I think it's funny when non-Christians call Christianity corrupt or oppressive. Like as if what THEY think what is immoral is of any substance.
I listed all the different bibles where pro slavery versed were mentioned. There are a lot and im not gonna spend so much time typing quotes when I gave you the source. How about you show me where god explicitly says "slavery is wrong". God definitely endorses rules for slavery. I would expect a timeless omniscient being to have always known slavery is bad and not just when mankind learns its bad.
Thats a reversal of the burden of proof. "I gave you the source, so you need to go and make my argument for me" Like what? That's not how that works. That's a logical fallacy, you made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. You can't just offload it onto me. Just give me one, thats all I need. One passage.
I gave my sources. In each of those bibles there are pro slavery verses. Im going to assume you either know your information already or you can look up the verse in each of those from genesis, leviticus, or exodus. We are both using the same information. I already know you cant find a verse that explicitly states "slavery is wrong". When did god learn slavery was bad?
Giving sources ≠ proof, you goofus. Your sources, or your understanding of them, can be incorrect. You can just give me your strongest biblical quote to argue your claim is correct. Also, you are shifting the goalposts. Your claim wasn't merely that Scripture lacks the sentence "slavery is wrong." Your claim was that God morally endorsed slavery and later changed His mind. Those are completely different claims. Even if I granted that Scripture never explicitly says "slavery is wrong," that would not prove God morally endorsed it. You still have to establish your original claim, which you continually fail to do. Not too good at this, are you? Does it make you feel smart to make baseless claims that you fail to substantiate? All I need is one passage that proves your claim. But I know you wont, because we both know that you can't. You can't do it, so you refuse to. A pity.
Why should someone listen to a christian about morality? You are just a man and fallible.
Never said you are morally obligated to listen to a Christian nor did I say that I'm infallible. But no other form of morality is consistent or based in anything objective.
That is not correct at all. Christianity isnt very consistent though history. People justified slavery with the bible. Why did god change his mind about slavery and not just be consistent from the beginning? Why are christians split on whether LGBT people can be Christian or not? I dont see consistency, I see humans fighting for who owns Christianity. Are you a pro gay or anti gay Christian? Which is moral?
There's a difference between a moral framework being inconsistent and fallible people failing to live consistently with that framework. You already acknowledged that humans are fallible. Christians are no exception. Let me be more precise about my claim: every alternative moral framework that has been presented to me other than Eastern Orthodoxy either fails to establish an objective moral standard and/or becomes inconsistent when applied. I'm talking about the framework itself, not whether every person claiming to follow it behaves consistently. Christians using Christianity to justify something does not establish that Christianity actually teaches it. You would have to demonstrate the contradiction within the moral framework itself. And regarding your LGBT example: I'm Eastern Orthodox. Orthodoxy has an actual doctrinal answer. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and sexual activity belongs within that marriage. That standard applies to heterosexual and homosexual people alike. L…