Slavery and religion

[Jake]

Seeing the discussion on slavery in the open forum, and the proper disgust for such a practice expressed by everyone, the ways religion deals with slavery came to mind. Most people are religious, most Americans are christians, and it seems they are blissfully unaware of how their "holy" books deal with slavery or simply choose to pretend it isn't there.

Let's start with the koran:

33:50 - "Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty."

By no means is that the only place where slavery is discussed as a practice condoned by their god, but they do say you cannot force your slaves into prostitution. Thank god for that, I suppose.

How about the bible?

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)

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)

Well, isn't that special. One would think that "God" would be a bit more enlightened on such topics.

So how do religious people rationalize such flaws in their perfect, all-knowing gods? Frankly, some do not as slavery continues to this day in parts of the world (often at the hand of islam). To be fair, their god says it is okay.

But the religious people who do reject slavery, as they should, are contradicting their own holy book, presumably the words of their god. It seems to be a convenient rationalization to accept the parts of the bible/koran they like while ignoring the parts they find distasteful, rather than consider that maybe their god is not perfect or perhaps even non existent.

So, is slavery okay? God says yes, I say no. What say you?

 

[PlanetFrnd]

Well, isn't that special. One would think that "God" would be a bit more enlightened on such topics.

God was long cotton for the better part of the 18th and 19th centuries, duh

 

[Gatorubet]

Most people are religious, most Americans are christians, and it seems they are blissfully unaware of how their "holy" books deal with slavery or simply choose to pretend it isn't there.

Or, Door Number three Jake. But you would not know that, having almost no awareness of the concept of spirituality, and how spiritual people live their lives. Since you have continually stated how only fools and hypocrites have anything to do with religion, and as your initial post confirms your view for the umpteenth time, why are you bothering everyone by starting a discussion topic that YOU have no interest in discussing?

Can't we just all agree that "Jake says anyone who finds value in the Bible is an idiot" and move on?

 

[Jake]

Or, Door Number three Jake. But you would not know that, having almost no awareness of the concept of spirituality, and how spiritual people live their lives. Since you have continually stated how only fools and hypocrites have anything to do with religion, and as your initial post confirms your view for the umpteenth time, why are you bothering everyone by starting a discussion topic that YOU have no interest in discussing?

Can't we just all agree that "Jake says anyone who finds value in the Bible is an idiot" and move on?

I started the thread, and your response was to go after me rather than put forth an answer to the question. It's not me who has no interest in the topic my friend, it is you, and for obvious reasons.

Once again, you have proven it is far easier to attack the questioner and build straw men than it is to actually answer questions that draw attention to the clear contradictions of the bible. Unfortunately, that response is all too typical of christians who - amazingly - demand respect for their religion then go apeshit when anyone dares to question the basis for it.

As for "spirituality", if you can demonstrate it is anything more than the figment of one's imagination, go for it. It has nothing to do, however, with the premise of this thread and the positions of so called "holy books" on slavery. It's a different subject altogether.

I fully expect your next response, if one is forthcoming, to be as valuable as the initial one. What you seem to miss, however, is that every time you (or anyone else) responds to me in that manner you simply make my point for me re: christianity and the people who practice it. By all means, have at it.

 

[AKAK]

I started the thread, and your response was to go after me rather than put forth an answer to the question. It's not me who has no interest in the topic my friend, it is you, and for obvious reasons.

Once again, you have proven it is far easier to attack the questioner and build straw men than it is to actually answer questions that draw attention to the clear contradictions of the bible. Unfortunately, that response is all too typical of christians who - amazingly - demand respect for their religion then go apeshit when anyone dares to question the basis for it.

As for "spirituality", if you can demonstrate it is anything more than the figment of one's imagination, go for it. It has nothing to do, however, with the premise of this thread and the positions of so called "holy books" on slavery. It's a different subject altogether.

I fully expect your next response, if one is forthcoming, to be as valuable as the initial one. What you seem to miss, however, is that every time you (or anyone else) responds to me in that manner you simply make my point for me re: christianity and the people who practice it. By all means, have at it.

Jake, the whole thread is trolling...

If you want to go buy a slave without the Bible's rubber stamp of approval, I'm not going to try to stop you. We both know you don't need it.

 

[Bleed S & G]

Seeing the discussion on slavery in the open forum, and the proper disgust for such a practice expressed by everyone, the ways religion deals with slavery came to mind. Most people are religious, most Americans are christians, and it seems they are blissfully unaware of how their "holy" books deal with slavery or simply choose to pretend it isn't there.

Let's start with the koran:

33:50 - "Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty."

By no means is that the only place where slavery is discussed as a practice condoned by their god, but they do say you cannot force your slaves into prostitution. Thank god for that, I suppose.

How about the bible?

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)

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)

Well, isn't that special. One would think that "God" would be a bit more enlightened on such topics.

So how do religious people rationalize such flaws in their perfect, all-knowing gods? Frankly, some do not as slavery continues to this day in parts of the world (often at the hand of islam). To be fair, their god says it is okay.

But the religious people who do reject slavery, as they should, are contradicting their own holy book, presumably the words of their god. It seems to be a convenient rationalization to accept the parts of the bible/koran they like while ignoring the parts they find distasteful, rather than consider that maybe their god is not perfect or perhaps even non existent.

So, is slavery okay? God says yes, I say no. What say you?

Ugh.

You could have picked tons and tons of other examples.. such as ritual human burnings, rape and pillage, evil and jealous god, mass murders, and the claim in the OT that god is the reason for natural disasters.

Raised in the Holy Roman church (went to catholic schools from grades 1-11) no one denies these things are in the bible. If the OT were made into a movie, it would be rated X.

I have a theory on this.. but it will require quite some time to put it all together, which I've planned on doing for a while now but haven't had the free time.

Here's my point: I, too, am a non-believer. I don't subscribe to the god of the OT, nor do I subscribe to the virgin birth of Jesus. However, some of the BEST things, PEACE loving things, and GREAT LESSONS are also contained in the scriptures of the OT & NT.

Why you feel the need to rub the believers nose in it, I don't quite get. For me, the bottom line is: Treat others how you want to be treated. If some people are better for believing in the things they do, good for them. If they find comfort in scriptures, or security in believing in Jesus Christ or Yahweh/Allah/God - then good for them. So long as they're good people, who the hell cares?

If they want your opinion on their (and here is the keyword) FAITH, they'll ask you for it. All you do by shoving their nose in these things is you get them to dig their heels into the sand further, and convince them even more that they're right, and you're wrong.

These threads aren't conducive for discussion, in my IMO of course.

FWIW I suppose.

 

[Gatorubet]

I started the thread, and your response was to go after me rather than put forth an answer to the question. It's not me who has no interest in the topic my friend, it is you, and for obvious reasons.

Once again, you have proven it is far easier to attack the questioner and build straw men than it is to actually answer questions that draw attention to the clear contradictions of the bible. Unfortunately, that response is all too typical of christians who - amazingly - demand respect for their religion then go ape[Mark May] when anyone dares to question the basis for it.

As for "spirituality", if you can demonstrate it is anything more than the figment of one's imagination, go for it. It has nothing to do, however, with the premise of this thread and the positions of so called "holy books" on slavery. It's a different subject altogether.

I fully expect your next response, if one is forthcoming, to be as valuable as the initial one. What you seem to miss, however, is that every time you (or anyone else) responds to me in that manner you simply make my point for me re: christianity and the people who practice it. By all means, have at it.

You seem to ignore the entire notion of spirituality. The fact that it is common to all humans throughout all parts of the world, and has existed for a hundred thousand years, seems - to me - to indicate that it is an essential component to the human experience.

You seem to think that a core human trait can be dismissed by referencing your issues with a fundamentalist Christian belief system. I think you are missing the forest for the trees - and doing so in an insulting fashion. So we agree to disagree. I find it rather ironic that you take my comment as an "attack" - given your prose - but maybe that's just me.

 

[Jake]

Jake, the whole thread is trolling...

The bible does not denounce slavery and even has rules for how to treat slaves. How do christians reconcile their faith with such beliefs? It is a simple question, and the answer is uncomfortable for christians. It is uncomfortable because there isn't a good way to rationalize the bible being the "word of god" with shit like how to treat your slaves.

It isn't "trolling" to ask a simple question about the bible, just because some people don't like the answer getting in the way of the happy face they put on it.

"Trolling" is attacking someone for asking a question you don't like, attaching straw men to them, or changing the subject. So far, that covers every response I've seen, including yours.

 

[Gatorubet]

:popcorn:

 

[AKAK]

The bible does not denounce slavery and even has rules for how to treat slaves. How do christians reconcile their faith with such beliefs? It is a simple question, and the answer is uncomfortable for christians. It is uncomfortable because there isn't a good way to rationalize the bible being the "word of god" with shit like how to treat your slaves.

It isn't "trolling" to ask a simple question about the bible, just because some people don't like the answer getting in the way of the happy face they put on it.

"Trolling" is attacking someone for asking a question you don't like, attaching straw men to them, or changing the subject. So far, that covers every response I've seen, including yours.

You're not asking a simple question. You're being a troll. I disagree with your characteriztion of trolling. Fortunately for me, in this case, it's my opinion that matters.

Want to continue?

 

[Jake]

You seem to ignore the entire notion of spirituality. The fact that it is common to all humans throughout all parts of the world, and has existed for a hundred thousand years, seems - to me - to indicate that it is an essential component to the human experience.

Apparently, you're unaware of the argumentum ad populum fallacy or have simply chosen to ignore it. I'm sure it is the latter because it suits your purpose in this case.

Humans are capable of imagining all sorts of things, which is why the list of all gods ever worshiped by Man goes into the thousands. Does that mean they were ever real? After all, at some point in time they were (and in some cases are) quite popular in parts of the world? Obviously, the answer is no because popularity isn't proof of anything.

You seem to think that a core human trait can be dismissed by referencing your issues with a fundamentalist Christian belief system. I think you are missing the forest for the trees - and doing so in an insulting fashion. So we agree to disagree. I find it rather ironic that you take my comment as an "attack" - given your prose - but maybe that's just me.

Spirituality isn't a "core human trait" any more than believing in Santa Claus is a "core human trait", no matter its popularity. As I said earlier, it is an entirely different subject from the fundamentalist christian belief system, which is the basis of my initial question.

While I appreciate the politeness of this reply, once again you have completely ignored that question. Changing the subject won't make it go away. I have my answer to that question and I'm giving christians a chance to provide a different one that makes sense. Obviously, if you had such an answer you would've already posted it instead of changing the subject to spirituality.

Thanks again.

 

[Jake]

You're not asking a simple question. You're being a troll.

I would've asked my question in this thread;

http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/...0-slavery-part-georgia-schools-math-test.html

I have been informed in the past that religious questions are not to be asked there, so I started a new thread in this forum where numerous religious threads exist.

 

[Jake]

Ugh.

You could have picked tons and tons of other examples...

I "picked" this question because I wanted to ask it in this thread:

http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/...0-slavery-part-georgia-schools-math-test.html

But that thread is in a forum not meant for religious questions.

 

[Brewtus]

You seem to ignore the entire notion of spirituality. The fact that it is common to all humans throughout all parts of the world, and has existed for a hundred thousand years, seems - to me - to indicate that it is an essential component to the human experience.

What exactly is "spirituality"? I've never understood the meaning of that word and find it to be such a vague and ambiguous term that it really doesn't describe anything at all. It seems to be used by people who don't follow the mainstream doctrines of the major religions, but also don't consider themselves atheist. It's as if they believe in something, but they're not sure exactly what and have even less support or guidance for their beliefs since they don't have any divinely inspired doctrine to turn to.

I used the term myself years ago, when I no longer considered myself Christian but also wasn't willing to call myself atheist either. It was a transitional description that I used but looking back it really didn't have any meaning to me. I'm not saying that everyone who claims to be "spiritual" is only in a transitional period from believing in god to becoming atheist, but I also don't think that it's a useful term as it doesn't clarify or explain anything.

 

[AKAK]

I would've asked my question in this thread but I have been informed in the past that religious questions are not to be asked there, so I started a new thread in this forum where numerous religious threads exist.

http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/...0-slavery-part-georgia-schools-math-test.html

That thread is what prompted it.

Jake. If you seriously think I believe for one moment that your intention here isn't to inflame people who hold beliefs that you find hypocritical, I find that personally insulting.

What's your favorite smiley?

It's enough.