Christian terrorist attack in Pakistan kills 57.....

[Kieran]

Not at all, Murat, we all agree that religious people do terrible things. The Orthodox Church in Russia leapt into bed with the Commies, and in Serbia, as Billie knows well, her side aren't without their sins, these things aren't in dispute. My problem is when you reduce a certain human condition - the urge to be violent and go to war - to religion. Religion gets hijacked and used as an excuse. This isn't the fault of God, or people who live their lives simply, as true believers. It's just a natural impulse that humans have to grab and abuse power. It can happen without religion, just as easily, and the atrocities committed by atheists look strangely similar to those committed by Catholics, Orthodox, Muslims, etc.

Where perhaps you would be better of judging religion is by the saints who've lived as best they could by what the teachings of the Gospel and done remarkable things in the world, inspired so many and brought faith to so many more. I mean, you'll concede that we're not all bad, right?

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Not at all, Murat, we all agree that religious people do terrible things. The Orthodox Church in Russia leapt into bed with the Commies, and in Serbia, as Billie knows well, her side aren't without their sins, these things aren't in dispute. My problem is when you reduce a certain human condition - the urge to be violent and go to war - to religion. Religion gets hijacked and used as an excuse. This isn't the fault of God, or people who live their lives simply, as true believers. It's just a natural impulse that humans have to grab and abuse power. It can happen without religion, just as easily, and the atrocities committed by atheists look strangely similar to those committed by Catholics, Orthodox, Muslims, etc.

Where perhaps you would be better of judging religion is by the saints who've lived as best they could by what the teachings of the Gospel and done remarkable things in the world, inspired so many and brought faith to so many more. I mean, you'll concede that we're not all bad, right?

Dude, probably %95 of people believe in a higher power one way or the other. If I thought they were all bad, I would probably check out...No, they are not all bad. Maybe a little insane :snigger, but not bad. Just like all atheists are not murderers. Some of us are just trying to make the world a better place for people around us NOW, without having to worry about what happens when we die, that's all.

 

[calitennis127]

So, the transatlantic slave trade has its roots in Christianity, which had no problem with slavery in the first place and held onto those beliefs up until around 1865 in the USA.

Murat, the early Christians were not at all unique for thinking that slavery was a natural condition to humanity. Virtually every civilization has had slavery as a social institution: Chinese, Hindu, African, Arab, European, etc. 40% of the population in ancient Rome consisted of slaves, and that was a case of white people enslaving white people. And I know it has been said over and over, but the fact is, African slave owners sold their African slaves to the white colonizers.

Christianity does not say that slavery must exist. And for this reason, many abolitionists made Christian moral arguments to advance the ending of slavery.

 

[calitennis127]

By the way, I am judging all religions equally, not just Christianity. I am an equal opportunity offender. And since religions claim to be timeless and God's word is final, and the books have not changed in any way since centuries, I CAN sit cosy in 21st century and bitch about what happened in the past, just like I will be able to bitch about NOW , in the 24th century. The crimes done in the name of religion are timeless as well. Started with sacrificing people after a volcano erupted because Gods wanted a virgin, going on today because "My religion beats your religion" arguments, that should have actually ended at kindergarten age are still present.

Why don't you counterbalance this rap sheet with all of the numerous benefits of religion?

As much as I pick on Islam as a political ideology, I am good friends with a Muslim whose personal spirituality has made him quite an upstanding individual on a personal level, and it has kept him out of trouble in environments where he would have otherwise really suffered.

 

[calitennis127]

One thing I will say though: I am totally against any kind of politicized science, like eugenics.

The way that evolution is taught and presented nowadays is entirely a form of "politicized science". That was my point in the other post.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

So, the transatlantic slave trade has its roots in Christianity, which had no problem with slavery in the first place and held onto those beliefs up until around 1865 in the USA.

Murat, the early Christians were not at all unique for thinking that slavery was a natural condition to humanity. Virtually every civilization has had slavery as a social institution: Chinese, Hindu, African, Arab, European, etc. 40% of the population in ancient Rome consisted of slaves, and that was a case of white people enslaving white people. And I know it has been said over and over, but the fact is, African slave owners sold their African slaves to the white colonizers.

Christianity does not say that slavery must exist. And for this reason, many abolitionists made Christian moral arguments to advance the ending of slavery.

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)"


"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)"


"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)"


"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)"



Uhm...yeah...Christianity does not say slavery MUST exist, but pretty much tells you everything else about how to get them, punish them, how hard you can beat them. COME ON Cali....

"So and so did it too" is not an adult argument. We are talking about the word of GOD here, not some rich person on a power trip. And if you are telling me "Well, those times were different" than you are debating the timelessness of the word of God.

 

[shawnbm]

Slavery has existed since the beginning of time. Christianity--more than any religion in history--has felt that a call of discipleship was to come to learn that slavery was not the way for people to live among one another. All of the things cited above come from the Hebrew Scriptures which, by definition, are not the Christian religion UNLESS viewed in the light of Christ in the Gospel. Then, the inspired truth that is within the Old Testament, at times seemingly concealed, can be seen. The minutia of rules governing how Jews and concerning how the Hebrews lived amongst the Mesopotamian groups, Arabian tribes and the clans of ancient Palestine is a red herring--it misses the point of the Christian religion, if looked at separate from Jesus or as if the New Testament is not a vital part of all this. Again, the call of Christ (the religion teaches) is not to overthrow by violence the existing world with its slavery and other human "sins" (we would say), but to conversion, which later did take care of the problem--although humanoids love power, wealth and can be arrogant bastards--but that is all part of the story, at least to the Christian. God is not a magician or a puppeteer, lest he cease to be the Almighty. Suffering will be part of the human existence for all time, for not all will come to Jesus, so to speak (and I say this only from a Christian standpoint). I know I said I was done, but I keep reading and ... now I must go.

 

[Kieran]

Actually, Murat, the Bible isn't about "Timelessness", it's about transmitting God's message in a relevant way, to people who live "in time." So the proof of this is that we have an Old Testament, which was to grab people by the scruff of the neck and tell them to behave - God was Coming. And we have a New Testament, which tells us the Good News and is the fulfilment of all prophecies regarding God.

Certain messages and books in the OT are written that way because that's the only way they would be understood. We're talking pre-Bronze Age people here, not 21st century sophisticates. And reading the Bible is fascinating, but certain things have to be understood about it: It's the Word of God - through Man. By this I mean, the Bible is the Word of God - written in the words of men. It reflects the cultures and times it was written in, as well as timeless truths regarding the nature of God and salvation. It's not God's only way of revealing Himself, but it's a loaded weapon in the wrong hands, I will gladly agree with you on this...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

But the New Testament is full of slavery references too, except they changed the word in most cases to something like a "servant". Nobody should mistake the word for meaning "butler" or something like that. It means slave...

" Luke 12:45-48: "The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

I have read the NT a couple of times and in different languages where translations might differ, and I am yet to see a passage where slavery is opposed.

Look, if you guys tell me "Well, those were the times, everyone was doing it and that was the norm then. " , I get it, but if we are to believe Jesus is God, and he is omniscient and omnipresent, than at some point he should have said " Guys, this slavery business..? It is immoral. Just stop it now."
For some reason , of all the kind words of Jesus that I have read, and there are many as you know, none of them are about stopping this slavery business...I find that odd.

 

[Kieran]

Murat, I'm amazed at how you're taking things in isolation and drawing your conclusions. You did it with St Peter as well, when the whole means something completely different. Luke 12 35-48 is about watchfulness in our own selves, before the Lord. We are the servants, and He is the Master, and we know not the hour that he comes. In verse 41, Peter even interrupts and asks, "Lord, dost thou speak this parable to us, or likewise to all?"

The whole of Luke 12 is here.

It's interesting, we're watching the film the Patriot Games right now, Harrison Ford against Irish terrorists. You just know that old Slopey Face will defeat them, right? But I remember well the Troubles here, Protestant against Catholic, all the stuff that was done in the name of religion. We had no Harrison Ford here then, but there was very little religion, either. I've known fellas who were associated withe the IRA, and I've known blokes who drove getaway cars for jewel thiefs and shop robbers, and believe me, they were of the same ilk, there was nothing between them. Gangster and thugs, but the big difference was, the IRA claimed they were doing their gangsterish brutalities to protect Catholics, and as Catholics, and over the other side of the barbed wire fence, gangsters were firing back at them in the name of Protestantism.

There was very little there that a devout Protestant or Catholic would recognise from their religion, but when thugs and madmen go all out to destroy, they drag the most convenient flag and wrap themselves in it. The old saying is that Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel: likewise, religion is, too...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I am still looking for a verse, a passage, something that is explicitly against slavery though.... I can find stuff against homosexuality in Romans or Corinthians for example....but still nothing against slavery.

 

[calitennis127]

I am still looking for a verse, a passage, something that is explicitly against slavery though.... I can find stuff against homosexuality in Romans or Corinthians for example....but still nothing against slavery.

Murat, you are operating on the modern libertarian and egalitarian premise that slavery is the equivalent of Auschwitz. I find that ridiculous. Every major civilization in history has had slavery and many of the loftiest and most sophisticated minds across all religions have not called it an intrinsic evil.

Whites have owned whites. Blacks have owned blacks. Arabs have owned Arabs. Chinese have owned Chinese. The list goes on and on and on and on.

Confucius did not object to slavery. Aristotle did not object to slavery. Plato did not object to slavery. Cicero did not object to slavery. Middle Eastern philosophers did not object to slavery.

I personally would never want to be a slave, and I also believe there are strong Christian arguments to be made against slavery. At the same time, I think it is absurd to equate "slavery" per se with genocide or something utterly grotesque and brutal. If we are to follow that logic, then we can conclude nothing else than that, for example, ancient Athens was a downright evil and barbaric society. Do you believe that?

Also, the larger question here is one of hierarchy. Many people today wish to deny that there are differences in human beings and that not everyone is equal. By this logic, Murat, LeBron James is not more talented at basketball than you; no, he just worked harder at it. That is utterly absurd.

 

[calitennis127]

Uhm...yeah...Christianity does not say slavery MUST exist, but pretty much tells you everything else about how to get them, punish them, how hard you can beat them. COME ON Cali....

"So and so did it too" is not an adult argument.

Yes it absolutely is. Your problem is that you are equating "Christianity" with the white man, and they are two distinct things. To say that Western imperialism was the result of Christian theology is preposterous. There is nothing in Christianity which says that you have to take up arms and enslave foreign nations by force. Give me a scripture verse that tells Christians to do that at all times as a moral duty.

I can find one in the Qu'ran though: verse 9:29. And it clearly unites everyone from Zawahiri to Ibrahim Hooper to Anjem Choudary and whoever runs in between.

We are talking about the word of GOD here, not some rich person on a power trip. And if you are telling me "Well, those times were different" than you are debating the timelessness of the word of God.

You are confusing the Qu'ran and the Bible. Muslims believe that everything in the Qu'ran was directly spoken by Allah to Muhammad. Christians believe that Scripture was inspired by God; it is not meant to be interpreted as an all-encompassing final word on every matter that can come up.

This is what the Catholic Church tried to explain to Protestants centuries ago. The Church has maintained that possible interpretations of Scripture are wide-ranging and almost limitless, so it is necessary to have a central authority establish a set of official dogmas. Without it, you have everyone and their brother starting a new church that claims to have found the "actual" message of God.

 

[calitennis127]

Look, if you guys tell me "Well, those were the times, everyone was doing it and that was the norm then. " , I get it, but if we are to believe Jesus is God, and he is omniscient and omnipresent, than at some point he should have said " Guys, this slavery business..? It is immoral. Just stop it now."
For some reason , of all the kind words of Jesus that I have read, and there are many as you know, none of them are about stopping this slavery business...I find that odd.

Murat, why don't you give a thorough and indisputable explanation for a) what slavery is, and b) why it is immoral for all times and places. I want a clear definition and then an explanation of why slavery is, say, the equivalent of rape. I can assure you that Abraham Lincoln was unclear about this, since he made clear to the Southern states in his 1861 First Inaugural Address that he would support a constitutional amendment forever banning the federal government from preventing individual states to maintain the institution of slavery:

"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."

 

[calitennis127]

Slavery has existed since the beginning of time. Christianity--more than any religion in history--has felt that a call of discipleship was to come to learn that slavery was not the way for people to live among one another.

This reminds me of Hilaire Belloc's book "The Servile State", in which he adamantly makes the point that the influence of Catholicism eradicated slavery in Europe during the Middle Ages.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Look, if you guys tell me "Well, those were the times, everyone was doing it and that was the norm then. " , I get it, but if we are to believe Jesus is God, and he is omniscient and omnipresent, than at some point he should have said " Guys, this slavery business..? It is immoral. Just stop it now."
For some reason , of all the kind words of Jesus that I have read, and there are many as you know, none of them are about stopping this slavery business...I find that odd.

Murat, why don't you give a thorough and indisputable explanation for a) what slavery is, and b) why it is immoral for all times and places. I want a clear definition and then an explanation of why slavery is, say, the equivalent of rape. I can assure you that Abraham Lincoln was unclear about this, since he made clear to the Southern states in his 1861 First Inaugural Address that he would support a constitutional amendment forever banning the federal government from preventing individual states to maintain the institution of slavery:

"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."

I am not sure why you need MY definition of slavery. Google it, check out Oxford or Websters dictionary.

As far as why it is immoral...Well, brother, if you do not have the answer for that yourself, I cannot help you.

 

[calitennis127]

Look, if you guys tell me "Well, those were the times, everyone was doing it and that was the norm then. " , I get it, but if we are to believe Jesus is God, and he is omniscient and omnipresent, than at some point he should have said " Guys, this slavery business..? It is immoral. Just stop it now."
For some reason , of all the kind words of Jesus that I have read, and there are many as you know, none of them are about stopping this slavery business...I find that odd.

Murat, why don't you give a thorough and indisputable explanation for a) what slavery is, and b) why it is immoral for all times and places. I want a clear definition and then an explanation of why slavery is, say, the equivalent of rape. I can assure you that Abraham Lincoln was unclear about this, since he made clear to the Southern states in his 1861 First Inaugural Address that he would support a constitutional amendment forever banning the federal government from preventing individual states to maintain the institution of slavery:

"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."

I am not sure why you need MY definition of slavery. Google it, check out Oxford or Websters dictionary.

As far as why it is immoral...Well, brother, if you do not have the answer for that yourself, I cannot help you.

I am afraid that you cannot be helped if you accept the wisdom of political science professors in North America post-1950 over the greatest minds in human history.

I am asking you a question. Now you can either be intellectual and rational, and answer it, or you can deflect it. Prove to me why slavery is an intrinsic evil that Christ should have condemned in an unqualified fashion.

Because Ayn Rand condemned it (only to endorse the use of nuclear weapons to ensure that no one could even be a slave)?

 

[calitennis127]

I also just remembered this famous passage from Pope Gregory XVI in 1839, when he issued the papal letter "In Supremo Apostolatus" to lay down the law for Catholics with respect to the slave trade:

"We, by apostolic authority, warn and strongly exhort in the Lord faithful Christians of every condition that no one in the future dare to bother unjustly, despoil of their possessions, or reduce to slavery Indians, Blacks or other such peoples. Nor are they to lend aid and favor to those who give themselves up to these practices, or exercise that inhuman traffic by which the Blacks, as if they were not humans but rather mere animals, having been brought into slavery in no matter what way, are, without any distinction and contrary to the rights of justice and humanity, bought, sold and sometimes given over to the hardest labor…

We prohibit and strictly forbid any Ecclesiastic or lay person from presuming to defend as permissible this trade in Blacks under no matter what pretext or excuse, or from publishing or teaching in any manner whatsoever, in public or privately, opinions contrary to what We have set forth in these Apostolic Letters....

We... admonish and adjure in the Lord all believers in Christ, of whatsoever condition, that no one hereafter may dare unjustly to molest Indians, Negroes, or other men of this sort; or to spoil them of their goods; or to reduce them to slavery; or to extend help or favour to others who perpetuate such things against them; or to excuse that inhuman trade by which Negroes, as if they were not men, but mere animals, howsoever reduced to slavery, are, without any distinction, contrary to the laws of justice and humanity, bought, sold, and doomed sometimes to the most severe and exhausting labours."


Murat, shouldn't you give credit to the Church for this? The Christian spirit has had a great deal to do with the gradual abolition of slavery.

Pope Gregory XVI's words represent a clear case of a Christian-minded philosopher opposing the depredations of the white man. That is a distinction you need to keep in mind.

 

[calitennis127]

I am not sure why you need MY definition of slavery. Google it, check out Oxford or Websters dictionary.

I asked the question because slavery has taken such a wide variety of forms throughout history. Therefore, I was illustrating the point that it is a social institution, not an action.

 

[calitennis127]

Look, if you guys tell me "Well, those were the times, everyone was doing it and that was the norm then. " , I get it, but if we are to believe Jesus is God, and he is omniscient and omnipresent, than at some point he should have said " Guys, this slavery business..? It is immoral. Just stop it now."

So do you consider the ancient Greeks and Romans to be populations of Charles Mansons, since slavery was widespread in their societies?

Were their civilizations evil and rotten to the core?

Were Aristotle and Cicero evil human beings?