evade anything. Clarifications in a debate setting are always important. You can define slavery very specifically with a tight range, which would entail immorality, or you can define it broadly as they did, in which case it may not be immoral- simpliciter. He mentioned it was a moral hazard because it was a fact of life and a necessary institution for the survival of people or protection of societies when we talk about contexts where institutions like police, prisons or social services didn't exist, I mean not even streetlights so you can imagine how safe it was for women and children. Brutality was often necessary to maintain order and protect society. People couldn't simply get a job at a place like Arby's or get welfare; they would have to sell themselves for food and shelter, same with foreigners escaping hardships. Do you think economic migrants escaping Africa rn and being used for cheap labor in first-world countries like in Italy aren't experiencing something similar? Imagine how much more difficult life was 3-4 thousand years ago - well we can't, and this is why when it comes to Atheists here all I see are appeals to emotion rather than an examination of the principles of human interactions throughout history. We need to understand what was possible and practical in such communities to mitigate and regulate harmful practices in the ancient East, not whine and scream like children about how bad the God of the Israelites was to allow extremely poor disenfranchised foreign people to have masters over them, where they are sheltered, fed, and are able to participate in the religious ceremonies eventually getting circumcised and being part of their community.

[@OldMotherLogo]

@@CroElectroStile I see you are in the “Biblical slavery was okay” camp. Sorry, but I strongly disagree. Odd that the atheists are condemning slavery while the Christians are using moral relativism to condone it.

[@michaelhenry1763]

@@OldMotherLogo agreed

[@pickyricky6226]

​@@CroElectroStile Rebutting the argument about the morality of slavery, especially within historical contexts and its justification, involves addressing several key points: the historical necessity argument, the comparison with modern-day economic migrants, and the moral framework used to assess these practices. I will be posting all 4 in different replies. 1.).Historical Necessity Argument The argument posits that slavery was a necessary institution for the survival and protection of ancient societies due to the lack of modern social services and infrastructure. 1a.) Moral Relativism vs. Universal Morality: While it's true that historical contexts differ vastly from modern ones, this does not absolve the practice of slavery from moral scrutiny. The principle of universal human rights asserts that certain actions, such as owning another person as property, are inherently immoral regardless of the context. This is based on the intrinsic value of human autonomy and dignity. 1b.) Survival and Protection: Even if slavery was seen as a means of survival or protection, this utilitarian perspective does not justify the violation of fundamental human rights. Ethical frameworks such as Kantian deontology argue that people should never be treated merely as means to an end, but always as ends in themselves. 1c.) Alternatives to Slavery: Historical necessity is often overstated. Many ancient societies developed complex systems of labor and community support that did not rely on slavery. Moreover, the existence of alternative social structures (like mutual aid, cooperative labor systems, or even less brutal forms of servitude) demonstrates that slavery was not the only solution to the challenges of ancient life.

[@goodquestion7915]

God is not shy at restarting things (flood, escape from Egypt, Jesus new covenant, End of Days) right? So, why the shyness at immediately ending slavery? Was God financially conservative?

[@smitty1647]

STONKS > human rights

[@sonyadonnegan1983]

Is slavery immoral? Gavin : “YesNo” Trent : “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth…(5 minutes later)…and they all lived happily every after. The end.”

[@nickydaviesnsdpharms3084]

When they say it's not as simple as it's just immoral etc, well it is when you take into consideration the God is supposed to be all knowing an absolute perfection. Surely he could come up with a better way. He sure speaks up on other less important subjects.

[@hiddenpearls4735]

A passage in the Instruction for Merikare speaks of the ways that God cares for humans as his cattle or herd, in terms strongly reminiscent of biblical anthropocentrism: Humans are well cared for, the livestock of god: he made heaven and earth for their sake, he pushed the greediness of the waters back and created the air so that their nostrils might live. His images are they, having come forth from his body.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

I know that human slavery is wrong. So where in the Bible does Yahweh or Jesus or St Paul agree with me?

[@leslieviljoen]

Tl;DR: Owning other people as property is not so bad! - Christians

[@harrispinkham]

Especially double the time frame - you just give them stuff.

[@simplybaker.]

I really love how small bean and weak God becomes in discussions like this as soon as something is a "moral hazard". Like "well god COULDN'T just say slavery is bad bc that would be too hard" like come on dude is this god or just a human ruler?

[@davidfrisken1617]

It is a shame Exodus 21:21 was not discussed.

[@PrometheanRising]

And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

[@kyleepratt]

2:28:50 -Gavin, saying that the Hebrew Bible and/or the Christian scriptures are what got "us" where we are now is crazy narrow minded. So much more than these 2 collections of writings went on in the past 3000 years. I credit more the people who have been taken advantage of for millenia fighting for their lives and rights doing the actual work of bettering our world.

[@neilericksson6989]

If we’re trying to understand what the Hebrew Bible says about slavery, and what does that say about the nature if God, a discussion as to whether they are better or worse than other Ancient Near East laws is not all that relevant. Surely the issue is does the New Testament have a different view and if so, why?

[@smitty1647]

comparing the torah to other cultures of the time addresses the argument that god greatly improved on the institution of slavery. whether the new testament fixes the old testament's endorsement of slavery would be a different debate (it doesn't)

[@Cuffsmaster]

Does any really believe there were not slaves owned by their Master in the those times

[@SaffronHammer]

Slavery is not serventhood. And WTF to equate working as a servant to actual slavery. Disgusting. In the Bible god gives instructions on how to own and pass down humans as property .

[@AbdulHannanAbdulMatheen]

👏🙂 Very interesting

[@donnanobel514]

The last stuff Kipp said reminded me of a video by mindshift.

[@SaffronHammer]

The mental gymnastics is Olympic!

[@SaffronHammer]

Hahaha! He is worried people will get the wrong idea of slavery if we call it slavery. No worries, dude. The slavery was just as evil in ancient Israel as in the US.

[@elcangridelanime]

There was bad faith from Trent and Gavin. They both were so incredibly vague and loosy-goosy with their interpretation that any listener is forced to make assumptions with their answer. This won't be a problem if the debate is about their *interpretation of the bible* but they were talking about the *historical slavery* of that specific period. For example at 39:30 Dr. Kipp asks the two Christians *"Do you agree that Slavery is immoral?"* Trent can't answer without a definition, which he knows he already had because Dr. Kipp and Dr.Josh give them their definition at the start of the FUCKING VIDEO!! and instead answering with a yes, no, or "Yes/No, but..." they go on an irrelevant tangent of _"How good definitions are in conversation"_, "It a fallen world" , "slavery is more moral than amputation", and many more Bullshit answer that does not address the question. This is Gavin and Trent's answer; *NO, They don't believe Slavery is immoral* because they already conceived that God promoted Slavery and they are forced to believe slavery is moral because god commanded it. But they both know how horrible it makes god and then look so they give a no-answer to the question.

[@Atomus242]

I sometimes imagine these kind of christians trying to defend rape if the Bible never said it was immoral and gave instructions on how to rape a woman or a girl so that their vaginas were not severely damaged, and is long as you didn't kill them during the rape then you were free to go, because the victims were woman. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't admit that rape in that "context" was something horribly wrong and they would be making mental gymnastics to try to justify such a horrible and traumatic act to make it look "not that bad as"

[@Atomus242]

I sometimes imagine these kind of christians trying to defend rape if the Bible never said it was immoral and gave instructions on how to rape a woman or a girl so that their vaginas were not severely damaged, and is long as you didn't kill them during the rape then you were free to go, because the victims were woman. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't admit that rape in that "context" was something horribly wrong and they would be making mental gymnastics to try to justify such a horrible and traumatic act to make it look "not that bad as", just because they are forced by their dogma to accept this bullshit

[@KravMagoo]

To Kip's point, in the Bible, a slave challenges his status as slave by successfully escaping.

[@SaffronHammer]

God can do anything. God forbids adultery. But he can’t Not tell his chosen people how to buy, sell, and pass down humans as chattel.

[@henryschmit3340]

"Does the Bible support slavery? ....many try to portray the Bible as advocating slavery. However, they are guilty of gross decontextualising of the Bible, in presuming that the word in the Bible refers to the antebellum American South. In reality, it had a wide range of meanings. E.g. in the biblical culture, the Prime Minister’s cabinet members would be called his ‘slaves’. The New World slavery that most people think of was expressly forbidden in the Bible, because it resulted from kidnapping, and because converted slaves were not freed as per Philemon and Anselm. ... ‘Scholars do not agree on a definition of “slavery”. The term has been used at various times for a wide range of institutions, including plantation slavery, forced labor, the drudgery of factories and sweatshops, child labor, semivoluntary prostitution, bride-price marriage, child adoption for payment, and paid-for surrogate motherhood. Somewhere within this range, the literal meaning of “slavery” shifts into metaphorical meaning, but it is not entirely clear at what point. A similar problem arises when we look at other cultures. The reason is that the term “Slavery” is evocative rather than analytical, calling to mind a loose bundle of diagnostic features. … ‘The word ‘ebed [עבד], however, denoted not only actual slaves occupied in production or in the household but also persons in subordinate positions (mainly subordinate with regard to the king and his higher officials). Thus the term ‘ebed is sometimes translated as “servant”. Besides, the term was used as a sign of servility in reference to oneself when addressing persons of higher rank. Finally, the same term was also used in the figurative meaning “the slave (or servant) of God”. Thus, the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, prophets, David, Solomon and other kings are regularly called slaves of Yahweh (Exod 32:13; Lev 25:55; 1 Sam 3:9; Ezra 9:11, etc.). Similarly, all the subjects of Israel and Judah are called slaves of their kings, including even wives, sons, and brothers of the latter (1 Sam 17:8; 29:3; 2 Sam 19:5, etc.; cf. also Gen 27:37; 32:4).… ‘For example, courtiers of an Aramean ruler or the soldiers of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II were considered slaves of their monarchs (2 Kgs 6:11; 24:10-11). It is natural that kings of Judah depending on more powerful rulers of neighboring countries were considered their slaves. Thus, Ahaz is referred to as a slave of the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 16:7). In modern translations of the Bible ‘ebed / doulos [δούλος] and several other similar terms are rendered “slave” as well as “servant”, “attendant”, etc. Such translations, however, might create some confusion and give the incorrect impression that special terms for the designation of servants and slaves are attested in the Bible… ‘However, selecting the proper meaning from such a broad metaphorical application of the term designating a general dependence rarely presents great difficulty. For example, Abimelech, king of Gerar, called up his slaves and told them his dream (Gen 20:8). Apparently, these “slaves” were royal courtiers and officials.’ Then why is there no command in the Bible to free the slaves immediately? Because the commands in the Bible already documented would subtly undermine the institution far better than a slave rebellion. E.g. the prohibition on trading in slaves would drastically localize it. Compare the application of Paul’s teachings with the tragic end to the rebellion of Spartacus (c. 120-70 BC), or in modern times, compare Martin Luther King’s peaceful (and Bible-based) protests with the secular revolutionary Malcolm X."

[@sparrowthesissy2186]

That's a lot of words to say, "God liked slavery."

[@henryschmit3340]

@@sparrowthesissy2186 It's actually saying opposite.

[@henryschmit3340]

@karldubhe8619 You don't seem to be very good at reading.

[@sparrowthesissy2186]

@@henryschmit3340 So Yahweh calls his favorite people slaves because he hates slavery? And he let the one good person worth saving on Earth, Noah, curse his grandson into slavery, in the only time Noah speaks, because Yahweh hates slavery? And Yahweh let an elderly Abraham have a son with a captive woman because he hates that sort of thing? And Yahweh lets Solomon build the first temple with forced labor, because he hates that sort of thing? And Numbers 31:14-27 has Yahweh and Moses giving orders for how to divide up captive virgin women as spoils of war, because Yahweh hates that sort of thing? I could go on and on. The text reflects the values of the time, and while it often admits that being a slave is a terrible thing to be, and that it's good to stop being a slave, it never advocates for the abolition of slavery. Yahweh commands the opposite.

[@henryschmit3340]

@@sparrowthesissy2186You have missed some important points in my post. "The text reflects the values of the time..." The actions of God are often a reflection of the people he was having to deal with. You have also missed the obvious fact that God was simply regulating something that was already common and a part of man's fallen and corrupted nature. Hence the rules and guidelines He gives. Since there was already slavery it would be as fair on the slave as possible. "I could go on and on..." I'm sure you could, but your narrow view ignores God's omniscience and his purpose.... ...And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" (Romans 9:10-24)

[@JasonHenderson]

1:09:29 what is a one-eyed foreign slave going to do if he is freed? Start his own business?

[@smitty1647]

get a paying job. it's not like a one-eyed person is unable to work

[@birdmann9197]

"We weren't expecting to see all the facts in front of us right from the start..." And just downhill from there.

[@jgoeg8922]

Ive learned that 6 years a slave is better than 3 years a slave.

[@JasonHenderson]

22:58 wasn't the apostle Paul put into a prison? And wasn't the bread baker and the wine taster put into prison in the story of Joseph? There absolutely is prison in the Bible.

[@RayG817]

Trent shows us the danger of Christian thought when he hems and haws about whether slavery is really bad. He does this only because slavery is mentioned in the Bible, and the Bible must be defended. He tries to muddy the waters by saying "whatabout criminals in prison?" which is a separate issue entirely -- and he knows it.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

so, did they admit god is immoral?

[@Atomus242]

It is very convenient to have such a limited god that has to adjust himself to human culture, times and bias, when he could easily had made the israelites seen as revolutionary people by teaching them how to find better ways than slavery and human beating. But is soo very convenient that this god was soo adjusted to human behavior of that time. The same way the Hammurabi Code was "given" by a god, the Commandments in the Bible were supposedly "given" by a god as well. To me this sounds soo much like men that tried to make people obey their own invented laws because they supposedly came from a higher power. Or they possibly really believed it, just like the ones who wrote the Hammurabi Code

[@DanielTate-wt9jt]

Gavin and Trents argument seems to boil down to... "Sure the bible condones slavery, but it's good slavery not bad slavery. And God was trying to slowly get rid of slavery." Except nowhere in the bible does God ever get rid of slavery. Even the NT condones slavery. So when does God finally "get rid" of slavery in the bible? If he's working to get rid of it, when did that happen? When did he get rid of it? Because the NT condones slavery as well.

[@yblackie]

How does the New Testament condone slavery?

[@smitty1647]

@@yblackie Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Colossians 3:22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.

[@anastazjaQ]

"The curse of Cham" comes from Talmud and served to justify the slavery of Blacks and Slavs.

[@PrometheanRising]

Apologist: See, the Bible has rules against harming your slaves! Their book: It's ok to kill them if you do it right.

[@SaffronHammer]

They start with thge presupposition that the Bible is moral and just and then must do all sorts of false , pretzel logic to justify,

[@guiagaston7273]

This topic again?

[@OldMotherLogo]

Because apologists keep making excuses for slavery in the Bible. I think it was Gavin Ortland who recently made (yet another) video rationalizing Biblical slavery.

[@smitty1647]

yeah unfortunately people still venerate the bible, and the bible still supports slavery. the topic hasn't been resolved

[@tonywilliams49]

If the Hebrew god can directly state not to eat shellfish, he could have stated slavery is wrong.

[@Chiefdixon]

How many times can you talk about slavery?

[@DigitalHammurabi]

As many time as it takes for people to stop defending it.

[@OldMotherLogo]

Thank you, Josh. ❤

[@smitty1647]

@@DigitalHammurabi buckle in, it's gonna be a while before that happens

[@Noir_Nouveau]

It is ironic how God called the "people who are owned by another person" as property but the apologists don't agree with it.

[@seoigh]

2:22:00 serious projection here

[@LostArchivist]

Was hoping for more insightful dialogue here, but seems the comments are mostly just flexing and rhetorical posturing.

[@superha0]

I don't think Josh's argument about Exodus 21 26-27 makes sense. 20-21 would definitely imply chattle slavery, meaning Exodus 21 covers both debt and chattle and the most recent reference before 26-27 would be the chattle, so I don't see any reason why we would assume 26-27 is now only talking about debt. Saying that we should assume its debt-only because that would make it consistent with other laws outside of biblical laws is just saying we should assume it's debt-free because it makes my argument fit. Gavin's whole point is that this passage presents something unique, so the counter-argument saying its not unique because scholars are arguing that it makes more sense to interpret it as not unique is circular. Josh is coming in with the pre-conceived idea that it can't be talking about chattle slaves because that would make it different from everything else rather than saying it looks different so maybe it is different.

[@DigitalHammurabi]

@@superha0 What would lead you to believe that 20-21 refers to chattel slaves?

[@superha0]

​@DigitalHammurabi Well at 50:45, we get the definition for chattel to be property, and then going to the passage at Exodus 21 21, which can be seen at 58:06, the slave is referred to as property. To me that would be the most straightforward interpretation, the counter argument discussed in the video not being very good as I described previously.

[@DigitalHammurabi]

@@superha0 I think you may need to spend some time reading through the secondary literature.

[@superha0]

@@DigitalHammurabi If you can refute what I'm saying or have a better explanation, I'm all ears

[@DigitalHammurabi]

@@superha0 You can read the 703 page book I wrote on the topic. Best.

[@metalhead0274]

I have held the position for quite some time that if your position requires apologetics, then maybe its time ro re-evaluate thw position you hold. Even on the simplest premise position. Any position worth any legitimacy does not need or require apologetics of any form. Apologetics is sort of i know its bad and wrong..i know the position is not correct .buttt let me try to excuse my way through it anyway

[@OldMotherLogo]

I’m an hour into this an need to take a break. Trent is really getting on my nerves with his rationalizations.

[@harrispinkham]

Josh is like “So being a slave for six years instead of three is not worse?” And Gavin is like.. “yeah in some circumstances…” 🙈🙈 Dude. Just no.

[@javierivantorres7668]

i dont understand the softness of dr josh here, i've seen him explain in detail why things like freeing a slave after blinding him isnt as simple as it sounds, and thats to give an example, i dont understand why he went so easy in some points

[@Rocket278]

Reading the comments…Since when is it God‘s job to make things great for us? Kipp and Josh approach this topic with a postmodern mindset. We all get things we don’t “deserve” in life, and that is one of the things the O.T. teaches (Romans 15:4) by giving us examples like slavery. The point of Scripture is to put trust in God, not in circumstances, as awful as they may be (Job 19:25). I am going through something horrific right now, something so awful that I would rather be a slave in the Old Testament. The question is, how do I respond to the calamity I’ve been dealt at God’s ultimate hand? In this, I am finding Christ sufficient. That is what God is teaching, whether you were a slave in the Old Testament, or a recipient of calamity today. Is God/Jesus enough, regardless of your circumstances? 2 Corinthians 12:7-10..."Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong."

[@smitty1647]

questioning the morality of an omnipotent deity isn't post modernism. is it post modernism to question the morality of the confederacy? why should we hold god to a LOWER moral standard than we hold other people? if i led an army to destroy a country and steal their land, and keep their virgin girls as their family members are butchered, it would not be 'post modernism' to judge me

[@KravMagoo]

The thing that I'm not hearing here is that God may (does, imo) have theological and prophetic motivations for how He perceives slavery as a concept and phenomenon. It's all about "morality" from a human perspective.

[@BirthingBetterSkills]

I was not born into the 3 Abrahamic faiths. Humans now have to follow The Great Global Truths and we need to develop cultures and faiths around them ... because they have always and will always exist. We now KNOW these Truths and we need to act on them 1. We are ALL one humanity. We all blink, cough, and can tighten our muscles. Any woman can get pregnant by any man. Any child can be brought up in any culture, religion, language, part of the world. We use Distorted Mind Beliefs to deny and suppress this Truth and see ‘Us’ and ‘Other’. 2. We are ALL born naked. Every Woman knows this. We are made to feel shame or unsafe due to Distorted Mind Beliefs and denied the Truth 3. We are ALL born equal because the sun shines on each of us. Distorted Mind Beliefs deny and suppress this Truth. 4. We ALL live on one planet shared with the Commons (Waters, Airs, Soils), All Species and Each Others. We use Distorted Mind Beliefs as a reason to kill one another, The Commons and Species.

[@myblueheaven86]

In summary: Jesus gave rules on how to treat your slaves. Why? Because people just weren't ready to hear that they simply shouldn't have slaves.

[@smitty1647]

@@sw3783 if dr. josh was omnipotent he would end slavery. even the christians defending biblical slavery would probably do that