Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Christianity has modern values

SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 12:06:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Anyone who says that Christianity"s views are outdated isn"t seeing things correctly.
Here"s a few examples:

1 Timothy 6:1
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour

Titus 2:9
Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters

1 Peter 2:18
Servants, Be subject to your masters with all fear

Matthew 23:10
. . . For one is your Master, Even Christ.

Although the civil war in America outlawed slavery, One could argue that we are all slaves to our corporate overlords in modern-day America. One could argue that Christianity was just preparing us for the time that we would have to kiss the a-ss of these corporate overlords. So, Anyone that thinks Christianity has outdated values might need to reconsider their rash judgments.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 12:38:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I would say Christianity has many different values. Since there are many different people who are Christians. Many of those Christians have values that contradict with other Christians.

Your view seems more a caricature than an honest discussion.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 12:45:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Leaning wrote:
I would say Christianity has many different values. Since there are many different people who are Christians. Many of those Christians have values that contradict with other Christians.

Your view seems more a caricature than an honest discussion.

Considering that the book that Christians live their lives by is a book of contradictions, It isn't surprising that so many Christians have values that contradict with each other. I quoted real Bible verses and did my best to apply them to the modern age. I don't know how to be more honest than that.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 12:56:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
My assumption here is that you are mocking people rather than trying to discuss things with them.
My assumption is that you do not view Christianity as having modern values.
So when you put the title as Christianity has modern values. What else is that but a lie? (To you)
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 1:05:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Leaning wrote:
My assumption here is that you are mocking people rather than trying to discuss things with them.
My assumption is that you do not view Christianity as having modern values.
So when you put the title as Christianity has modern values. What else is that but a lie? (To you)

I was speaking the truth. If the truth happens to mock something, It is what it is. I think Christianity supports slavery because the powers that wrote the Bible support slavery. And I believe those powers are at work in the modern age. So, In that sense, I believe Christianity's pro-slavery slant is very appropriate to what is going on today. In that sense, Christianity's modern values are evil modern values. It was in no way a lie. If you want to discuss the issue at hand than discuss it. Stop throwing around false accusations.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 1:41:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I do not view you as truthful or polite. Perhaps you are truthful and an epitome of politeness. But I don't see it. Accusations eh? I called them assumptions. Based on how 'I viewed your words and my feelings.

Christianity has many forms. Their focus and interpretation of the bible varies. There is history in the bible, Laws, And teachings. But the Christians I have known, Recognize that there is more in life than just the bible. That there are other laws made by governments and society, Lessons to be learned throughout life, And a number of variations of history.

Shall I abandon the constitution, Modern history books, Or laws because of errors and contradictions I see in them? Become a self made man, An anarchist beholden only to himself?

I suppose 'I have in a fashion, Though life goes on pretty much the same as before, With me reading books, Following the law, And learning through experience with other people.

I haven't met in person any Christians advocating for slavery. Perhaps it is in the bible that they revere, I am not bothered. Enough of them for me recognize that people wrote the bible, Printed off the copy that they own themselves. Enough of them practice a Christianity that seems modern to me by their actions and words.

The reply I imagine is complaining about the bible being corrupt and whatnot. I don't care if some people have a book full of versions 0. 1-8. 5 or whatever. I am secure enough in myself I can hear a Christian tell me I need to read the bible and pray to a deity to be saved. I would just say, That is nice but I don't think that myself, Have a nice day. Hmm, But why am I bothered by a person demeaning Christians? I'm not quite sure. I'd be bothered by a Christian saying that all atheists are evil I think. Selective hearing? Possible, I'll think on that for a bit.

Personally I view the bible as a living document. Who cares if there are inconsistencies in something I don't practice. That's why I don't practice it anymore. I don't feel the need to be an a$$ to people who do. People will just change their practice of it to fit the times. Again, So long as they are fitting in with the rest of society, I don't care if they have some old copies of an old book.

So far the only argument I've really found convincing is Willows on What about the children so to speak. Still thinking on that one. There might have been another, But I don't recall. Again much of this is assumption perhaps, But ah well, If I don't venture anything, What do I gain.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2018 2:15:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Leaning wrote:
I do not view you as truthful or polite. Perhaps you are truthful and an epitome of politeness. But I don't see it. Accusations eh? I called them assumptions. Based on how 'I viewed your words and my feelings.

Christianity has many forms. Their focus and interpretation of the bible varies. There is history in the bible, Laws, And teachings. But the Christians I have known, Recognize that there is more in life than just the bible. That there are other laws made by governments and society, Lessons to be learned throughout life, And a number of variations of history.

Shall I abandon the constitution, Modern history books, Or laws because of errors and contradictions I see in them? Become a self made man, An anarchist beholden only to himself?

I suppose 'I have in a fashion, Though life goes on pretty much the same as before, With me reading books, Following the law, And learning through experience with other people.

I haven't met in person any Christians advocating for slavery. Perhaps it is in the bible that they revere, I am not bothered. Enough of them for me recognize that people wrote the bible, Printed off the copy that they own themselves. Enough of them practice a Christianity that seems modern to me by their actions and words.

The reply I imagine is complaining about the bible being corrupt and whatnot. I don't care if some people have a book full of versions 0. 1-8. 5 or whatever. I am secure enough in myself I can hear a Christian tell me I need to read the bible and pray to a deity to be saved. I would just say, That is nice but I don't think that myself, Have a nice day. Hmm, But why am I bothered by a person demeaning Christians? I'm not quite sure. I'd be bothered by a Christian saying that all atheists are evil I think. Selective hearing? Possible, I'll think on that for a bit.

Personally I view the bible as a living document. Who cares if there are inconsistencies in something I don't practice. That's why I don't practice it anymore. I don't feel the need to be an a$$ to people who do. People will just change their practice of it to fit the times. Again, So long as they are fitting in with the rest of society, I don't care if they have some old copies of an old book.

So far the only argument I've really found convincing is Willows on What about the children so to speak. Still thinking on that one. There might have been another, But I don't recall. Again much of this is assumption perhaps, But ah well, If I don't venture anything, What do I gain.

I was being very truthful with this post. I won't claim that I'm always polite when people accuse me falsely as you have, But in this instance I have been as polite as I can be.

If you choose to defend Christianity even though you aren't any longer a Christianity (am I hearing you right? ), That's your choice. To me, There is not any more monstrous institution on the earth than "the church. " All you have to do is study the history of the church for the last 2000 years and you can see that Christianity has been the source of divisions and bloodshed both metaphorically speaking (in the modern age there are 3000+ sects that all argue with each other over issues of doctrine and whatnot) and physically speaking (in the times of Roman Catholic church tyranny there where countless people murdered for their "apostasies"). The bible is a racist ("Jews are the chosen people), Sexist ("wives submit yourselves onto your husbands"), Homophobic (Romans 1:26-27), Slavery supporting (see above verse references), Defense denying ("love your enemies" "turn the other cheek" - What, I'm not suppose to generate some hate towards a rapist that is trying to rape me? ) piece of trash. Sometimes the truth is not "polite, " and can't be to remain the truth. Maybe there are some Christians that are able to rise above the trash which is the Bible and still be "nice people" in spite of the Bible. My experience with Christians that have managed to still be "nice people" is that the Bible has shallowed them as people significantly. I am here not to criticize them for remaining nice people in spite of the Bible, But to tell them to flee the Bible before it drains them of any more depth of soul that they might have if they recognize the truth.
Tradesecret
Posts: 1,421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 1:08:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
1 Timothy 6:1
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour


1 timothy 6:1 " so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered. V. 2 those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers.

What is the purpose? In the time of Paul, Slavery was part of the culture. Slaves who were becoming Christians were waking up to the fact that the Gospel of Jesus frees them and givens them liberty. Many were leaving and this was causing the communities Paul was preaching to be angry at Christianity because people were losing their slaves. Paul's message was much bigger than anti-slavery. His message to these slaves was not to run but do well so that Christ's name may not be slandered. The current application would be for employees to make sure they pay their debts or their mortgages.

Titus 2:9
Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters

1 Peter 2:18
Servants, Be subject to your masters with all fear

Matthew 23:10
. . . For one is your Master, Even Christ.

Although the civil war in America outlawed slavery, One could argue that we are all slaves to our corporate overlords in modern-day America. One could argue that Christianity was just preparing us for the time that we would have to kiss the a-ss of these corporate overlords. So, Anyone that thinks Christianity has outdated values might need to reconsider their rash judgments.


The American civil war over slavery was talking about a different kind of slavery to Paul's time. Yet, Its message does not change and your application is misapplied. It is not about kissing up to corporate overlords. It is about doing the right thing. Paying your debts and not stealing from people. And overall, Not bringing Christ's name into disrepute because of your dishonesty or new found beliefs.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 1:14:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
1 Timothy 6:1
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour


1 timothy 6:1 " so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered. V. 2 those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers.

What is the purpose? In the time of Paul, Slavery was part of the culture. Slaves who were becoming Christians were waking up to the fact that the Gospel of Jesus frees them and givens them liberty. Many were leaving and this was causing the communities Paul was preaching to be angry at Christianity because people were losing their slaves. Paul's message was much bigger than anti-slavery. His message to these slaves was not to run but do well so that Christ's name may not be slandered. The current application would be for employees to make sure they pay their debts or their mortgages.

Titus 2:9
Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters

1 Peter 2:18
Servants, Be subject to your masters with all fear

Matthew 23:10
. . . For one is your Master, Even Christ.

Although the civil war in America outlawed slavery, One could argue that we are all slaves to our corporate overlords in modern-day America. One could argue that Christianity was just preparing us for the time that we would have to kiss the a-ss of these corporate overlords. So, Anyone that thinks Christianity has outdated values might need to reconsider their rash judgments.


The American civil war over slavery was talking about a different kind of slavery to Paul's time. Yet, Its message does not change and your application is misapplied. It is not about kissing up to corporate overlords. It is about doing the right thing. Paying your debts and not stealing from people. And overall, Not bringing Christ's name into disrepute because of your dishonesty or new found beliefs.

You can believe what you want about our corporate overlords, But I for one don't think that the super-rich that have made their billions on the backs of others deserve the respect that they have in this society, And I think the Bible's permissiveness towards slavery has a role in this. It's permissiveness towards sexism, Homophobia, Denying defense, Etc is also abominable.
Tradesecret
Posts: 1,421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 1:30:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
You can believe what you want about our corporate overlords, But I for one don't think that the super-rich that have made their billions on the backs of others deserve the respect that they have in this society, And I think the Bible's permissiveness towards slavery has a role in this. It's permissiveness towards sexism, Homophobia, Denying defense, Etc is also abominable.

Are their rich people who have made their money on the backs of others? Yes. Are their poor people who have make their daily bread on the backs of others? Yes. Why? Because money is always made - for the rich and the poor on the backs of others. Money does not come from nowhere - it is only representative of someone's ability to sell or purchase.

The Bible is the reason why slavery has been outlawed in the modern society. Slavery has always existed in every country in the world - and it was the Christian view on the Bible which brought about its prohibition. You need to read some history on the subject. If Christianity had not arise, Then we slavery would continue to exist much more broadly than it does today. Remember the basis of slavery is that people can be owned. Today in our secular society we slip back to this thinking. Think of abortionists who say "it is my body and I will do with it whatever I like". This is the basis of slavery. Because I own my body I can do anything -including selling it. Or killing it.

The British Common Law under its Christian laws moved towards stating we don't own our own bodies - because the human body is not property. The abolitionist movement was Christian. To say as you did that the bible is permissive is to gravely misrepresent the truth of the bible and history. It is also to misrepresent where society would be without Christianity.

What do you mean about denying defence? The Bible is not homophobic. Unfortunately many Christians are homophobic and sexist etc. I take the view however that if we were to look at greater society that they church would not be instrinsically more so than other groups.

I don't have a view about corporate overlords. I think there are some bad ones and I think there are some good ones. I know from the court system that many poor people are atheists and do many corrupt things.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 1:37:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
You can believe what you want about our corporate overlords, But I for one don't think that the super-rich that have made their billions on the backs of others deserve the respect that they have in this society, And I think the Bible's permissiveness towards slavery has a role in this. It's permissiveness towards sexism, Homophobia, Denying defense, Etc is also abominable.

Are their rich people who have made their money on the backs of others? Yes. Are their poor people who have make their daily bread on the backs of others? Yes. Why? Because money is always made - for the rich and the poor on the backs of others. Money does not come from nowhere - it is only representative of someone's ability to sell or purchase.

The Bible is the reason why slavery has been outlawed in the modern society. Slavery has always existed in every country in the world - and it was the Christian view on the Bible which brought about its prohibition. You need to read some history on the subject. If Christianity had not arise, Then we slavery would continue to exist much more broadly than it does today. Remember the basis of slavery is that people can be owned. Today in our secular society we slip back to this thinking. Think of abortionists who say "it is my body and I will do with it whatever I like". This is the basis of slavery. Because I own my body I can do anything -including selling it. Or killing it.

The British Common Law under its Christian laws moved towards stating we don't own our own bodies - because the human body is not property. The abolitionist movement was Christian. To say as you did that the bible is permissive is to gravely misrepresent the truth of the bible and history. It is also to misrepresent where society would be without Christianity.

What do you mean about denying defence? The Bible is not homophobic. Unfortunately many Christians are homophobic and sexist etc. I take the view however that if we were to look at greater society that they church would not be instrinsically more so than other groups.

I don't have a view about corporate overlords. I think there are some bad ones and I think there are some good ones. I know from the court system that many poor people are atheists and do many corrupt things.

I think you are gravely misrepresenting the permissiveness of the Bible towards slavery that gave, For the most part, The Bible believing South ammunition against the North for continuing their slavery. You need to read your history, If you are going to start that superior tone. And the permissive attitude towards slavery in the Bible gives our corporate overlords reason to increase the burdens of the middle class and the poor to "work harder, Work faster, " and put the average person at a disadvantage. I never said their aren't many atheists that don't do bad things. Stop throwing in red herrings.
Tradesecret
Posts: 1,421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 7:17:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think you are gravely misrepresenting the permissiveness of the Bible towards slavery that gave, For the most part, The Bible believing South ammunition against the North for continuing their slavery. You need to read your history, If you are going to start that superior tone. And the permissive attitude towards slavery in the Bible gives our corporate overlords reason to increase the burdens of the middle class and the poor to "work harder, Work faster, " and put the average person at a disadvantage. I never said their aren't many atheists that don't do bad things. Stop throwing in red herrings.

The slavery in the civil war is not the same as the bible talks about slavery. In OT times, Slavery was something that you voluntarily entered into and could work yourself out of. The OT also has the idea of a the jubilee which meant every seven years slavery came to an end. The OT also forbade kidnapping. Hence the OT form of slavery and what we see in the Civil war completely different.

In the NT, Slaves were part of the Roman Empire - a non - Christian civilisation. Paul was assisting the NT Christians how to live in such a world. He was not condoning slavery.

For the record in the American civil war - read your history. Most slaves in the south had good masters and fought on behalf of their masters because they knew they would lose the good life they had under the new laws of the north. Many ended up losing their security and freedoms once the North won the war. I am not condoning slavery but we need to understand that some masters were good masters even though we knew many others were nasty and horrible.

The bible does not give any corporate overlord the permission to be oppressive and overbearing - it gives the vulnerable freedoms they never had before. Don't lie about the bible - otherwise quote passages that support your position and do us a favour - quote the context - don't just pull passages out of context like you did previously.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 10:54:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
I think you are gravely misrepresenting the permissiveness of the Bible towards slavery that gave, For the most part, The Bible believing South ammunition against the North for continuing their slavery. You need to read your history, If you are going to start that superior tone. And the permissive attitude towards slavery in the Bible gives our corporate overlords reason to increase the burdens of the middle class and the poor to "work harder, Work faster, " and put the average person at a disadvantage. I never said their aren't many atheists that don't do bad things. Stop throwing in red herrings.

The slavery in the civil war is not the same as the bible talks about slavery. In OT times, Slavery was something that you voluntarily entered into and could work yourself out of. The OT also has the idea of a the jubilee which meant every seven years slavery came to an end. The OT also forbade kidnapping. Hence the OT form of slavery and what we see in the Civil war completely different.

In the NT, Slaves were part of the Roman Empire - a non - Christian civilisation. Paul was assisting the NT Christians how to live in such a world. He was not condoning slavery.

For the record in the American civil war - read your history. Most slaves in the south had good masters and fought on behalf of their masters because they knew they would lose the good life they had under the new laws of the north. Many ended up losing their security and freedoms once the North won the war. I am not condoning slavery but we need to understand that some masters were good masters even though we knew many others were nasty and horrible.

The bible does not give any corporate overlord the permission to be oppressive and overbearing - it gives the vulnerable freedoms they never had before. Don't lie about the bible - otherwise quote passages that support your position and do us a favour - quote the context - don't just pull passages out of context like you did previously.

Your views are so repulsive, I'm not sure I want to continue this "discussion" with you. The only one lying here is you.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 11:27:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
I think you are gravely misrepresenting the permissiveness of the Bible towards slavery that gave, For the most part, The Bible believing South ammunition against the North for continuing their slavery. You need to read your history, If you are going to start that superior tone. And the permissive attitude towards slavery in the Bible gives our corporate overlords reason to increase the burdens of the middle class and the poor to "work harder, Work faster, " and put the average person at a disadvantage. I never said their aren't many atheists that don't do bad things. Stop throwing in red herrings.

The slavery in the civil war is not the same as the bible talks about slavery. In OT times, Slavery was something that you voluntarily entered into and could work yourself out of. The OT also has the idea of a the jubilee which meant every seven years slavery came to an end. The OT also forbade kidnapping. Hence the OT form of slavery and what we see in the Civil war completely different.

In the NT, Slaves were part of the Roman Empire - a non - Christian civilisation. Paul was assisting the NT Christians how to live in such a world. He was not condoning slavery.

For the record in the American civil war - read your history. Most slaves in the south had good masters and fought on behalf of their masters because they knew they would lose the good life they had under the new laws of the north. Many ended up losing their security and freedoms once the North won the war. I am not condoning slavery but we need to understand that some masters were good masters even though we knew many others were nasty and horrible.

The bible does not give any corporate overlord the permission to be oppressive and overbearing - it gives the vulnerable freedoms they never had before. Don't lie about the bible - otherwise quote passages that support your position and do us a favour - quote the context - don't just pull passages out of context like you did previously.

For the record the Jubilee was once every 50 years, Not every 7 years. And the freeing of slaves only included the Isrealites that were taken into bondage by other Isrealites, Not the "strangers" of the land that Isreal brought into slavery. Not only is the Bible slavery condoning, But it is racist, Along with being sexist, Homophobic, And defense denying.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,328
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2018 2:53:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
You can believe what you want about our corporate overlords, But I for one don't think that the super-rich that have made their billions on the backs of others deserve the respect that they have in this society, And I think the Bible's permissiveness towards slavery has a role in this. It's permissiveness towards sexism, Homophobia, Denying defense, Etc is also abominable.

Are their rich people who have made their money on the backs of others? Yes. Are their poor people who have make their daily bread on the backs of others? Yes. Why? Because money is always made - for the rich and the poor on the backs of others. Money does not come from nowhere - it is only representative of someone's ability to sell or purchase.

The Bible is the reason why slavery has been outlawed in the modern society. Slavery has always existed in every country in the world - and it was the Christian view on the Bible which brought about its prohibition. You need to read some history on the subject. If Christianity had not arise, Then we slavery would continue to exist much more broadly than it does today. Remember the basis of slavery is that people can be owned. Today in our secular society we slip back to this thinking. Think of abortionists who say "it is my body and I will do with it whatever I like". This is the basis of slavery. Because I own my body I can do anything -including selling it. Or killing it.

The British Common Law under its Christian laws moved towards stating we don't own our own bodies - because the human body is not property. The abolitionist movement was Christian. To say as you did that the bible is permissive is to gravely misrepresent the truth of the bible and history. It is also to misrepresent where society would be without Christianity.

What do you mean about denying defence? The Bible is not homophobic. Unfortunately many Christians are homophobic and sexist etc. I take the view however that if we were to look at greater society that they church would not be instrinsically more so than other groups.

I don't have a view about corporate overlords. I think there are some bad ones and I think there are some good ones. I know from the court system that many poor people are atheists and do many corrupt things.

Church supported slavery from. 362 AD to 1965.

362 AD The local Council at Gangra in Asia Minor excommunicates anyone encouraging a slave to despise his master or withdraw from his service. (Became part of Church Law from the 13th century).

1965 AD. The Second Vatican Council defends basic human rights and denounces all violations of human integrity, Including slavery (Gaudium et Spes, No 27, 29, 67).

The role of Christianity in African slavery is rather unique. Most religions allowed slavery based on economic and monetary reasons. But slaves were never targeted because of their skin colour alone. This all changed when Christians justified their targeting of Africans based on scriptures and skin colour. The continued discrimination of Africans are purely on skin colour.
Tradesecret
Posts: 1,421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2018 5:01:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Church supported slavery from. 362 AD to 1965.

362 AD The local Council at Gangra in Asia Minor excommunicates anyone encouraging a slave to despise his master or withdraw from his service. (Became part of Church Law from the 13th century).

1965 AD. The Second Vatican Council defends basic human rights and denounces all violations of human integrity, Including slavery (Gaudium et Spes, No 27, 29, 67).

The role of Christianity in African slavery is rather unique. Most religions allowed slavery based on economic and monetary reasons. But slaves were never targeted because of their skin colour alone. This all changed when Christians justified their targeting of Africans based on scriptures and skin colour. The continued discrimination of Africans are purely on skin colour.


The church was behind the prohibition of slavery. Hinduism still favours it.
Tradesecret
Posts: 1,421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2018 5:19:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
For the record the Jubilee was once every 50 years, Not every 7 years. And the freeing of slaves only included the Isrealites that were taken into bondage by other Isrealites, Not the "strangers" of the land that Isreal brought into slavery. Not only is the Bible slavery condoning, But it is racist, Along with being sexist, Homophobic, And defense denying.

Yes jubilee was every 50 years. It however is the 7th lot of 7 years. Every seven years the debts were released. After the end of 50 years the land was given back as well. And it may well have been only the Israelites - that would make sense because it was the land that was being given back to the Israelites from foreign multi-national corps and ownership.

the OT was not racist. It was religiously intolerant which is quite different. Ruth for example was not a Jew yet became an ancestor of Jesus. The nation of Israel had lots of people who converted to Judaism. Take Uriah the Hitite amongst others. Israel was a covenant keeping religion - people were not permitted to practice publically their religions. But it was not racist per se. It was only those nations which chose to destroy Israel or who wished to mock Israel's God.

In the NT of course this is even more obvious. Jesus broke down the walls between Israel and other nations - and made Christianity a multi- national religion. This was predicted in the OT - even in the name of Abraham. Christianity has been at the forefront of getting rid of racism. Paul says in Galatians there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ. Christ is the one who breaks down all the walls. Between races, Between economic powers of slavery and owners, Between females and males. This is all very easy to show from history.

You say the Bible is homophobic. I say you are wrong. It is true the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination. In the OT under the OT law it was to be sentenced with the death penalty. But this was a lawful act executed by lawful officers. It was not something to be done by vigilantes. No one in the OT or the NT is permitted or encouraged to go out and be violent or indeed hateful towards homosexuals. Yet, God calls homosexuality a sin. It is God's right to determine right and wrong. It is not my right. Nor is it your right. Yet, This does not give me a right to be nasty or mean or violent towards homosexuals. I am commanded to call sin a sin. The bible also does not give me a right to be hateful or violent towards murderers or heretics or drunkards or in fact anyone at all. Yet, It does command us to call sin a sin - this should be done lawfully and without regret.

Yet, Despite this fact of the bible, I would never dream of walking up to a homosexual and calling them a sinner because they are a homosexual. Why not? Because that would be untrue. People are not sinners because they practice a particular sin. They are sinners - all of us - including me - are sinners because of the nature of sin we are born with. Hence, I would tell my mother - that she needs to repent of her sin and turn to God - as I would tell anyone.

Again I don't understand what you mean by the bible denying defencing. What does that even mean? Can you please explain that?
Tradesecret
Posts: 1,421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2018 5:22:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Your views are so repulsive, I'm not sure I want to continue this "discussion" with you. The only one lying here is you.

why are my views so repulsive? Because you don't agree with them and because I refuse to agree with you about Christianity and about what the Bible says. At the end of the day, It is my religion and my holy book. You have already said that find Christianity repulsive and the bible the same.

It is you who is attacking me. Please don't expect me to just sit back and let you slap me and my religion about without a fair reply. I do believe in natural justice. I am hopeful you do as well.
SingularityofLight
Posts: 1,915
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2018 4:10:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
For the record the Jubilee was once every 50 years, Not every 7 years. And the freeing of slaves only included the Isrealites that were taken into bondage by other Isrealites, Not the "strangers" of the land that Isreal brought into slavery. Not only is the Bible slavery condoning, But it is racist, Along with being sexist, Homophobic, And defense denying.

Yes jubilee was every 50 years. It however is the 7th lot of 7 years. Every seven years the debts were released. After the end of 50 years the land was given back as well. And it may well have been only the Israelites - that would make sense because it was the land that was being given back to the Israelites from foreign multi-national corps and ownership.

the OT was not racist. It was religiously intolerant which is quite different. Ruth for example was not a Jew yet became an ancestor of Jesus. The nation of Israel had lots of people who converted to Judaism. Take Uriah the Hitite amongst others. Israel was a covenant keeping religion - people were not permitted to practice publically their religions. But it was not racist per se. It was only those nations which chose to destroy Israel or who wished to mock Israel's God.

In the NT of course this is even more obvious. Jesus broke down the walls between Israel and other nations - and made Christianity a multi- national religion. This was predicted in the OT - even in the name of Abraham. Christianity has been at the forefront of getting rid of racism. Paul says in Galatians there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ. Christ is the one who breaks down all the walls. Between races, Between economic powers of slavery and owners, Between females and males. This is all very easy to show from history.

You say the Bible is homophobic. I say you are wrong. It is true the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination. In the OT under the OT law it was to be sentenced with the death penalty. But this was a lawful act executed by lawful officers. It was not something to be done by vigilantes. No one in the OT or the NT is permitted or encouraged to go out and be violent or indeed hateful towards homosexuals. Yet, God calls homosexuality a sin. It is God's right to determine right and wrong. It is not my right. Nor is it your right. Yet, This does not give me a right to be nasty or mean or violent towards homosexuals. I am commanded to call sin a sin. The bible also does not give me a right to be hateful or violent towards murderers or heretics or drunkards or in fact anyone at all. Yet, It does command us to call sin a sin - this should be done lawfully and without regret.

Yet, Despite this fact of the bible, I would never dream of walking up to a homosexual and calling them a sinner because they are a homosexual. Why not? Because that would be untrue. People are not sinners because they practice a particular sin. They are sinners - all of us - including me - are sinners because of the nature of sin we are born with. Hence, I would tell my mother - that she needs to repent of her sin and turn to God - as I would tell anyone.

Again I don't understand what you mean by the bible denying defencing. What does that even mean? Can you please explain that?

Isreali slaves and debts were only released during the 50th year of Jubilee. Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow. These are two compeletely different things. I'm not going to argue this point with you because you are just making up things that suit you. And you implicitly agree with my point: Isreal was racist because it keep "heathen slaves, " in spite of the Jubilee, And it saw Jews as "God's chosen" people. The Bible old and new views the Jews and God's "chosen people, " in spite of "opening up the message" of the heinous Yahweh and Jesus" to "the Gentiles. " Isreal burned and murdered it's way into it's "God given" land, Just like it did in modern times, Because Yehweh is a murderous, Slave-owning thug like you. You play both sides of issues to try to win arguments: "Oh, Christianity freed slaves during the civil war, But the slaves loved their masters. " Most of the Southern slave owners were thugs that no doubt brainwashed many slaves into thinking that they deserved to be slaves. No one should be a slave to anyone else at any time. Yehweh/Jesus helped perpetuate slave-owning in the Old Testament, The New Testament, And it gave Bible believing Southerners ammunition to continue slave-owning before the civil war.

Christ "breaks down walls" alright: that monster breaks down walls of the soul, Which fellow monsters like you want to break down in order to get people to believe in that monstrous book.

Yes, I could give you New Testament Bible verses that support the racist, Sexist, Homophobic, Defense-denying nature of Jehovah and Jesus, But what is the point? Because you will give me contradictory verses that indicate the opposite, And say "I took the verses out of context, " like you do with the slave owning permissiveness verses of the New Testament which I gave at the beginning of this thread. Why? Because the Bible is a book of contradictions, Meant to confuse and overcome souls. This contradictory nature engenders a great deal of intolerance on the earth we live today.

Loving same-sex couples are not "practicing sin, " because of their love for the same sex, As you say. You just say those kinds of intolerant things because the homophobic Bible tells you that it is "sin. "

I thought you were a predator before I engaged you in that first post, But now I know for sure: you are an alpha predator, Just like Jehovah and Jesus, So I can see why you cling to the Bible. The Bible is the alpha predator book of all time, Meant to overcome and harden souls, So they eventually become like you are today. There are of course the "nice Christian" slaves of Christianity out there, Who just follow the big daddy priests, Like you, And let their souls become as shallow as saran wrap because of it. But unfortunately, If they remain drones of Christianity, They are going to be in a huge karma hole after this life, In which they will have to serve big time Christian predator spirits.

I know we won't get anywhere, Because you are not in anyway open-minded about how treacherous the Bible is, And because you have adopted its treacherous ways and become treacherous yourself. I'm not sure why I am continuing this discussion, Because I like discussions not "talking heads" debates, Except for the fact that in this thread you have not resort to cutting and slashing my posts. But your views of slaves during civil war times and our need to contently serve our corporate overloads, I find repulsive, And I am barely continuing to discuss them with you. You should know, I hate debates, I like discussions: that is why I am in the forum section of DDO and not the debate section. You can certainly debate in this section of DDO, But it won't be with me.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,328
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2018 6:24:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Tradesecret wrote:
Church supported slavery from. 362 AD to 1965.

362 AD The local Council at Gangra in Asia Minor excommunicates anyone encouraging a slave to despise his master or withdraw from his service. (Became part of Church Law from the 13th century).

1965 AD. The Second Vatican Council defends basic human rights and denounces all violations of human integrity, Including slavery (Gaudium et Spes, No 27, 29, 67).

The role of Christianity in African slavery is rather unique. Most religions allowed slavery based on economic and monetary reasons. But slaves were never targeted because of their skin colour alone. This all changed when Christians justified their targeting of Africans based on scriptures and skin colour. The continued discrimination of Africans are purely on skin colour.


The church was behind the prohibition of slavery. Hinduism still favours it.

Church abolished slavery in 1965 after promoting it for 16 centuries.

There is no slavery in India because the Indians never converted to Christianity or embraced slavery. And those that did were not in any position of authority to enforce slavery.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.