57
   

Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

 
 
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 05:05 pm
@gekritzl,
But I thought he doesn't exist???? Exclamation Exclamation Exclamation 2 Cents
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 05:55 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Early in this thread I invited people to change the question to: Why do you suppose the people who wrote for Jesus...or who claim he did what he did... never had him condemn slavery?
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 06:38 pm
@gekritzl,
Quote:
Not only did he NEVER condemn slavery, he actually advised how savagely we should whip our slaves

URL: http://nomeekmessiah.com/NMM-beaten.htm


gekritzl Thank you for sharing, very educational in my opinion. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 06:40 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
But I thought he doesn't exist????


Are you suggesting that these practices did not exist by church members? Or that the bible taught against them?
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 06:58 pm
@reasoning logic,
Nope...I am suggesting that since these practices have...Why not come out and explain exactly why one believes this God is evil and immoral?, and then a theist of this God and an atheist, or doubter can actually get together and get something productive discussed about this God, or any other God...Rather than theists trying to explain why an atheist does not reject anything and just chooses to believe that this God or any other God may be evil...While atheists keep asking for proof that they do, because it seems they do not understand that they believe things and know why they do...Or do not believe things, because they believe things and know why they do...Or were born without an instinctive ability to know what they believe or do not believe because they believe things and why...So that this one big circle can actually go somewhere and actually progress...

Atheists already know what theists believe about this God or any other God that may exist...

Tell us theists what it is that you believe, or what you do not believe, because you believe this...and a theist can actually try to explain why they do believe, and do not believe, because they believe this...

It doesn't do any good to explain how one thinks a God is not real because they reject it...Then explain how fucked up this God is without explaining why you believe it is true, and not also explaining how they reject it is true... because they know it is not an accurate or truthful statement but are being stubborn...

How could anyone try to explain their views or validate that subjectively for someone else? Think about that one for me, and get back to me when you come up with an idea...
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 07:03 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Did you read this?

: http://nomeekmessiah.com/NMM-beaten.htm


XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 07:08 pm
@reasoning logic,
I just did, yes...Did you read my last reply????? How can someone explain how they think or believe different? If one is not honest and does not wish to explain why they believe this God was a ******* asshole???? How could I argue for or against that if one is not willing to explain why they believe this is actually true? Or this God was?? And ask me to personally validate an emotion that they have themselves, but do not understand that they are asking me to do this, because they either do not know they believe, or must not want to admit what they do believe...but I can't really do this...because what they believe is not what I believe...

Can they "prove" to me that this God was for me to believe?

If they can...I will attempt to prove why they believe...
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 08:00 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Congratulations, Neo. This was one of the worst evasion of a question I've ever read.
It did kind of fall short; but it was so much fun to relate . . .
The conclusion was right, though. Sometimes we already know the answer.
Frank Apisa wrote:
But...I like to be sure...so...

...let us suppose that you and John are both correct--and Jesus has fulfilled what he was supposed to fulfill.

How does that impact on why he never condemned slavery?

The reason for my question is that earlier you responded, “Frank, I think the answer to this, as far as Jesus is concerned, may lie in the fact that Jesus fulfilled the law. I know; I know; This is another of your pet subjects and doesn't answer the underlying questions about slavery. But I think it may take your microscope away from Jesus.”

So I am willing to assume Jesus thought he “fulfilled the law”; John thought Jesus “fulfilled the law”; and you think John was right that Jesus thought Jesus had “fulfilled the law.”
From the biblical prospective, Jesus did not merely think he fulfilled the law. I'll have to stick with my assertion that if the entire world lived according to Jesus' teachings, we would not be concerned with the excesses of slavery.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 03:41 am
@neologist,
Quote:
From the biblical prospective, Jesus did not merely think he fulfilled the law.


He didn't??? Would you point out where he unambiguously is reported to have said otherwise?

Quote:
I'll have to stick with my assertion that if the entire world lived according to Jesus' teachings, we would not be concerned with the excesses of slavery.


If Queen Elizabeth had the right genitalia, she'd be King of England! But she doesn't.

So...back to the question you have not answered so far: Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

And while you are at it, could you explain to me the implications of "...with the excesses of slavery?" Are you saying that if people who follow the teachings of Jesus...it would be okay with you for them to own slaves?
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 04:08 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
If Queen Elizabeth had the right genitalia, she'd be King of England! But she doesn't.


What exactly do you think is wrong with Liz's genitalia?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 04:11 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
What exactly do you think is wrong with Liz's genitalia?


You'd have to ask her doctor that. But obviously she does not have the genitalia necessary to be King.
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 05:53 am
@Frank Apisa,
I'm just amazed you were allowed to get so close.
0 Replies
 
Great Plans
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 04:21 am
@Lustig Andrei,
The whole bible is the teachings of god and what he believes are right. If it is in the bible, God (or Jesus) agrees with it. You cannot just assume that because Jesus did not personally speak out against slavery that he was opposed to it.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 04:26 am
@Great Plans,
Great Plans wrote:

The whole bible is the teachings of god and what he believes are right.


So you agree that the god of the Bible "believes" (in fact teaches) that there is nothing wrong with slavery at all.

Interesting.


Quote:
If it is in the bible, God (or Jesus) agrees with it. You cannot just assume that because Jesus did not personally speak out against slavery that he was opposed to it.


Also an interesting point.

Do you think Jesus was NOT opposed to slavery?
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 04:38 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Do you think Jesus was NOT opposed to slavery?


I'll say it again... Being a slave was just what a low-information voter (or Obunga voter) did for a living until around 150 years ago. The alternative for them was starving; how would you expect Jesus to be for all of those fools starving??
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 04:52 am
That is absolutely the stupidest thing I've ever read.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 06:16 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
Do you think Jesus was NOT opposed to slavery?


I'll say it again... Being a slave was just what a low-information voter (or Obunga voter) did for a living until around 150 years ago. The alternative for them was starving; how would you expect Jesus to be for all of those fools starving??


Rather easy for you to say...particularly since you can fit it into another insult of Barack Obama.

But slavery involved a hell of a lot more than manner of work...or means of staying alive.

Why didn't he or the people who wrote his stuff ever condemn that?

I doubt you will ever acknowledge that in any meaningful way.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  3  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 08:41 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
That is absolutely the stupidest thing I've ever read.


Only if you think that slavery was as you imagine it to be rather than as it was at the time Jesus lived.

The slave owner, the rich man, had as much chance of getting to Heaven as a camel had of getting through the eye of a needle. What do you want Jack? Having it spelled out in words of one syllable?

Don't all the teachings of Jesus condemn slavery assuming the institution is more than the experience of bell-hops and short order cooks? Many slaves in that period were rich and influential. It was an institution we can't understand.

It's a silly question. It is born of arrogance and a desperation to undermine Christianity.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 08:50 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
That is absolutely the stupidest thing I've ever read.


Only if you think that slavery was as you imagine it to be rather than as it was at the time Jesus lived.

The slave owner, the rich man, had as much chance of getting to Heaven as a camel had of getting through the eye of a needle. What do you want Jack? Having it spelled out in words of one syllable?

Don't all the teachings of Jesus condemn slavery assuming the institution is more than the experience of bell-hops and short order cooks? Many slaves in that period were rich and influential. It was an institution we can't understand.

It's a silly question. It is born of arrogance and a desperation to undermine Christianity.


Nonsense.

The ownership part of "slavery back then" shoots so many holes in this line of attack...a tank division could go through it without a scratch.

It was stupid!
gungasnake
 
  2  
Reply Sat 18 May, 2013 09:50 am
@Frank Apisa,
Another basic reality... Slavery in Jesus' time really was just what the lower half of the species did for a living (as opposed to voting for demoKKKrats in our own age). The kind of EVIL slavery which we think in terms of is a slammite invention; it didn't exist in Jesus' time. Jesus almost certainly would have spoken against slammite slave practices and the European slave trade which developed for the purpose of exploiting the New World.

For that matter, Jesus did in fact speak of Mohammed and others like him:

Mathew 7:15

Quote:
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.



The kind of slavery which we think in terms of is covered in the term "evil fruits"...
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/15/2021 at 10:42:35