How do I respond to arguments like these?

[Reed]

Well, many people know I'm serious about Christianity. I've gotten in several debates before, but none like this. The person I was debating told me this bible quote:
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods†(gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.~Deuteronomy 13:6-10


and it also contradicts itself by saying though shall not kill.
He also told me this quote:

exodus 21:21 "If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property. "


How do I respond to arguments like these?

 

[Hitch]

Well, many people know I'm serious about Christianity. I've gotten in several debates before, but none like this. The person I was debating told me this bible quote:
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods†(gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.~Deuteronomy 13:6-10


and it also contradicts itself by saying though shall not kill.
He also told me this quote:

exodus 21:21 "If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property. "


How do I respond to arguments like these?

Actually Moses prohibition applies to murder and in these passages you can see some of the ways murder was defined. The OT Case Law insists on dgrees of murder much as out system does today.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Well, many people know I'm serious about Christianity. I've gotten in several debates before, but none like this. The person I was debating told me this bible quote:
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods†(gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.~Deuteronomy 13:6-10


and it also contradicts itself by saying though shall not kill.
He also told me this quote:

exodus 21:21 "If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property. "


How do I respond to arguments like these?

The first way to respond is by knowing that those who would argue thus are totally out of touch with the teaching of the bible, and the context.

On your first bolden statement regarding killing those who would entice one to commit idolatry is the punishment for that sin. While the Law's standards are still in effect, the punishment for them are not --- that's the difference between the old covenant and the new covenant as Christ came to take upon Him the curse of the Law (the punishments). That's not an escape hatch cleverly contrived. That's what the NT teaches in regards to the punishments demanded in the Old Testament. In the OT the person himself took the punishment, but then the same OT predicted a Savior who in turn would become sin for us and take the punishment for us.

As for "Thou shalt not kill", a better translation would be "murder". Again, if you look at the context of the commandments, you will see that they are addressed to someone who is up to no good, i.e. thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, so likewise, thou shalt not kill (maliciously). The command is not for those who deserve to die for a sin and as such is no contradiction. The principle extrapolates to the punishment of slaves. They were not to be stricken so hard as to die (that's murder) but they were allowed to be punished (and for those who are spiritually insightful, slaves foreshadowed what Christ would do).

 

[Reed]

"They were not to be stricken so hard as to die (that's murder) but they were allowed to be punished"
No it's saying "if they die within a day or two" so they are dying.

 

[Reed]

Oh yea, he also made another argument that the fact that the bible says that slavery is ok is also wrong. And he told me its not just in the OT but also in the NT. Then he mentioned a story of Jesus healing a slave so he could work again, but obviously had no problem with him being a slave.

 

[Nathan]

Sometimes you simply cannot respond to arguments like these. They are simply arguments, not discussions. It would not be wise to keep on. But if this guy was seriously wondering how to resolve the two, and completely torn that they are seemingly at odds with each other, then there is a possibility with some time he may come to understand the truth.

Some things in the Bible are simply not understood from a physical perspective. There are some things where spiritual knowledge is a must. Those who do not have the Spirit of God in them just cannot understand.

You do not have to make a big deal about it, but I would simply just leave it to rest as it is. If he seriously wanted to know more, then I would start with who Christ is and what the law is all about. But somethings are just better left alone.

 

[Hitch]

"They were not to be stricken so hard as to die (that's murder) but they were allowed to be punished"
No it's saying "if they die within a day or two" so they are dying.

Yes ,what is your point?

 

[Drew]

How do I respond to arguments like these?

I have a suggestion for your consideration, but do not have time to get into the details right now. I should warn you - probably few fellow Christians will think this idea is correct, but it is what it is.

In very short form: All these "intructions to kill" as issued by God were done in the specific context of His dealings with Israel. As such, they no longer apply, since the role of Israel as a "special people" came to its fulfillment on the cross. Even though this may seem strange, I think that God intentionally caused evil to flourish in Israel through the Law of Moses (the disturbing material you posted was from the Law of Moses). Why would God do such a thing? Answer: so that evil would be concentrated in that one people and then rendered vulnerable to being transferred into the body of the one true Israelite - Jesus of Nazareth - and then dealt with on the cross. In other words, God used the Law of Moses to get Israel to commit evil acts so that the power of evil would "take up residence" in Israel and then be made vulnerable to being dealt with by Israel's true representative - Jesus.

I suspect that you, and others, will not like this answer. However, I am prepared to defend it.

 

[Hitch]

No need Drew,that explains a lot.

 

[Sparkey]

What establishes the need?
I mean, why would one be able to demand a response? If I asked you to justify the things your mother did, would you? What about if I asked you to try to justify the things that were only alleged that she did - where people questioned her motive and tried to slur her good name? Would you spend much time with me? What about if you gave me the benefit of the doubt and explained some but you were soon convinced that I wasn't able or willing to listen to reason? Would you continue?

If a superficial understanding is all that the presenter of the arugment is capable of understanding there is no hope of convincing them otherwise. Often the case is that those who present arguments based on rational thinking (supposedly) are doing so for emotional reason. If the Lord shows the real reasons behind their lying about Him you could respond but that would be through the use of Prophecy where your opponents heart and motivations are made clear to all.

How to respond? Prayer would be my answer.

 

[Sam21]

Well, many people know I'm serious about Christianity. I've gotten in several debates before, but none like this. The person I was debating told me this bible quote:
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods†(gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.~Deuteronomy 13:6-10


and it also contradicts itself by saying though shall not kill.
He also told me this quote:

exodus 21:21 "If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property. "


How do I respond to arguments like these?

Murder was against the law,a person could kill in self defense and war and for someone trying to lead the person away from God. Since the person being lead away from God would end up in hell then killing someone for sending a person to hell does not seem out of line. God dealt with a people that had slaves, however there were no slaves in Eden, so that demonstrates the mind of God on slavery, also if a slave escaped then they were not to return him to his master but to take care of him,so God was not for slavery,people were.

 

[Danny63]

As for "Thou shalt not kill", a better translation would be "murder". Again, if you look at the context of the commandments, you will see that they are addressed to someone who is up to no good, i.e. thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, so likewise, thou shalt not kill (maliciously). The command is not for those who deserve to die for a sin and as such is no contradiction. The principle extrapolates to the punishment of slaves. They were not to be stricken so hard as to die (that's murder) but they were allowed to be punished (and for those who are spiritually insightful, slaves foreshadowed what Christ would do).

I like that answer Tim, well said.

I would like to just add this reed, I would suggest to you (and tell your friend to do the same after they receive Christ of course) get yourself a Bible, a concordance, a Bible dictionary, and a good commentary, to start with, then get to studying those scriptures in question. Remember to take in to account who is writing this and too whom they are writing to, and most important, ask the Holy Spirit to guide you into the truth.

Enjoy studying God's word, it is AWESOME!!!!

 

[Reed]

I like that answer Tim, well said.

I would like to just add this reed, I would suggest to you (and tell your friend to do the same after they receive Christ of course) get yourself a Bible, a concordance, a Bible dictionary, and a good commentary, to start with, then get to studying those scriptures in question. Remember to take in to account who is writing this and too whom they are writing to, and most important, ask the Holy Spirit to guide you into the truth.

Enjoy studying God's word, it is AWESOME!!!!

I don't think my friend will exactly "receive christ" anytime soon. He told me in the past, as a kid, he was a christian. He has several reasons not to believe in Christianity and that he was mad it was taught to him as a kid. He then said, as a kid, he would much rather be taught a scientific theory of how things came to be, rather than a biblical one.

 

[Vic C.]

Hi Reed and welcome to the site. :waving

You asked:

How do I respond to arguments like these?

My advice is to think twice about responding to Biblical questions concerning passages taken out of the context and ignoring the culture of those to whom it was written. But you have been given some good answers here and I prayerfully consider them. :yes

You also said:

Well, many people know I'm serious about Christianity.

Perhaps you might share your testimony with us one day?

 

[Danny63]

I don't think my friend will exactly "receive christ" anytime soon. He told me in the past, as a kid, he was a christian. He has several reasons not to believe in Christianity and that he was mad it was taught to him as a kid. He then said, as a kid, he would much rather be taught a scientific theory of how things came to be, rather than a biblical one.

In that case you are fighting a loosing battle and I would say abort mission

You can not convince anyone of God's mercy and His Authority if they do not even believe in Him.
When he or anyone is questioning scripture to you, just say I have faith and I trust God and that is your best answer IMO. Only the Holy Spirit can convince him, all you can do is share your faith with him not try to debate scripture.

God bless you.

 

[Reed]

Hi Reed and welcome to the site. :waving

You asked:



My advice is to think twice about responding to Biblical questions concerning passages taken out of the context and ignoring the culture of those to whom it was written. But you have been given some good answers here and I prayerfully consider them. :yes

You also said:


Perhaps you might share your testimony with us one day?

well honestly, none really answer the big questions to his argument. He told me his main points are that "why does the bible say its ok to kill someone if they worship a different god than you" and "why does the bible allow slavery, and also allow someone to kill their slaves as long as they die within a day or two"

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Well, many people know I'm serious about Christianity. I've gotten in several debates before, but none like this. The person I was debating told me this bible quote:
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.~Deuteronomy 13:6-10


and it also contradicts itself by saying though shall not kill.
He also told me this quote:

exodus 21:21 "If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property. "


How do I respond to arguments like these?

Reed, just be honest and upfront. Tell him that God is a zealous God who will punish unrighteousness and expects and demands HIS people to be holy. Tell him that national Israel made and was in a covenant with God where they swore to not do certain things and pledged to uphold other things as per the covenant. Violations of the terms of the covenant were punishable by various means up to and including death. Also let him know that those who wished to not abide in the covenant did not have to. They could leave Israel, the covenant people, but of course doing so would cause them to be removed from the land where their family was since abiding in the covenant was necessary in order to inherit the land.

As far as slavery is concerned, we must admit that it is not prohibited in scripture. It is however, regulated. What is meant by regulated is that the manner is which servants were to be treated is specified, the terms that allow for servitude to begin are outlined (debters beware), and a release from the bonds of slavery are discussed in detail (see the jubilee).

 

[Reed]

Reed, just be honest and upfront. Tell him that God is a zealous God who will punish unrighteousness and expects and demands HIS people to be holy. Tell him that national Israel made and was in a covenant with God where they swore to not do certain things and pledged to uphold other things as per the covenant. Violations of the terms of the covenant were punishable by various means up to and including death. Also let him know that those who wished to not abide in the covenant did not have to. They could leave Israel, the covenant people, but of course doing so would cause them to be removed from the land where their family was since abiding in the covenant was necessary in order to inherit the land.

As far as slavery is concerned, we must admit that it is not prohibited in scripture. It is however, regulated. What is meant by regulated is that the manner is which servants were to be treated is specified, the terms that allow for servitude to begin are outlined (debters beware), and a release from the bonds of slavery are discussed in detail (see the jubilee).

Well I told him that argument over FB and he replied, thats another thing, "why does God have a selected group of people, shouldnt he love everyone"

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Well I told him that argument over FB and he replied, thats another thing, "why does God have a selected group of people, shouldnt he love everyone"

God's "select group" of people huh...........
This issue is rather easily addressed. God has always had a select group because not all select to abide in righteousness. Looking thru the history of the Bible God's 1st "select group" was the family of Noah. WHY? Because they practiced righteousness while the hearts of others was centered on evil continuously. Next we have Abraham. He committed himself to following the LORD and the LORD decided to make him a promise, actually a few promises based on his faithfulness. From Abraham came the nation of Israel, their inheritance of the land of Canaan, and the seed, Jesus, the anointed one.
Israel entered into a covenant with God, but the blessings and responsibilities of that covenant were NOT just available to them. Those not born from Hebrew blood could become a part of Israel provided they wished to abide by the terms of the covenant (see Ruth, a non Israelite descendant of Jesus!).
We then move ahead to the time after Jesus and we see again that God's "chosen people" are the people who chose to follow Him and practice righteousness.

 

[Drew]

I do think the skeptic poses a really valid question. The Old Testament is full of what seem to be (1) laws that impose overly harsh penalties; and (2) acts of outright genocide that are sanctioned by God. I think it is entirely understandable for the non-Christian to wonder at the contrast between this and the "kingdom of God" model set forth by Jesus.

I further suggest that a lot of the "stock" answers to this do not really speak to the heart of the objection. For example, explaining the harsh law in the OP in terms of God being holy seems to be a bit of reach - why can God be holy without all the violence?

This is why I think a more radical explanation is required - something along the lines that God had no choice but to endorse these violent laws, and mandate all that genocide, in order to ultimately heal the world. I think that Romans 9 is related to this - Paul speaks of God hardening the nation of Israel so that salvation can be brought to all the world.