What's the number of times the letter "d" appears in:
/Can you respond to the claim that the Bible condones slavery, child abuse, misogyny, war and rape-marriage?
Posted on November 28, 2014 by John Oakes wrote in General, Q & A, Reliability of the Bible, Social Issues, Supposed Inconsistencies in the Bible, Theology and Doctrinal Questions.
I look forward to whatever your answer is.
Let me respond to the claim that the Bible “condones” slavery. My response is that the Bible allows for slavery, especially in an ancient world in which it was so prevalent that God decided to limit its harmful effects rather than outlaw it entirely.
First, let us acknowledge that, on some level, God legislating slavery can be troubling at first glance.
God accommodated rather than approved slavery.
Slaves could not be bought and sold.
All slaves were eventually given their freedom at the Jubilee year. In fact, “slavery” in the Old Testament was more like indentured servanthood than classic slavery.
God is not concerned with physical slavery nearly so much as spiritual slavery. This is a big issue for us, as it should be, but for the Jews, God was more concerned with the spiritual welfare of people, including those held as slaves in Israel.
Nevertheless, Paul asked Philemon to free his slave Onesimus in an inspired passage through which it is clear that Christianity, as a religion, may condone slavery in certain situations, it never supports or encourages it.
William Wilberforce. It was Christian influence which ended the slave trade world wide. It is a fact of history that if it were not for Christianity, slavery would be rampant across the entire world.
God does not ever condone or encourage slavery in the Bible, but instead he accommodates it and provides very strict regulations preventing its abuses in the Old Testament, and providing the principles in the New Testament which successfully led to the end of legal human slavery in all nations.
The God of the Old Testament is a sadistic ethnic cleanser.
We have to admit that, on some level, this seems to be a fair charge.
That is tough stuff!
If you are not bothered by this on some level, I am worried about you!
The argument assumes that physical death is bad/evil. This is a false assumption. Sin is evil but death is not. Death is a transition, hopefully, to something better.
This is the Creator talking here. Like the father said to his kid: I brought you into the world, and I can take you out! God has every right to do as he wills.
God has a perfect right to judge.
There is the issue of the religion of the Amelekites. Sacrificing of children, worshipping gods by having sex with a prostitute in the temple, etc.
The situation for the children in this situation was hopeless.
In the case of Amelek and other Canaanites, both God’s love and his justice demanded that something be done.
Either God was going to create a nation or he was not. If God is going to have a “people,” then such people must have a physical land and must have an army.
God’s plan is to choose a man, then a nation, through whom to send a savior. God’s plan to bless humanity through Jesus trumps all else.
It is sinful to take the life of another in anger, out of greed or selfishness, but it is not necessarily sinful to take a life in war.
Everything God did to Israel as a nation was to limit their ability to wage war.
No authority to establish an empire.
No standing army allowed.

I hope this helps. If your friend can find a scripture to supposedly justify that the Bible condones child abuse or rape, please send me that scripture so that I can respond.
How do you respond to a Wikipedia claim that all modern scholars believe Judaism evolved from polytheism?
Does it make sense to call the death of Jesus a human sacrifice?	Can you explain the parallels between Isaiah 14:4-20 and the Ugaritic story of Athtar, Baal, Mt. Zaphon and the Morning Star?
user
There are 117 "d"s in the text you provided.
assistant