1. Jesus said to give to the poor. 2. Jesus ACCEPTED slavery in multiple verses in the NT, and never spoke out against slavery (which is highly approved of in the Bible, and one of the worst moral crimes in history – and Jesus claimed to be a moral teacher). More Americans died in the Civil War than any other war, and The Bible's acceptance of slavery was used to justify slavery (and therefore the war), yet the "all-powerful" Jesus chose to never appear to them to clarify his position (hopefully in opposition to slavery....if he did indeed oppose slavery?) Modern Secular Humanism is the world's most moral belief system, and applauds Jesus for #1, and condemns Jesus for #2. So my moral question for you is: can you also applaud Jesus here for #1, and condemn him now for #2 (accepting slavery)? I realize this is very very easy for a moral person to do, so just humor me. ----------------------------- SOURCES: Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn't know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT) evilbible/com/Slavery.htm
I would like to help, but when it comes to morals Jesus never enters the equation. No more so than Darth Vader, or Avalokitisvara, or Tinkerbell, or Satan
dairyair, so true! dairyair, from now on I will refer to you by your new Sith name of "dairyair the wise"! (My master, Darth Gorn Captain, will approve of this action - which pleases me.) The Qur'an refers to it's followers as "slaves of Allah", in many places! Yes, religion is about slavery. Modern Secular Humanism is CLEARLY about FREEDOM, however. My old username was "SlaveSeeker", but then I left religion so I had to change my username.... - - - Updated - - - True. Santa, Mother Goose, Allah, Jesus, etc.....maybe it just doesn't MATTER where they are morally since they don't really exist. Good point.
Kunta Kinte was a PHYSICAL slave, and today's religionists are MENTAL slaves. - - - Updated - - - Valid point. Jainism, probably, for one. gabriel1, do you applaud Jesus for #1 and condemn him for #2? I honestly don't know.
which is not to say that the two can't happily coexist. I know a few highly moral individuals who subscribe to superstitions however I know more highly moral buddhists than highly moral xtians. the problem with your xtians is that they often confuse conservatism with morality - or simply don't understand the difference. so you get clean living, goody-two-shoes godbotherers who get thingy if someone says the word 'prostitute', but who think nothing of cheating the tax man by 'hiding' money, or owning guns, or gambling. or being obsessed with profit, status, or power. you see my problem?
I don't judge one way or the other. if he kept slaves, im sure karma took care of it. if not, no big deal. he was just an unemployed carpenter living in a slave owning society. I wouldn't condemn him for going with the flow.
This is the problem with the world today, no one (except modern Secular Humanists) are willing to take a moral stand. COME ON, IT'S SLAVERY, AND HE CLAIMS TO BE THE MOST MORAL PERSON EVER (the "son of god", even)! If you can't condemn acceptance of slavery then you can't really condemn pedophilia, or theft, or whatever. Seriously, just re-read what you wrote. So it's ok if your neighbor robs your house tonight, because you are too morally unsure as to condemn him, apparently. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
exactly. and he didn't participate in slavery so there is nothing to condemn him for. I don't accept that he was the most moral person on earth and certainly not capable of seeing that someday society would see slavery differently. he was just an ordinary guy. I don't condemn ordinary guys for not condemning what they don't see as wrong.
Interestingly enough the original Hebrew definition also means servant. If you're being honest what do you think Jesus was talking about, serving him or being a slave to him?
I'm glad we agree that Jesus was not divine, not listening to people's "prayers", and just a regular guy.
"your earthly masters" would likely mean slave owners. If jesus was moral he'd have said three little words that would now be famous throughout the world: "No slavery, period." He's not smart enough to say that, but a 10 year old in his shoes WOULD be, so he's likely not divine. Just a con artist. He's "listening to people's prayers today, and altering the real world to facilitate those prayers, but is too immoral to simply tell us no to slavery - which continues to this very day in some parts of the world." Clearly a made-up deity. On another note, here's how easy it is to, somewhat "convincingly" (if one was a stone-age barbarian in biblical times), show to that Jesus magically walked on water: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLSIHYbedII Jesus didn't really walk on water, unless you believe that THIS Jesus did, too.
This Bible search shows slavery mentioned around 470 times, so Jesus clearly (clearly!) was surrounded by slavery, yet never spoke out against it specifically. My Downs Syndrome inflicted 10 year old niece is smarter than jesus because she, if she claimed to be a moral teacher (like Jesus certainly did) would condemn slavery in the harshest terms, and would have been known as the "Abe Lincoln of the 1st century", which Jesus would be known for if he was moral enough to speak out against slavery. He was more concerned about his hatred of people (sending them to hell and eternal torture) than freeing innocent people by ending slavery. The bible mentions, and never condemns, one of the worst acts in human history probably MORE than any other book in world history that's not a book that specifically ABOUT slavery. The Qur'an might be #2 on that list of shame. Jesus would also have harshly condemned "god" for killing every thing during the "flood" (because GOD MADE A MISTAKE, NO LESS!), if jesus was moral, because "god" committed the biggest moral crime in history (the Bible approves of the most immoral acts in world history - so its clearly not "divine"). But he didn't, so he's not.
The OP has been up 4 days and counting, and not one Christian can condemn acceptance of slavery, apparently. Incredible. I thought this would be so easy that I'd be mocked like "FreedomSeeker, do you want us to condemn the Holocaust too, jerk!" But Christianity is so immoral that it's followers can't even answer an obvious question. Clearly this shows how morally bankrupt, fanatical, and insane religions (well, at least the #1 religion of all time) are. It also shows how far far better modern Secular Humanism is than religions ("gosh, should we condemn Richard Dawkins if he accepts slavery(?)...gee, I can't answer that question....") Religionists, you are hereby put on alert that your great-grandchildren will NOT follow your religion, most likely, as religions will largely be "Zeused" by the end of this century (that is, Jesus/Allah, etc. will, then, be about as believed as Zeus is today.) Your religions will fall. Modern Secular Humanism is beginning it's inevitable rise. Sorry to break this to you, but it's true.
