The most ABSURD Biblical slavery defence you’ll ever see | Ft. Dr. Joshua Bowen
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ต.ค. 2023
- To support us on Patreon (thank you): / rationalityrules
To support us through PayPal (thank you): www.paypal.me/RationalityRules
Our other channel, DEBUNKED: / @casuallydebunked284
To visit the DEBUNKED card game website: www.debunkedcardgame.com/
To support us through merchandise: teespring.com/en-GB/stores/ra...
To follow me me (Steve) on Facebook: / rationalityrules
To tweet with me (Steve) on Twitter: / rationalityrule
--
Apologist FAILS to whitewash Elisha and the Two Bears | Dr. Paul Copan: • Apologist FAILS to whi...
The Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament: Volume 1: www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...
The Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament: Volume 2: www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...
Did the Old Testament Endorse Slavery? www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...
Follow Dr. Josh on Twitter: djhammurabi1?lang...
I'm so tired of hearing Christians say "it was a different time" while simultaneously saying biblical morality applies to my life now
😂
They want to bring back the 10 commandments to schools, but not the mosaic laws. Or at least, only what they cherry-pick for their own interests.
@@nicolasandre9886 of course the funny thing is the 10 commandments don't mean shit, there is only 1 commandment in christianity that matter, the commandment of 'be on team God'
@@thejuiceking2219 : well, that and 'love thy neighbor as thyself'. But of course, even the new testament has enough contradictory verses to promote mutually exclusive interpretations.
@@nicolasandre9886 nah, you can love your neighbour as yourself all you want, don't mean jack shit if you don't subscribe to team God
*"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities"* ― Voltaire
Your analogy of a defense attorney is perfect. As a former ordained Christian minister and passionate apologist I can attest that I didn't examine the evidence with the intent of going wherever it led. Rather, apologists parse the data to find anything that can be used to support existing beliefs.
Not really great. Defense Attorneys at least have ethical constraints they have to work within, like not outright lying to the court on their clients behalf(in theory anyways, in practice...well).
you still didn't examine the evidence. everything this fraud has pointed out from exodus, Leviticus and numbers, is from the Torah, the J-e-w--i-s-h book, not Christianity
It's all performance.
Nothing more than to be seen or heard defending faith, no matter how absurd the defense.
The defense attorney analogy doesn’t quite hold up. Demonstrating a client’s guilt or innocence isn’t the same thing as admitting guilt, then making excuses for the act they were guilty of.
I would give the attorney/lawyer credit for one small thing. He doesn't really (or need to) care what's morally right or wrong, or whether he's convinced of some kind of moral superiority. He doesn't care about that at all. He probably knows exactly what kind of people he is defending.
Just hearing the apologist lie without a flinch makes me happy I'm deconverting ftom all this mess.
I really love how Joshua came into this very calm and collected and the more he talked about it, the more infuriating it got for him. That's a perfect showcase of how insane this really is. Thank you both.
Why are we bringing up a topic of incarceration
"I'm not saying you didn't have hard chores to do" i shouted f##k you at Paul at this characterisation of slavery. My wife was a bit surprised.
"Don't forget to take out the garbage... slave!" - Biblical slave owners, maybe
Yeah that was appalling and disgusting jfc! How bout you sell yourself into slavery, Paul?
Yo they drank contaminated water with fermented fruit in it to survive...
You would definitely be selling your daughter too if that was your life.
I mean, they had more justification to enslave then considering they did it to get by and we do it to get smart phones and cheap t shirts.
Imagine being "a servant" of Abra(ha)m and getting circumcised just because your "boss" changed religions... No choice, no way out, just done without your input.
@@Ugly_German_Truths Imagine having entire nations whose citizens and governments exist to provide you access to cheap fruit, textiles and minerals.
Trimmed dick < Multiple nations of people who exist to serve the west's dumb consumers.
That butter robot from Rick and Morty whose entire purpose is to get butter for people at the family table? We have nations of people who do that for us.
A number of people who dwarf the amount of people who lived under Abrahamic religions and sold their family members to survive. Not for cheap food and electronics and clothes, but just to live.
When engaging an appologist that was defending biblical slavery I asked him if he had a daughter because I had 50 shekels. Still waiting for an answer.
One thing people often don't realize about slavery is that slaves were actually quite expensive in most societies that practiced slavery. They were a limited resource and a huge asset. Think about it-- we're talking about the labor value of a person's entire life. Records from the antebellum South show prices that, translated into current dollars, equate to the cost of an expensive car and up. In most cases slaves were the property of the wealthy elites.
@@donnievance1942.. Slaves have always been property of the elite and wealthy, and still are in modern day Human trafficking schemes and operations. 🤨
@@donnievance1942 So what? Doesn't change the way they were treated one bit. Horses and Bulls were expensive too, but you'll find accounts of owners mistreating them, mutilating them or killing them.
Which "ironically" often was justified by biblical hypocrisy as the Slaves (in the antebellum south) were of course black, which meant they bore the curse of Ham and were "destined" to "serve"... making them conveniently "less than human" and justifying treating them like cattle.
Other models of slavery had similar apologetics, just differently worded, like the Greeks enslaving "barbaroi" (uncivilized "mumblers" not of the hellenic cultural sphere) or any number of ancient cultures enslaving prisoners of war as "enemies" that brought this fate upon themselves.
@@donnievance1942 if you win a war in the bible, they all become your property for no money at all And there were many of those wars.
@@donnievance1942banning half of population from reading, writing and working carries extremely expensive consequences for the society but that doesn't prevent the taliban from treating women like cattle. Tiny brains that wrote the bible and quran didn't care about the long term expenses nor did they worry about fairness and justice. They owned other humans because it was socially acceptable and not seen as immoral, simple as that. Slavery is illogical and harmful for the society, but the primitives who practiced it were not concerned with logic or society.
My mum worked in the a job for 20 years, the only employee. Every week she had to ask for her pay and the boss then grudgingly gave it. Occasionally she didnt ask for her pay and didnt receive her pay.
Her boss was the type of person completely ok with slavery. Guess what, he was a christian.
He was a dirtbag
Most corporations would without a second thought use employees as slaves. They do everything they can to do that already. Fortunately human rights are a thing the government recognizes.
@@mwperk02 Not all governments, sadly. Many are willing to turn a blind eye if corporations bribe them enough.
she should've sued him lol
@@mwperk02 "The corportion" hire people like you. Amoral, unethical members of you community no different than you.
I read Copan’s “Is God a Moral Monster” (a defence of slavery etc) and let’s just say I was convinced… that he IS A MORAL MONSTER.
At least the monster part...
In God's defence, he was initially made up in an entirely different time and social context :p
Still guilty though. To help the prosecution, James Bond is considered a hero by many, and his character has evolved pretty quickly to become less of a villain in his newer stories. The biblical god did not. People's excuses for its character did slightly better, but then only end up being further from the texts.
Just saying, it's entirely possible to write sequels with improvements of the character and Jesus didn't really cut it with his bigoted, sexist views of societies and people of different cultures and his lack of knowledge about how anything in reality works and his warped morality and ethics. Not to mention his implicit endorsement of slavery.
That said, I do like the pre-iron age god better. I really appreciate the overt, over the top evilness of the character a lot more than the covert sleazy "loving" messages from Jesus.
I mean, there's a huge difference between: "My daddy will be so disappointed with you! MEHHH MEHHHH!"
And: "I gave you your brother's wife so you can have an heir! And you cum on the floor????" SMITED! DEADGE! 🤣
That is just hilarious! 🤣
Without fail, every Christian I've ever asked about slavery in the bible, has known nothing about what the Bible says about slavery.
Yeah I think you are correct
Apologists are just lawyers for God! Hilarious and accurate.
spin doctors is what we call them in politics.
Liars for Yahweh.
@@PrometheanRisingWhat I call "Hovind's Wager."
@@antondovydaitis2261 the idea being that the best choice to make is the one that is most likely to keep you away from the Hovind's?
Aren't modern people way better at slavery?
Like the 5% of our citizens in prison dwarfs the population of people who existed over entire continents in biblical times yeah?
So putting multiple nations worth of people in cages, and then running sweat shops and mines out of sight makes us magically more moral than the guy who sells his daughter and drinks contaminated water with fermented fruit in it...
Is he joking? Sports players chose the career voluntarily and they make huge amounts of money and they can walk out anyway with fear only of a civil suit.
Usually, they are free to walk away at any time that is not within a playing season.
I recently encountered an evangelical trying to defend Biblical slavery on Quora. Even after I directly quoted to them the passage about slaves being heritable property, they still insisted it wasn't the same kind of slavery and tried to play word games over what "chattel slavery" means and so on. There's no reasoning with people that deeply indoctrinated.
0:47 Ok, since you asked, I'll be honest Rationality Rules: I have never felt guilty because of selling my own daughter into slavery.
When I sold my neighbours daughter however...
Was she a foreigner living amongst you?
I hope you secured a good price for both of them.😀
Lot
HAHAHA 😂😂
I wonder if Paul Copan realises that his "argument" also exonerates slavery in the Quran.
I also wonder if Paul Copan would sell his daughter into slavery for money, if things got tight.
It would. If it exonerated it at all.
No cause he doesn't believe in the Quran.
@@fatman957 but would he dismiss a Muslim who makes the exact same argument in defence of the Quran?
@@misterocain- I'll wager he would! He's a hypocrite to the core. 🙄
The comparison of the apologist to a defense lawyer is a realization that helped me deconstruct my Mormon faith while in law school at BYU. I realized that all apologetics resembled a lawyer defending a guilty client: the job was not to weigh the evidence and develop the most plausible theory, the job was to cast a shadow of reasonable doubt that made Mormonism and Christianity seem less “guilty.” It’s all about making your predetermined conclusion as survivable as possible.
Bend themselves into Pretzels so they can justify their ancient book?!
It’s just amazing that people that can read and write that understand language and to a point life will just slurp up these weak weak excuses for these atrocities. I love this channel
i maintain that diversity is what has kept humanity going, that no matter what, after the apocalypse someone will crawl out of the rubble to start over, i just hope it's not these cockroaches.
It is still better than our supposedly enlightened society today. People like this will portray these things as atrocites (which I am not denying that they are) than turn around and get most of their stuff from slave labor.
But… but… “pro-life!!”
Totally agree! That's the slippery thing about language. A person can completely euphemize, obfuscate and for all intents and purposes Nerf their reality to serve their ideology and self-talk. Confirmation bias is no joke, lol
Considering that one of the commandments is "thou shalt not lie", it's funny that apologists make a living off lying
‘Say that I love my master’….bit of Freudian slip there I think. 😂
"Anyone who beats Lebron James with a rod must be punished if he dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if he recovers after a day or two, since Lebron is their property."
🤔Hmmm Not really the same thing is it?
In sport they trade the player contract NOT the player. The player still decide if he will go or not. Compensation may occur but in that instance it's the contract that is traded.
Aside the from fact that Paul manipulates and misrepresents the similarities between ancient debt and chattel slavery and modern athletes, even worse is how he leaves out big differences, such as it being approved by the god of the bible to beat your slaves to death or to the point of them getting up two days later, or that a wise owner beats his slaves, or that foreign slaves weren't allowed to go free after 6 years, or that they had far less rights and freedoms than regular citizens. That and many more major differences are left out of Paul's insane defense.
I'm on your side, but the Bible does not allow a master to unambiguously beat his slave to death. It declares that to be murder. It does say that if the slave survives for a couple of days and then dies, the master is guiltless, and you are correct to regard that as a distinction without a difference. However, you need to be more precise in your language. Otherwise, we leave ourselves open to the charge of the same kind of equivocation that is the apologists' stock in trade.
@@donnievance1942 Exodus 21:20-21
Has God saying it’s okay to beat both your male and female slaves. To make matters worse, the most literal reading has God saying it’s okay when a beaten slave dies after a couple days, since a slave belongs to the owner. That's the scholarly consensus reading. Yes, I understand that apologists and versions have mistranslated it to tone it down, making it say that it's only okay if the slave gets up after 2 days. If it took two days to die, it was assumed the master didn't intentionally kill them, so that piece is valid. They weren't supposed to just go around executing their slaves, but such a thing would be unlikely, just like a farmer wouldn't execute their cattle unless going mad. I don't need to be more precise, as I represented the most precise reading. Don't give the apologists an inch.
Dr. Josh is a righteous dude. Can't say enough good things about this man.
He's totally in my face!
Dr. Bowman was on fire. “A slave for_just_ six years? Sick flex, bro.” 😅
Apologists: They are not interested in the truth-just in defending their client.Well said,Steven, well said.(I hope I quoted you right?)
The fact that being born a woman made you 💯 owned no matter your status, is too often excluded in slavery discussions. It is a fate worse than slavery in that there’s no choice… unless your owner grants it to you, always conditionally never with self autonomy.
Where does it state that with women being "owned" ? Sure, there is plenty of patriarchal and discriminatory stuff in the holy books, but being owned?! Owned by whom? The parents? Tribe? Children today aren't allowed to leave their parents up to a certain age and they don't have to be paid either to help in household chores, but it's still not ownership like slave ownership, just stating that in case your argument goes in that direction...
@@thulyblu5486
Though it may not say it directly, women are considered property by the 'big 4' religions. Yes, the father owns the daughter, her entire life, or, until he hands her off to her new owner, a husband. That is why, in those religions, (I'm more familiar with the abrahamic 3, but what I've read of hindu, same) if a woman is 'damaged', ie: had sex, consenting or not, injured, like in an accident, or even killed, her 'owner' is compensated. Also why, in the stories, the men are named, women are, only if it's important to the man's story. And most obvious in the ten commandments, where they are listed with the livestock. 🥰✌
@@thulyblu5486Look into the ten commandments. It isn't explicit, but implicit. The ten commandments say, you shall not lust after your neighbours wife. This is a commandment written only for men. The laws often implicitly show that men alone are addressed by them, because women don't have the autonomy necessary.
Another example is Psalm 128, were it begins by telling how blessed the ones are who follow the Lord and a few verses later it says that those verses are about men who follow the Lord. Those things are never explicit, because everyone back then thought those things were obvious
@@laurajarrell6187 That only shows the patriarchal nature of society where men are in charge and important and women are to be protected by the male leaders and side characters at best etc... it's not ownership, though.
With the financial compensation: even today you can sue people for compensation when someone is hurt/damaged - has nothing to be with being owned. For example in the nineties OJ Simpson was convicted in civil court for killing people so he had to pay compensation (while he was found not guilty in criminal court so he didn't have to go to prison). Following your argument: him having to pay financial compensation to the family would imply that the family had *ownership* of the victims as property... that's obviously not how it works.
@@derpfaddesweisen Yes, the commandments and stories are all about men and for men because it was a profoundly patriarchal society. That doesn't mean women are property not even implicitly, just like children aren't property of their parents just because legal texts (including those regarding children) are written by and for adults only. The bronze age societies treat women like children to some degree, which is obviously not a good thing, patriarchal and backwards, but it's not ownership.
"Those things are never explicit(...)" is just untrue. In many places there are explicit rules for owning slaves and who can be enslaved and who can't. I think it was Exodus 21 where the explicit rules are layed out included "from the nations around you, you may buy slaves". Meaning: Foreigner = potential slave. It is very much explicit.
I think you just say that because you can't back up that claim that all women were basically enslaved back then... I don't think any society could function at all enslaving an entire gender. It just seems like propaganda making that crass of a claim.
I hear this disgusting defense too often. Would they themselves offer to become slaves?
Anyone who beats their male or female sports player with a rod must be punished if the sports player dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the sports player recovers after a day or two, since the sports player is their property.
"it's only assault, not battery," ha! Genius. That actually made me laugh. When I was a believer this whole thing was really hard for me to rationalize away. Even as a kid I'd read these scriptures and listen to the sermon trying to justify it and think it just didn't make sense calling it moral for exactly the reasons you bring up. Well done sir
It's important to remember that apologists are all working backward from the conclusion. The facts and the arguments don't matter; they know what the answer is supposed to be _before they even start thinking._
which assumes that at one point they MIGHT start to think... citation needed ;)
What's there to work backwards from? We still do slavery and just don't look at it.
I think the poor family that drinks contaminated water with fermented fruit in it selling their daughter to get by is probably more justified in their slavery than you or I having cheap fruit and electronics on the backs of slaves while we imprison 5% of our population.
@Edandar To clarify:
They're working backward from the principle that the bible- being the inspired word of god- can't actually be advocating for bad things and that, therefore, the appearance of biblical impropriety is merely a result of us understanding/contextualizing incorrectly.
tl;dr: _Naw, man! Biblical slavery was tight, actually!_
@@shassett79 Bibilical slavery is way more justified for the survival of the people then than the slavery that we do today is.
They did it to survive and we do it to... get cheap stuff...
If the metric is need then they needed it more than we do today.
It's not that it was "tight", it's that it was an obvious solution to some life's hardships at that point in time. Regardless of it being God's word or not. It was something you would have just done to get by.
It's dumb to expect people to not act on their means when their means are, like I sad, drinking contaminated water with fermented fruit in it.
@Edandar If your point is that humanity is awful and many live in terrible conditions, even now, I can't argue with you.
I'm just referring to the need of apologists to, well... apologize... for horrible things in the bible.
Anyway, if someone starts a new religion holding up present-day poverty, human trafficking, or sweatshop labor as ordained by their deity I'm probably going to take issue with that too.
I see a Christian like this and I can see why former slave Frederick Douglass said "I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders with whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders are the worst. I have ever found them the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all others. It was my unhappy lot not only to belong to a religious slaveholder, but to live in a community of such religionists."
It's hard to feel sympathy for the slaves if they couldn't be bothered to get a good agent.
They always ignore the part that reffers to the life long slaves, I remember Matt Dillahunty reading out the passage and a christian jumping through circle to say that it doesn't mean what it says
Let's make sure that it's clear that the buying and selling of an athlete's contract is not the buying and selling of said athlete.
As Brian Dalton (Mr. Deity) has pointed out, we need to correctly call biblical apologists “Excusegists”. Let's ask Paul if he would be happy and willing to be the sort of slave as described in the OT. I'd be interested to hear his answer.
Yeah, but it is still better than the supposedly enlightened west.
I mean apologoist is kind of the same type of word. It's about making apologies aka excuses. When I first heard the word apologist I thought it was a term only atheists use to reference christians who made up excuses for their faith as I thought that the word itself sounded negative. I was quite shocked to learn that many theists actually refer to themselves as apologists.
I just love the Atheist Community.
Experts in excugesis
"Let's ask Paul if he would be happy and willing to be the sort of slave as described in the OT."
Look, I'm not saying I'm going to force him into non-consensual sex with threats of violence, I'm just NOT not saying I'm going to force him into non-consensual sex with threats of violence.
Most accurate description of apologetics I have heard.
Selling anyone is wrong on every level
THis is what happens when you start with an unquestionable belief and then spend an entire lifetime trying to prove it correct. You end up comparing multi millionaire athletes to slaves living in the bronze age.
excellent point
Paul is right. Today if a baseball player is killed by his coach or by the owner of the team then the owner of the team has no charges brought against him. Right?
if the owner is rich enough, yes
What's more dangeous is those who bite the bullet and say well if God commanded it then it is good rather than those who try to make it not be as bad.
This guy Copan pretty much does that. His rationalizations are super thin. If we had a white Christian fascist theocracy, he'd be out there advocating for the revival of slavery for unbelievers.
Great debunk! Several times during this video I began typing in the comments my own objections to Coplan, but you covered all my objections and then some before the end. Really good job and I hope Coplan sees this.
everything this fraud has pointed out from exodus, Leviticus and numbers, is from the Torah, the J-e-w--i-s-h book, not Christianity
debunk my foot everything this fraud has pointed out from exodus, Leviticus and numbers, is from the Torah, the J-e-w--i-s-h book, not Christianity
even if he does, not like he will change, just like the other apologetic people, they have been told again and again how and why the world works. but if its not in My book thou they don't care
He'd have just more "apologies" to make for why his book is not inhumane and wrong...
@@Ugly_German_Truths lol, of course. It's not only his belief, it's his bread and butter! 🥰✌
Even modern contracts can be exploitative and coersive. They talk about 'having no choice' and entering these slave contracts out of desperation but even on that level alone the coersive nature of the exchange is reprehensible
"Alfred could leave Batman when ever he likes" i love this😆
It is fairly disgusting how he compares slavery to sports players.
I literally laughed out load when you switched from your discussion of the atrocities highlighted in the Bible to your outro and “thank you for watching”. Well done overall as always.
This one is truly among the best. The conclusion rellay hit home, how near everyone defends the ingroup for the same atrocities they decry in the outgroup
"They claim that we can't judge the past based on modern standards" but they'll certainly insist that the present should be judged based on the moral standards of the past.
That's why their defense of slavery is so disturbing.
I think the apologetics empire is imploding on the slavery issue recently. It's an impossible mountain to climb for them. I truly think serious christianity is going to fail soon as a result. Unfortunately that leaves us with a bunch of Christians who are either ok with slavery, or neospiritualists. I don't want either
The religion ain't going no where. As Hitch said, it's their favorite toy.
everything this fraud has pointed out from exodus, Leviticus and numbers, is from the Torah, the J-e-w--i-s-h book, not Christianity
@@cshubs well i think it's superstition that isn't going away, we don't really need god if we can still have fairies or orcs. it's superstition that is evolutionary necessary, not gods. we might be able to get by with finger crossing.
Christianity can survive if it is willing to become a mythology. The problem for Christians as that their favourite flavour will disappear.
@@he1ar1 that's why the Prager Mafia pays Jordan Peterson to do his "myths are actually real" bs.
Please, tell me that Dr. Bowen has altogether been the 11th doctor, who (pun very much intended) has ever appeared on RR! BTW, bowties are cool. 😁
I'd totally watch him as the next Dr Who.
Athletic contacts are in no conceivable way comparable to slavery. This makes my head hurt in a bad way. Not sure I could resist giving someone who said this to me the old Glasgow kiss.
Yes they would win the gold medal in mental and linguistics gymnastics when it comes down to their defense of slavery in both the Old and New Testaments.
Was Dr. Bowen the one who made that amazing Kent Hovind impression? Is it really bad that I think he is the opposite-universe version of Hovind?
Wonder how long Copan would last as a slave
the lawyer/client role play was great at illustrating how insane the claims are
Great video! I would love to see Copan respond, but chances are all he could do would be to stutter incoherently until he collapses into the fetal position murmuring "oh god oh god"
This might be the best one yet. The lawyer bit is great, especially. Amazing the lengths religious people will go to when legitimizing the horrors allowed by God. Insane.
"It just blows my mind!" .. that's not a shock really. It must really hurt their brains when their irrational, incoherent beliefs come face to face with logical questions and objections. -- It never stops amazing me how these people will say and twist anything to justify their demonstrably false book and it's imaginary God.
Looking forward to the upcoming podcast.
When I hear people talking about Israelite myth seriously, I get the same reaction as if I was hearing someone talking about Greek mythology just as seriously. It's profoundly ridiculous that people think this stuff is real -- that magic is real. That it is possible for a virgin to get pregnant by magic, or even give birth to a magic star baby that grew up to be a sorcerer and performed magic. That any of the other Old Testament stories that would require magic, like "stopping the sun,." could be taken seriously. That was obviously written by people who thought the sun revolved around the earth, and never took into account the earth spinning and what it would mean considering the laws of physics for it to suddenly stop. We are so advanced as a species with all this knowledge at our fingertips, yet there are those of us who still cling to ancient ignorance.
Yes they are Clingons
I think that at least some of the Greeks realized gods were bunk before the supposed birth of christ. And some of the ones who still thought their were gods thought them arbitrary and capricious and not worthy of worship.
They claim god is good,
They claim god is all powerful,
Except when bad things happen,
Then he's mysterious,
And we can't understand his plan.
Puny god
*Hulk* has entered the chat.
Rationality Rules, Stephen, this was great! And Dr. Josh, is so 'fair' in his criticism. I get so sick of them all ignoring the actual truth, and it just shows how few believers read their fable books! Did I hear Reese from Castles and Curiosities? Also, I think that, until humans get past automatically respecting someone for representing a religion, these lies will rarely be called out, except for activists like you all! I'm looking forward to the rest of you and Dr. Josh. And hopefully seeing a few of you playing Debunked! Mine is part of my decor, it's so purty, being linen and all! 👍💙💝💙🥰✌
Dude, stop calling Scipture "fables". I find it insufferably condescending. Also, I have read my holy book (The Avesta) cover to cover several times over, and Zoroastrians tend to be rather honest about our scriptures. (I was able to do this because it is pretty short)
@@TheMilitantMazdakite "Dude, stop calling Scipture (sic) "fables". I find it insufferably condescending."
Flatter yourself much? Who do you imagine cares whether you find something insufferable or condescending?
(Edit: fixed punctuation)
@@JP-su8bp I KNOW that God's existence is at LEAST plausible. Look up entropic gravity, and think about what that implies.
@@TheMilitantMazdakite
Fables are stories with talking animals and morals. There is a clear link and apt analogy between the idea of fable and the Bible.
Plus sometimes it's meant to be condescending.
Also why do you think a scientific theory has anything to do with your God. Just saying " think about what it implies " is vague enough to be meaningless. Clearly you've jumped to vastly different conclusions to what it "means".
@@FoursWithin Instead of looking up what Mazdakite suggested, I looked up some of his other posts and it's more of the same: Mazdakite doesn't answer direct questions, issues ambiguous blather, insists others spend their time researching various esoteric topics, and leaps to conclusions not supported by anything presented. Might be a fool. Might be a troll. Either way, a waste of time.
Dan Mclellan phrases it as negotiating with the text, often to preserve the structure of power.
One additional key difference between modern contractural arrangements and debt slaves is that, at least under US law, courts may not specifically enforce personal service contracts. In other words, courts cannot order a person to perform personally ANY services called for under the contract. They can be required to pay money or cause certain actions to be taken by others, such as repairs etc, but they cannot be required to do so themselves.
Thus, even if they agreed to work for a given period pursuant to a written contract, they can simply walk away, and the worst possible punishment is that they will have to pay money or hire someone else to do the work.
"Or, as the Bible describes, the master could simply provide the slave with a lover and then extort the slave to stay with his wife and children."
The glaring issue with this, of course, is that a slave's wife is not a "lover" in this context. She is a fellow slave who was forced to marry him against both his and her will, so the male slave coming to actually love his slave wife would be the same kind of Stockholm syndrome effect as him coming to love his master. There's a reason the Bible groups these two together.
I know Dr Bowen knows Paul and doesn't want to talk ill of him but you cannot credit this man with good faith. His words are chosen so carefully so as to not strictly lie but to reliably and efficiently lead people to incorrect understandings. This just can't come about by accident.
He is representing what he is saying as the whole thing. That is 100% a lie.
@@PrometheanRising from a normative moral point of view, 100% I regard it as bad if not worse than simply saying something that is untrue. My point is that he's saying things in a way that is designed so that he can't be "caught out".
I found that the desperation of apologetics played a huge role in my breaking from my indoctrinated faith. The same reasoned minds that I regularly engaged with seemed to cast away their reasoning on the subject of faith, which was a huge red flag to me.
Excellent conclusion. Great video as always!
Wow you can see the evil in his eyes when he talks
Just two generations ago, my grandmother was offered the choice to become a nun or make a living as a housemade for the local baker. Needless to say that she never spoke about it. No need to dig up ancient history: christianity never changed.
This was a great one. Thanks!
Man, this channel is so great. Was amazed when I found it a few years ago along with CosmicSkeptic, still amazed. Keep it up. Cheers.
The fact that this guy has a PhD says a lot about the US education system.
it is amazing how easy it is for folks to get phds and professorships, watch any of tjumps debates and it's rife with idiots with qualifications they aren't worthy of.
the fact theology is seen as a serious study is hilarious. That's like studying star wars and getting a phd
You can have a PhD and still be off your rocker, the two are not mutually exclusive.
PhD proves only that you are persistent, not smart
...like "Dr." Kent Hovind? Apparently it doesn't take much: $50 to the right diploma mill.
They took that joke from Norm MacDonald's show and turned it into apologetics LOL
This was superbly done, thank you.
Excellently presented, thank~you!
As I always say. If Christian God was, in fact, the one undeniably true god who really would like all the people on Earth to know him as he truly is, there would be no such thing as apologetics, ever. The very idea that something like apologetics is needed would be considered crazy.
It's not just that one day LeBron will retire. He can literally retire whenever he wants. And in the first second of the first minute of the first day of his NBA career he could have also chosen to retire with the owner of his contract not really able to do anything about it with the possible exception of asking for some of the the money they paid him up front back.
Your on fire ! great work...cheers.
This issue really exposes apologetics for the morally bankrupt grift that it is
Now ask the preacher why everyone is so poor! 🙂 It's because god is an uninvolved dad who never pays child support.
Now, where did I leave my starship at?
@@littleredpony6868 On the dark side of the moon?
I said it before and I'll say it again: is not players that are sold or traded. Is their contracts. Contracts.to.which all parties involved agree. And.thst.can be broken.... unless student debt which is very similar in reach to biblical slavery tbh.
student debt is putting people who have no income into debt, to my mid totally immoral. i went to uni in the 80's and i had cash in the bank, a small business bringing in regular money, and i got a full grant. it's like "austerity" it's a con trick and most people are dumb enough to fall for it - "being poorer will make you rich"
no one forces anyone into student debt lol. and breaking contracts has to have consequences, stealing is wrong, making a contract to borrow something and then not returning it is stealing.
@@tothumn try getting out of it.
The government holds a monopoly on slavery. All other contracts can be voided. The draft (conscription) is at least partial slavery, since you are not allowed to leave.
🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️ wow. They keep getting worse and worse
Great video, Stephen! I love your channel!
I'd also like to point out that when athletes are injured or get to old they aren't forced to keep going i doubt the same could be said about slaves. Also LeBron james can negotiate his contract (how much he makes, how long he's with that team ect) debt slaves couldn't do that because they're too poor so its also just taking advantage of poor and desperate people. (Although now that i watch this video i think those points were covered)
And are slaves given a bonus if they hit a milestone like how many point scored or making it to the playoffs?
@@user-gl5dq2dg1j I would probably not
I don't know. I think Paul has some interesting things to say. In fact, they're so interesting, I think he should be given a larger audience to speak to. Let's let him speak on national television to people outside of his echo chamber, have him address the entire nation. Let's allow the whole modern world to hear what these apologists have to say.
yes, that's the way to deal with this crapola, as i have faith in humanity i think the broader audience are more likely to reject a god that condones this bollocks than to find it appealing.
YES please! Let these slave apologists cancel themselves!
Agree. This guy isn't guilty of just logical rationalization. He fully knows what he's justifying. He's a moral monster. If our present social context became what we all fear-- a white Christian fascist theocracy- he'd be all in on the atrocities. He'd be justifying them, very possibly participating in them. We need a new category of discussion-- Psychopath Apologetics. When I watched these clips, I realized that this guy doesn't even wear a mask. The sadism is right there on the surface. You can see it on his cruel face and hear it in his voice, as he offers up what he well knows is a thin veneer of denial, which is not even meant to hide his actual position that "slavery, killing, torture, and rape are the deserved fate of those who reject our God." That was the explicit position of the people who wrote those horrific passages in the Bible, and that's his position as well. His discourse is aimed only at creating a rhetorical defense against those who point all this out. He'd love to get his hands on some of those virgin girls that the Lord grants as spoils to his righteous warriors.
Thanks for the video
Dr Bowen is my new favourite scholar.
Oh wow. That intro, at least it lets us know we are in for some real Apologetic BS.
Edit: Love seeing Dr. Josh, and hate that he has to keep doing this when apologist try to downplay this subject.
Don't worry, next year is the year of Jubilee, and Dr. Josh will go free. Too bad his wife won't.
Apologetics mission isn’t ethical consistency but self-preservation through moral contortionism. Damn, that’s a hell of a sentence 😎
Always enjoy your content sir.
I'll be using your "defense attorney" description. Nice ;-)
Can we call Dr. Joshua Bowed THE Doctor from now on
You didn't want to include a clip of south park season 15 ep 5 _"Crack Baby Athletic Association"_ in which Cartman impersonates a slave owner trying to get information from college sports teams on how to trade _"student athletes"_ (depicted as slaves)... ?
That seemed a propos..
Definitely a political take, but the Orwell quote is an exact explanation for maga.
I have to wonder. If we successfully demonstrated to Paul's satisfaction, that biblical and antebellum slavery had no significant differences, would he then be saying antebellum slavery was ok?
I've not felt guilty about selling my daughter but then again I've never had a daughter and even less sold her
Your "employer" LMFAO
i know a lot of folks shun the notion that religion is akin to mental illness, but come on, people like this have some really stale bread making up their sandwiches for the picnic that's covered in wasps and ants. i mean, this is sickness, no?
And so all the sportspeople get traded for free, have no income, are restricted in where they can go and what they can do ... aye, right.
Lawyers are not allowed to lie to the jury, even that analogy isn’t that helpful.