For Once

[UllysesS.Archer]

There was a time when christian martyrdom meant being thrown to the lions.

Indeed. Serial Religion Bashers (SRBs) like to say that Christianity was a human invention. If that is true, it was a highly impractical one. Early Christians were persecuted, marginalized and forced underground. Nevertheless, the teachings spread to the Greco-Roman world (not by sword or edict).

Christianity was illegal in the Empire until the Edict of Milan in 313. It was still only present in small pockets around the Med. Even though it was a minority religion in 380 AD, it became the Roman state religion. Now, SRBs will have heads full of visions of a religion being imposed on a people at this point. But, it's more accurate to say that Rome turned to Christianity as a Hail Mary pass, pardon the pun. The Empire had been rotting from the inside due to moral decay since the days of Caligula and Nero.

It was a case of too little, too late. Rome's army was defeated by the Gauls in 390. Rome was sacked by the Visgoths in 410 and by the Vandals in 455. Political order was eviscerated. Roads succumbed to erosion. Cities became towns. Towns became hovels of squalor. There was no official currency for trade. Chaos ensued. Western man was faced collectively with a question. Where do we turn to restore order? Who is standing up for civilized society?

The christian church addressed the questions: Where do we turn to restore order? Who is standing up for civilized society? with the Dark Ages, Witch Hunts, Inquisitions, suppression of science and knowledge and the maintenance of suffering and misery.

So where do I find this question being addressed at? I would like to read the sermon. Or are you not going to answer that question also?

So why do you dodge, sidestep and deflect when your comments are addressed?

Your application for martyrdom is denied.

Please, ask me a question, i'll do my best to answer it, unlike you, and your ilk, I will do my best to answer it, and if I don't know I will admit that I don't know.

So please ask.

 

[Hollie]

So I'm conflicted on how to handle a domestic issue, and the christian allowances for slavery are not making it clear how I should proceed.

Here's my conflict, from Leviticus 25:45-46 (Christians are aware, are they not, of the theft of Hebrew scripture used for the invention of christianity)
________________________________________
"Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession."
_______________________________________

Here's my problem. One of the 4 year neighborhood children of the heathens around me actually has converted to Judaism. Now, technically the child is still heathen, at least by blood. Can I buy this child anyway, or does the conversion override the bloodline issue? I suspect that a 4 year old isn't old enough to make such a decision regarding their status, so I can buy and enslave him anyway.

Can any good christian enlighten me on how the bibles resolve such a conflict?

Thanks

I am sorry you carry so much hate around with you.

I have read It, many time

Maybe you should try reading that book you carry around.

I have read It, many times, and I don't carry hate around with me(except maybe for child molesters and those who just hurt children). Unlike you and Hollie and many others on here, who show your unhealthy hatred to anyone who professes to be a Christian.

Are you okay with child sacrificing? There's all sorts of people in the Bible willing to sacrifice their children.

Genocide? You know there had to be women, children, and even unborn children in the flood.

There are people in the world today who sacrifice their children, and they are in no way Christian, do these people get a pass? According to your way of thinking, Christians should give them a pass because we are not to judge, at least, that is what you think the Bible says.

Yes, men, women, children, unborn were all killed in the flood, I have no douts that the unborn and children were saved and have been in glory for thousands of year now, for they had no choice. Much like the world of today, people have choices, if you choose to drink and drive and run over someone you should be charged with murder and put away forever, but it was your choice, God did not force you to do it.

And genocide? It seems to me that Noah and his family survived that flood, thus, there was no genocide there.

So, when the gawds wiped humanity from the planet (excepting Noah and his immediate family), because they were a disappointment, we can ignore the "genocide" term?

Do we ignore the "incestuous relations" term when, as the fable goes, olny Noah and his immediate family were left to repopulate the planet?

I'm reminded of the term, "gives me the creeps".

Even if you believe in evolution, we all come from one single celled ameba.

Amoeba.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

In Luke, Jesus explains how Gawd treats people the way people treat their slaves, they beat some more than others.

So who's morality is superior, ours or Gawds? I'm going with door #1.

You Carla, don't even have enough morals to respect other people and use the word God.

I don't believe in Allah, but I respect those that do enough to capitalize the name, and speak to them with respect, same with all religions.

If you believe that you are morally greater than other people, then good for you, I just know I'm not.

 

[Carla_Danger]

In Luke, Jesus explains how Gawd treats people the way people treat their slaves, they beat some more than others.

So who's morality is superior, ours or Gawds? I'm going with door #1.

You Carla, don't even have enough morals to respect other people and use the word God.

I don't believe in Allah, but I respect those that do enough to capitalize the name, and speak to them with respect, same with all religions.

If you believe that you are morally greater than other people, then good for you, I just know I'm not.

Actually, the reason I'm now an atheist is because I took "Gawd" so seriously.

Why should I respect a religion that condones slavery and stoning people to death?

When push comes to shove, all you can do is pull out your victim card.

Heck, we haven't even covered family values yet.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

In Luke, Jesus explains how Gawd treats people the way people treat their slaves, they beat some more than others.

So who's morality is superior, ours or Gawds? I'm going with door #1.

You Carla, don't even have enough morals to respect other people and use the word God.

I don't believe in Allah, but I respect those that do enough to capitalize the name, and speak to them with respect, same with all religions.

If you believe that you are morally greater than other people, then good for you, I just know I'm not.

Actually, the reason I'm now an atheist is because I took "Gawd" so seriously.

Why should I respect a religion that condones slavery and stoning people to death?

When push comes to shove, all you can do is pull out your victim card.

Heck, we haven't even covered family values yet.

You don't have to respect the religion, just respect people, no matter what they believe. I don't care for people who claim to be Christian, running down other people who are not, but are in fact good people.

And I am far to blessed to be a victim, I live in the greatest country in the world, I married a woman far to good for me, I have 4 healthy kids, a good job, and I am relatively healthy. I don't mean to brag, but my life is good, and I give thanks to God for that.

 

[Carla_Danger]

This thread is kinda weird. Instead of just responding to the OP in my thread on this subject, Treeshepherd takes my quote to start his own thread, invites me over, then acts offended when I say the same thing on this thread, that I did on the thread I created. What were you thinking? LOL!

 

[Carla_Danger]

So I'm conflicted on how to handle a domestic issue, and the christian allowances for slavery are not making it clear how I should proceed.

Here's my conflict, from Leviticus 25:45-46 (Christians are aware, are they not, of the theft of Hebrew scripture used for the invention of christianity)
________________________________________
"Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession."
_______________________________________

Here's my problem. One of the 4 year neighborhood children of the heathens around me actually has converted to Judaism. Now, technically the child is still heathen, at least by blood. Can I buy this child anyway, or does the conversion override the bloodline issue? I suspect that a 4 year old isn't old enough to make such a decision regarding their status, so I can buy and enslave him anyway.

Can any good christian enlighten me on how the bibles resolve such a conflict?

Thanks

I am sorry you carry so much hate around with you.

I have read It, many time

I am sorry you carry so much hate around with you.

Maybe you should try reading that book you carry around.

I have read It, many times, and I don't carry hate around with me(except maybe for child molesters and those who just hurt children). Unlike you and Hollie and many others on here, who show your unhealthy hatred to anyone who professes to be a Christian.

Are you okay with child sacrificing? There's all sorts of people in the Bible willing to sacrifice their children.

Genocide? You know there had to be women, children, and even unborn children in the flood.

There are people in the world today who sacrifice their children, and they are in no way Christian, do these people get a pass? According to your way of thinking, Christians should give them a pass because we are not to judge, at least, that is what you think the Bible says.

Yes, men, women, children, unborn were all killed in the flood, I have no douts that the unborn and children were saved and have been in glory for thousands of year now, for they had no choice. Much like the world of today, people have choices, if you choose to drink and drive and run over someone you should be charged with murder and put away forever, but it was your choice, God did not force you to do it.

And genocide? It seems to me that Noah and his family survived that flood, thus, there was no genocide there.

So, when the gawds wiped humanity from the planet (excepting Noah and his immediate family), because they were a disappointment, we can ignore the "genocide" term?

Do we ignore the "incestuous relations" term when, as the fable goes, olny Noah and his immediate family were left to repopulate the planet?

I'm reminded of the term, "gives me the creeps".

I never heard that version in Sunday school.

 

[Treeshepherd]

This thread is kinda weird. Instead of just responding to the OP in my thread on this subject, Treeshepherd takes my quote to start his own thread, invites me over, then acts offended when I say the same thing on this thread, that I did on the thread I created. What were you thinking? LOL!

I have no interest in the subject matter of your thread. I used your quote for my thread as an example of tiny thinking. Saying, as you do, that Christianity condones slavery and stoning people to death does disservice to the faith of practically every abolitionist in Western history, and most historical opponents of capital punishment. Take that juvenile argument back to your thread and preach it to the choir. You aren't up to the task here, no offense.

I have no interest in theists or non-theists who insist on literal one-dimensional shallow unsophisticated interpretations of scripture. If theists want to quote Bible verses and tell people they're going to hell, I invite them to go to Carla's thread. For antagonistic atheists who equate all conceptualizations of metaphysics to a believe in the Tooth Fairy, I also recommend them to Carla's thread.

In this thread, if you want to mock religion, at least take on one of the great thinkers who represents that faith. I gave the Christian examples of MLK, Tolstoy, Hugo, Kant, Kierkegaard, etc..

Otherwise, the purpose of this thread is to provide the context that is so wanting in the arguments of SRBs (serial religion bashers).

 

[Treeshepherd]

The christian church addressed the questions: Where do we turn to restore order? Who is standing up for civilized society? with the Dark Ages, Witch Hunts, Inquisitions, suppression of science and knowledge and the maintenance of suffering and misery.

A bit simplistic? The Dark Ages were caused by the Church? I disagree. Most of the Inquisitions were administered by local political authorities.

Of political unity, early medieval Europe had little or none. Dynasties were short-lived. Kingdoms were in constant flux. Law and order, the two pillars of the Roman imperial system, lay in ruins. Men paid a stiff price for what security they could find. The Church hardly thrust itself upon the people. It filled a gaping chasm.

European monks developed systems of organized harmonious communal life, which became models in some ways for Feudal Europe. They developed agricultural techniques. Their libraries contained manuscripts which survived the havoc. They copied and thereby preserved the works of Ovid, Vergil, Cicero, Seneca, etc.. The sick and the starving were attended to in monastery hospitals. And they transmitted these useful arts to the people of the surrounding countryside.

Christian atrocities that you love to invoke are sometimes valid. What you can’t abide is that the medieval Church was more often a sanctuary for the afflicted and those who were persecuted by political authorities. The Church instituted a day of rest from toil on Sundays, and many holidays. They instituted the only rights that peasants had.

More importantly, from an existential standpoint, Christianity was the one thing that far flung villages in Europe shared in common.

When the Muslim Saracens came to invade France in 732, most of the Franks were on foot and all of the Arabs were on horseback. The Arabs used a strange new device, stirrups, which allowed them to fight while mounted. The Christianized Franks stood solid, “as a wall” as one chronicler put it. Europe stood together, also against Saracen invasions of Italy. The leader of the Christianized Franks was Charles Martel, and his grandson would be Charlemagne, the face of the Carolingian Renaissance which would become the foundation of another higher echelon of civilization.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I'll go first. This example is pretty obvious. SLAVERY--Gawd approves of slavery, but men condemn slavery. We even fought a war over it because it's repulsive.

When people claim they get their morals from reading the Bible, I'm thinking REALLY? How so? I mean, we are way ahead concerning ethics and morality...way ahead.

Okay, your turn.

The book of Exodus is fundamentally about liberation from slavery, and certainly was an inspiration for every historical abolitionist movement of Western Civilization. After being an entrenched 10,000 year old human economic system, slavery was first eradicated in Bible literate countries. It took a very long time for other cultures to catch up.

For once on the internet, I'd like to see religion bashers step their game up. Carla Danger, Agit8er, Sealy, Luddy, Holly, D4E et al., I'd like for once that any of you should advance beyond a 1st level unrefined newbie level in your critique of religion. You string up televangelists and white supremacists like pinatas and then whack at them without a blindfold. Yeah, we get it... people are gullible.

Go after the philosophy of the European and American abolitionist movements, which were principally Christian. Take on the pacifist philosophy of Leo Tolstoy. Ridicule the Christianity of MLK, whose doctorates were after all not in astrophysics. Attack Immanuel Kant. Thomas Merton. The great American Quaker William Penn, tear him a new one. Kierkegaard. JRR Tolkien.

Fact is, you have no clue what the history of Christianity or any other religion is unless you've genuinely submersed yourself in the great writers who represent those religions. You are inspired by themes and sentiments in modern culture, and you have no clue that they spring from the very root you strike at.

Please quote the bible verses where Jesus condemns slavery and tells Christians to free all of the slaves.

I'll mail you a 10 dollar bill, if you can show me anywhere, in the Bible, that Jesus used the term, Christian.

Non sequitur.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I'll go first. This example is pretty obvious. SLAVERY--Gawd approves of slavery, but men condemn slavery. We even fought a war over it because it's repulsive.

When people claim they get their morals from reading the Bible, I'm thinking REALLY? How so? I mean, we are way ahead concerning ethics and morality...way ahead.

Okay, your turn.

The book of Exodus is fundamentally about liberation from slavery, and certainly was an inspiration for every historical abolitionist movement of Western Civilization. After being an entrenched 10,000 year old human economic system, slavery was first eradicated in Bible literate countries. It took a very long time for other cultures to catch up.

For once on the internet, I'd like to see religion bashers step their game up. Carla Danger, Agit8er, Sealy, Luddy, Holly, D4E et al., I'd like for once that any of you should advance beyond a 1st level unrefined newbie level in your critique of religion. You string up televangelists and white supremacists like pinatas and then whack at them without a blindfold. Yeah, we get it... people are gullible.

Go after the philosophy of the European and American abolitionist movements, which were principally Christian. Take on the pacifist philosophy of Leo Tolstoy. Ridicule the Christianity of MLK, whose doctorates were after all not in astrophysics. Attack Immanuel Kant. Thomas Merton. The great American Quaker William Penn, tear him a new one. Kierkegaard. JRR Tolkien.

Fact is, you have no clue what the history of Christianity or any other religion is unless you've genuinely submersed yourself in the great writers who represent those religions. You are inspired by themes and sentiments in modern culture, and you have no clue that they spring from the very root you strike at.

Please quote the bible verses where Jesus condemns slavery and tells Christians to free all of the slaves.

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hathanointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preachdeliveranceto the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, Luke 4:18

Only problem I have with that is that those are not the words of Jesus. He was reading the words of the prophet Isiah in the synagogue and was subsequently rejected by his own people for claiming to be the son of God. They wanted to kill him for blaspheming.

So while I appreciate the effort it doesn't reach the bar of Jesus condemning slavery and setting anyone free.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Empire had been rotting from the inside due to moral decay since the days of Caligula and Nero.

And yet Rome managed to happily survive a couple more centuries after those two.

In fact the rot only really set in after it adopted Christianity as the state religion.

Coincidence?

How many Christian empires have collapsed?

 

[Derideo_Te]

I was stating that those Christians are suffering, and again you deflect, you are a good liberal.

There are plenty of good liberal Christians just in case you didn't know.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You don't have to respect the religion, just respect people, no matter what they believe. I don't care for people who claim to be Christian, running down other people who are not, but are in fact good people.

And yet here you are running down people who don't believe as you do.

Did you just dis yourself?

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Dark Ages were caused by the Church? I disagree. Most of the Inquisitions were administered by local political authorities.

The Dark Ages started in the 5th Century. The Inquisition only began in the 12th Century and it was based upon the central authority of the Christian Church to punish those accused of heresy.

The Christian Church was responsible for upholding the divine right of kings to have absolute power over their subjects. That feudal society ensured that education and enlightenment was deliberately withheld from ordinary people for many centuries. The Christian Church was one of the primary tools used to oppress people and deny them the freedom that we enjoy today.

The Founding Fathers made the very deliberate decision to separate the Church from the state so that situation could not happen again. They also instituted public libraries and encouraged education so that people could learn how to govern themselves instead of having to rely upon religious superstitions.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

I'll go first. This example is pretty obvious. SLAVERY--Gawd approves of slavery, but men condemn slavery. We even fought a war over it because it's repulsive.

When people claim they get their morals from reading the Bible, I'm thinking REALLY? How so? I mean, we are way ahead concerning ethics and morality...way ahead.

Okay, your turn.

The book of Exodus is fundamentally about liberation from slavery, and certainly was an inspiration for every historical abolitionist movement of Western Civilization. After being an entrenched 10,000 year old human economic system, slavery was first eradicated in Bible literate countries. It took a very long time for other cultures to catch up.

For once on the internet, I'd like to see religion bashers step their game up. Carla Danger, Agit8er, Sealy, Luddy, Holly, D4E et al., I'd like for once that any of you should advance beyond a 1st level unrefined newbie level in your critique of religion. You string up televangelists and white supremacists like pinatas and then whack at them without a blindfold. Yeah, we get it... people are gullible.

Go after the philosophy of the European and American abolitionist movements, which were principally Christian. Take on the pacifist philosophy of Leo Tolstoy. Ridicule the Christianity of MLK, whose doctorates were after all not in astrophysics. Attack Immanuel Kant. Thomas Merton. The great American Quaker William Penn, tear him a new one. Kierkegaard. JRR Tolkien.

Fact is, you have no clue what the history of Christianity or any other religion is unless you've genuinely submersed yourself in the great writers who represent those religions. You are inspired by themes and sentiments in modern culture, and you have no clue that they spring from the very root you strike at.

Please quote the bible verses where Jesus condemns slavery and tells Christians to free all of the slaves.

I'll mail you a 10 dollar bill, if you can show me anywhere, in the Bible, that Jesus used the term, Christian.

Non sequitur.

So I get to keep my 10 dollars?

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

You don't have to respect the religion, just respect people, no matter what they believe. I don't care for people who claim to be Christian, running down other people who are not, but are in fact good people.

And yet here you are running down people who don't believe as you do.

Did you just dis yourself?

there is a big difference in running/putting down people, and disagreeing with people. Name calling, baiting, insults, are just not necessary to try and make your point of what you believe.

 

[OZman]

I'll mail you a 10 dollar bill, if you can show me anywhere, in the Bible, that Jesus used the term, Christian.

If Jesus did use a term it would be Chrestian not Christian.

 

[hobelim]

Please quote the bible verses where Jesus condemns slavery and tells Christians to free all of the slaves.

and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." They answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, 'You will become free '?" Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.…

"They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity--for "people are slaves to whatever has mastered them."

 

[Carla_Danger]

I'll go first. This example is pretty obvious. SLAVERY--Gawd approves of slavery, but men condemn slavery. We even fought a war over it because it's repulsive.

When people claim they get their morals from reading the Bible, I'm thinking REALLY? How so? I mean, we are way ahead concerning ethics and morality...way ahead.

Okay, your turn.

The book of Exodus is fundamentally about liberation from slavery, and certainly was an inspiration for every historical abolitionist movement of Western Civilization. After being an entrenched 10,000 year old human economic system, slavery was first eradicated in Bible literate countries. It took a very long time for other cultures to catch up.

For once on the internet, I'd like to see religion bashers step their game up. Carla Danger, Agit8er, Sealy, Luddy, Holly, D4E et al., I'd like for once that any of you should advance beyond a 1st level unrefined newbie level in your critique of religion. You string up televangelists and white supremacists like pinatas and then whack at them without a blindfold. Yeah, we get it... people are gullible.

Go after the philosophy of the European and American abolitionist movements, which were principally Christian. Take on the pacifist philosophy of Leo Tolstoy. Ridicule the Christianity of MLK, whose doctorates were after all not in astrophysics. Attack Immanuel Kant. Thomas Merton. The great American Quaker William Penn, tear him a new one. Kierkegaard. JRR Tolkien.

Fact is, you have no clue what the history of Christianity or any other religion is unless you've genuinely submersed yourself in the great writers who represent those religions. You are inspired by themes and sentiments in modern culture, and you have no clue that they spring from the very root you strike at.

Those early abolitionists evolved their own morality, which is far superior to the weird, wishy-washy laws in the Bible. In Exodus, chapters 19-24, Moses presents all of the Laws to all the people at Mt. Sinai as Gawd has commanded.

In Exodus 21 Gawd goes over the rules of purchasing Hebrew slaves and how long you can own one. Then he goes over the rules for selling your daughter.

Your defense of slavery is that everyone was doing it back then. That's laughable, considering Gawd is supposed to be perfect. And the reason you keep pointing us away from scripture (MLK, Merton, Penn) is because the scripture cannot stand on its own merit.