Christianity

[DriveInDriveOut]

Your proof for it not being pro slavery is saying, “slaves earn your freedom” or a story about an apostle returning a slave to his master. That isn’t very convincing stuff bud.

Because you are ignorant about first century slavery. The bible condemns enslaving people by force, which is the modern slavery you're confusing it with.

 

[El Correcto]

Because you are ignorant about first century slavery. The bible condemns enslaving people by force, which is the modern slavery you're confusing it with.

Why don’t you prove it? Where does the Bible speak about not taking slaves by force?

 

[vantexan]

I never said Christianity created slavery, I said it condoned it.

Then yes you trying to keep society from allowing “open hedonism” is discriminatory towards gays since you see gays as hedonistic.

I’ve made it a point to highlight different denominations of Christians and different christian interpretations of the Bible. That isn’t saying all Christians think alike, but Christianity itself absolutely does condone slavery and discriminated towards gays. If anything you’re projecting your point of view onto me, you are the ones who see Christians as a monolith of progress only claiming the glory of good “Christian” movements. I agree with you that this isn’t a smart way to view it which is why I’m correcting you on your wrong headed views of Christianity.

Why should state or city validate my morality? No one is forcing kids to be transgender, they are teaching them acceptance of lgbtq people and by your definition of lgbtq that is the problem you truly have. I don’t take issue with trans teens or people in general, I don’t care if they want to transition. There is nothing wrong with being trans or gay.

Your point of view is schizophrenic at times.
I’m not altering reality of the Bible or slavery. I’m telling you the truth of it from a position of not being indoctrinated by southern Christianity.
You can’t even argue against it which is why you go into these tangents about gays and kids.

How would you propose Christians in the 1st Century oppose slavery?

 

[vantexan]

You have no idea what you’re talking about.
That’s why you don’t source out your scripture for it. You can find pockets of progressive thought in the Bible,

“Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse. For whenever anyone bears the pain of unjust suffering because of consciousness of God, that is a grace. But what credit is there if you are patient when beaten for doing wrong? But if you are patient when you suffer for doing what is good, this is a grace before God. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered* for you, leaving you an example that you should follow in his footsteps.”

“Slaves, obey your human masters in everything, not only when being watched, as currying favor, but in simplicity of heart, fearing the Lord.”

“Slaves are to be under the control of their masters in all respects, giving them satisfaction, not talking back to them stealing from them, but exhibiting complete good faith, so as to adorn the doctrine of God our savior in every way.”

“Those who are under the yoke of slavery must regard their masters as worthy of full respect, so that the name of God and our teaching may not suffer abuse. Those whose masters are believers must not take advantage of them because they are brothers but must give better service because those who will profit from their work are believers and are beloved”

The Bible is overwhelming pro slavery. Majority of the passages speaking about slavery are telling slaves to obey. Your proof for it not being pro slavery is saying, “slaves earn your freedom” or a story about an apostle returning a slave to his master. That isn’t very convincing stuff bud.

The culture was strong men and their servants. Just the way it was. Christians didn't invent that.

 

[El Correcto]

How would you propose Christians in the 1st Century oppose slavery?

We aren’t speaking about Christians though, we are speaking about the word of god. Objective morality, what is in your Bible. To you that’s not the word of Christians, so you don’t really get to take this reasonable position of that was just Christians during a time period it was normal.

 

[vantexan]

We aren’t speaking about Christians though, we are speaking about the word of god. Objective morality, what is in your Bible. To you that’s not the word of Christians, so you don’t really get to take this reasonable position of that was just Christians during a time period it was normal.

How would you have opposed slavery in the Roman Empire? The Apostles called Jesus Master. Were they his slaves? You want to put your modern mores on a very different world 2000 years ago. You're lacking understanding.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Why don’t you prove it? Where does the Bible speak about not taking slaves by force?

Timothy condemns enslavers.
Slaves at the time sold themselves to pay debts.

Again, your entire narrative is meaningless because you're reading these verses and thinking about racist slavery in the 1700s where people were stolen and kidnapped.

 

[El Correcto]

How would you have opposed slavery in the Roman Empire? The Apostles called Jesus Master. Were they his slaves? You want to put your modern mores on a very different world 2000 years ago. You're lacking understanding.

I wouldn’t of. Because I’m not an all knowing deity that is laying out objective morality, I’m just a human being just like the Christians who made up your Bible were. You’re the one trying to drag the morality from thousand years ago into modernity so you can talk about gays and pretend you are a moral justified human being for doing so.
I don’t lack understanding, dido lack understanding and is trying to downplay the barbarity of slavery in 100 AD and add things to the New Testament that aren’t there. Some of his points are true, but they are far outnumbered by the pro slavery argument found in the Bible.

Timothy condemns enslavers.
Slaves at the time sold themselves to pay debts.

Again, your entire narrative is meaningless because you're reading these verses and thinking about racist slavery in the 1700s where people were stolen and kidnapped.

yeah you won’t quote it because you know it isn’t solid concrete proof of the overwhelming majority of pro slavery in the Bible. That isn’t true at all either, slaves didn’t just sell themselves into slavery, that is only one avenue for slavery. Slave were routinely taken by force.

 

[El Correcto]

Timothy condemns enslavers.
Slaves at the time sold themselves to pay debts.

Again, your entire narrative is meaningless because you're reading these verses and thinking about racist slavery in the 1700s where people were stolen and kidnapped.

Stolen and kidnapped were only rights that applied to Israelites, not to foreigners.
You really lack any kind of understanding and it is embarrassing how you came in here so sure of yourself running your mouth vaguely about the Bible when you can back up maybe 50% of your original claims.

 

[El Correcto]

Timothy condemns enslavers.
Slaves at the time sold themselves to pay debts.

Again, your entire narrative is meaningless because you're reading these verses and thinking about racist slavery in the 1700s where people were stolen and kidnapped.

You should really stick to being a vague troll that doesn’t fully explain your position and deflects to other subjects.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

dido lack understanding and is trying to downplay the barbarity of slavery in 100 AD

No I'm not, and the new testament condemns barbarity towards slaves.

slaves didn’t just sell themselves into slavery, that is only one avenue for slavery. Slave were routinely taken by force.

And the new testament condemns enslavers.

 

[MrFedEx]

What about parents going around quoting scripture that incest is okay? Those christians are sick people in some ways.

Adam and Eve. They had 2 BOYS. Someone had to commit incest to keep it all going, even if there were also a daughter. Think about it. Bible scholars say it's OK. Why didn't the omniscient God create a second couple?

 

[El Correcto]

No I'm not, and the new testament condemns barbarity towards slaves.

And the new testament condemns enslavers.

You changed your tune up pretty quickly.
Yea and it also tells them to suck it up if it does happen, tells them to serve the prick like he was God, what strong condemnation telling slaves to serve abusive masters as if they were god.
Where does the Bible condemn doing business with slave traders? Hint it doesn’t. It doesn’t fully condemn the slave trade and does more to promote a master’s right than any condemnation of the master owning another person.

There were multiple ways of securing slaves during that time, doing business with slave traders, war, the justice system and economic reasons. You like to pretend it is Old Testament Hebrew enslavement these people were facing, it was much closer to non-Hebrew enslavement they were facing in the Roman Empire. It wasn’t just members of the community falling in poverty or committing a crime that got them enslaved.
In some instances the slavery of the day was worse than American slavery.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

You changed your tune up pretty quickly.

No I'm saying the same thing I've been saying this entire conversation. Not sure why you're confused.

 

[vantexan]

I wouldn’t of. Because I’m not an all knowing deity that is laying out objective morality, I’m just a human being just like the Christians who made up your Bible were. You’re the one trying to drag the morality from thousand years ago into modernity so you can talk about gays and pretend you are a moral justified human being for doing so.
I don’t lack understanding, dido lack understanding and is trying to downplay the barbarity of slavery in 100 AD and add things to the New Testament that aren’t there. Some of his points are true, but they are far outnumbered by the pro slavery argument found in the Bible.

yeah you won’t quote it because you know it isn’t solid concrete proof of the overwhelming majority of pro slavery in the Bible. That isn’t true at all either, slaves didn’t just sell themselves into slavery, that is only one avenue for slavery. Slave were routinely taken by force.

That's the same morality that was commonplace decades ago in the States but people like you are eroding. Watching what people are doing in gay pride parades doesn't inspire confidence in your brand of morality.

 

[El Correcto]

No I'm saying the same thing I've been saying this entire conversation. Not sure why you're confused.

The New and Old Testament doesn’t condemn taking slaves by force, it condemns illegal force. Slavery was a legal system. Depending on which Bible you read it makes this clear, others not so much. Timothy 1:10 has many translations, some reflective of what you say others not so much.
When you take in account the Bible in its entirety it’s clear that it is not anti-slavery, it is much more anti-slaves disobeying their masters.

The only Bible translations that suit your reading of it are the newest version published within the last 50 years post slavery. Christian apologists rewriting their religion.

 

[vantexan]

The New and Old Testament doesn’t condemn taking slaves by force, it condemns illegal force. Slavery was a legal system. Depending on which Bible you read it makes this clear, others not so much. Timothy 1:10 has many translations, some reflective of what you say others not so much.
When you take in account the Bible in its entirety it’s clear that it is not anti-slavery, it is much more anti-slaves disobeying their masters.

The only Bible translations that suit your reading of it are the newest version published within the last 50 years post slavery. Christian apologists rewriting their religion.

Abolitionists were Christians. Lincoln was a Christian.

 

[MrFedEx]

That's the same morality that was commonplace decades ago in the States but people like you are eroding. Watching what people are doing in gay pride parades doesn't inspire confidence in your brand of morality.

Pat Robertson didn't inspire much confidence in me.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

The New and Old Testament doesn’t condemn taking slaves by force

I disagree with your opinion about the New Testament.

 

[Box Ox]

You’re just so indoctrinated it is hilarious.

This coming from someone who believes that boys/men can be girls/women and girls/women can be boys/men.