|
Disinterested posted:The abolitionist movement in Britain was led by evangelicals. Evangelicals at that time were also more likely to be political radicals; their influence was strongly responsible for the institution of free trade in Britain, as well. If you don't know that, you probably read a history book outside of bible class Ftfy I suggest you Google the names Locke, or Rousseau, or Montesquieu
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:22 |
|
|
Miltank posted:It is EXTREMELY telling that atheists think that the important aspect of abolition was just thinking it up. It took action and conviction of believe more than anything else. Yeah, it's a lot of effort to convince people that the teachings of the religion that they believe they have to follow or else they'll burn for eternity are actually wrong. But Christianity adapts, and eventually we have people like you who refuse to believe that the religion officially sanctioned slavery at the deepest level for the vast majority of its existence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:01
|
|
Kaal posted:Ftfy Ah yes, the troll reveals himself.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Starving Autist posted:Yeah, it's a lot of effort to convince people that the teachings of the religion that they believe they have to follow or else they'll burn for eternity are actually wrong. But Christianity adapts, and eventually we have people like you who refuse to believe that the religion officially sanctioned slavery at the deepest level for the vast majority of its existence. Hmmmm nope.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Miltank posted:It is EXTREMELY telling that atheists think that the important aspect of abolition was just thinking it up. It took action and conviction of believe more than anything else. Yes it is extremely telling. I mean obviously atheists are incapable of action with conviction since they are immoral bei ... oh wait French deists and agnostics abolished slavery with the advent of the First Republic, before the Second Awakening even happened in America. I think that your trolling is beginning to pale a bit, what's next, maybe some discussion about whether or not atheists eat the hearts of good Chrisian babies?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Lol you are such a troll of this thread. Thats horseshit, many in the enlightenment engaged in pre adamism and were quite willing to say that blacks, aboriginals, and semites were not equal to Europeans. Also Lol Locke? That guy was a Christian.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Thats horseshit, many in the enlightenment engaged in pre adamism and were quite willing to say that blacks, aboriginals, and semites were not equal to Europeans. That has more roots in white supremacism white was ironically also religiously motivated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Hmmmm nope. If Christianity is really responsibly for ending slavery, why did it only take 1850 years? Wouldn't it have done something earlier if the scripture was actually anti-slavery? Abolitionism has no origin in Christianity, it was merely assimilated by apologists like you who are afraid of death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
In 50 years when the universal consensus is that homophobia is morally wrong, and Christians don't even bother to preach against gays, Miltank's going to be arguing that Christianity is like, the original pro-gay philosophy. That's the level of historical revisionism he's engaging in here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Ah yes the First Republic, a shining example of Atheist society.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
I keep reading Starving Autist's handle as Starving Atheist. At first I thought it was a mistake, and now I think it's because of the convergence of those two things ITT.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:That has more roots in white supremacism white was ironically also religiously motivated. White supremacy arose as a justification for colonialism and slavery because Christians didn't want to admit that the people they were mistreating were proper humans and brothers in Christ. It was given religious trappings by aristocrats and plantation owners sure, but the Church rejected it right from the gate. One of the arguments the Spanish advanced for slavery was that the natives didn't have souls, to which the Pope, just 40 years after the discovery of America said "nope, that's dumb as poo poo, they have souls and if you enslave them you're doing the devil's work".
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Look I know you're an anti theist and everything that christianity or any religion has ever done is evil. But lets just look at the songs ofr abolitionists and their writings. I am actually not an anti-theist, shocking I know. But I'm also well aware there was more motivation behind the abolition movement then sudden appeals to religious ideals that previously were used to uphold slavery.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:That has more roots in white supremacism white was ironically also religiously motivated. Yes and the enlightenment for all its many goods also was certainly a major influence on the development of white supremacy. Starving Autist posted:If Christianity is really responsibly for ending slavery, why did it only take 1850 years? Wouldn't it have done something earlier if the scripture was actually anti-slavery? Abolitionism has no origin in Christianity, it was merely assimilated by apologists like you who are afraid of death. CommieGIR posted:I am actually not an anti-theist, shocking I know. But I'm also well aware there was more motivation behind the abolition movement then sudden appeals to religious ideals that previously were used to uphold slavery. If the shoe fits.... Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Feb 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Yes and the enlightenment for all its many goods also was certainly a major influence on the development of white supremacy. Much like pro-Slavery Christians were a product of their time. You could even argue that the Christian Abolitionist movement was simply a product of its time, as Christianity was seen as the law and order of the land, what better way to promote ending slavery than appeals to the majority religion? Once again, I am not anti-thiest. However, the arguments that people like Kyrie, Miltank, and CoC promote are literally No True Scotsman hogwash that attempts to 'cleanse' their personal faith by arguing those who were also overwhelmingly Christian that did BAD things were obviously just not Christian enough, which is a laughable hand wave. Crowsbeak posted:If the shoe fits.... So, unless I am repeating the standard phrase of people like Miltank and arguing for No True Christians, I'm anti-theist. Got it. Can't wait for Miltank to make appeals to how Pol Pot and Stalin where Atheists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I am actually not an anti-theist, shocking I know. But I'm also well aware there was more motivation behind the abolition movement then sudden appeals to religious ideals that previously were used to uphold slavery. You mean the pro-slavery religious ideals that the Pope had denounced as deceptions by the greedy and violent three centuries before abolitionists "suddenly" started agreeing? How can you credit the enlightenment with anti-slavery thought when it started a good 200 years after the Catholic Church had already come down unequivocally against slavery?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:It doesn't really make sense to claim that you know Jesus' true opinion on slavery just because he didn't mention it. Sure maybe he didn't care or he forgot to mention it, or maybe he consciously avoided saying anything that could be interpreted as treason against Rome (as the Pharisees were constantly trying to trick him into doing so he could be arrested) and instead said subversive things about how you should treat every human being the same way you would treat Him if He came to your house. I wouldn't say I know Jesus' true opinion, but it's a fact that slavery was a normal practice in his time. And despite the indisputable fact that his teachings were used by the abolitionist movement and Christians were the driving force behind ending slavery in America, to say that it clearly condemns slavery isn't the least bit accurate. Jesus' teachings were also undeniably used to make pro-slavery arguments as well, and even though I don't agree with them they wouldn't have been able to do that if he had ever outright said, "don't own people for any reason". And since getting caught and crucified was supposedly part of the plan there's no excuse for Jesus not to start explicitly saying so when he decided the time was right. The fact that he never does probably means that he likely didn't have much of a problem with it, just like the vast majority of his peers didn't, and that's not an outrageous claim to make. It also doesn't change how we can apply his teachings today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Once again, I am not anti-thiest. However, the arguments that people like Kyrie, Miltank, and CoC promote are literally No True Scotsman hogwash that attempts to 'cleanse' their personal faith by arguing those who were also overwhelmingly Christian that did BAD things were obviously just not Christian enough, which is a laughable hand wave. That's how they actually think, though. There's no reasoning with them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Slavery argument is stupid as gently caress. Everyone kept slaves, does not matter what religion was predominant. Bad things happen because humans are poo poo, regardless of faith or the lack thereof. Jesus matters because he is responsible for the last two millennia of Western thought, and all the good and bad that comes with it. Gas thread, ban OP for this worthless poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Christianity was not the first religion or philosophy to influence the abolition of slavery in a society. It's nice that it came to the table eventually though, after however many centuries.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Slavery argument is stupid as gently caress. Everyone kept slaves, does not matter what religion was predominant. An eloquent response. Well done. Sinnlos posted:Jesus matters because he is responsible for the last two millennia of Western thought, and all the good and bad that comes with it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, the adoption of Platonism into Christianity has nothing to do with it. Man, I want some of what you are smoking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Jesus matters because he is responsible for the last two millennia of Western thought, and all the good and bad that comes with it. Lol what the gently caress is this? "Jesus, the great philosopher! He who was responsible for everything and for all time, despite never writing down a single word".
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:An eloquent response. Well done. I am only putting in the effort this thread deserves. Christianity, being a religion based partly upon the philosophy and teaching of Jesus, has had a significant impact on world history. Yes or no?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
No, hey I could care less if you bring up the crusades, those were idiotic uses of religion that can be used because some poo poo stains think that Christians have to own Jerusalem. But to deny when Christians were the main motivator for good, because that somehow goes against you're religious people never do nay good narrative , shows that you really do have a problem with Christians. CommieGIR posted:An eloquent response. Well done. Yep thanks for proving my point anti theist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Christianity, being a religion based partly upon the philosophy and teaching of Jesus, has had a significant impact on world history. Yes or no? The difference between having an impact on world history and Sinnlos posted:Jesus matters because he is responsible for the last two millennia of Western thought, and all the good and bad that comes with it. Is that plenty of history did not involve him at all. Just because someone used their religion as a rallying cry or a call to arms does not make Jesus the motivator. By that same token, you could arguing that Hitler had a significant impact on World History and the Western world. Guess we better give him his due. Crowsbeak posted:No, hey I could care less if you bring up the crusades, those were idiotic uses of religion that can be used because some poo poo stains think that Christians have to own Jerusalem. But to deny when Christians were the main motivator for good, because that somehow goes against you're religious people never do nay good narrative , shows that you really do have a problem with Christians. So, you dislike the No True Scotsman not because it ISN'T a logical fallacy, but because you want to be able to use it to make an argument. Nice. Its a logical fallacy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:I am only putting in the effort this thread deserves. Christianity, being a religion based partly upon the philosophy and teaching of Jesus, has had a significant impact on world history. Yes or no? Bad posts are just bad posts, there are no excuses. Trying to play the "Christianity invented everything" card just displays your own lack of historical awareness. Roman pagans had a significant impact on Christianity, yes or no? QED Julius Ceasar banned slavery in America.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The difference between having an impact on world history and But I thought Christianity was responsible for slavery?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:But I thought Christianity was responsible for slavery? Arguing that it is solely responsible for the abolition of slavery was the question being addressed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I wouldn't say I know Jesus' true opinion, but it's a fact that slavery was a normal practice in his time. And despite the indisputable fact that his teachings were used by the abolitionist movement and Christians were the driving force behind ending slavery in America, to say that it clearly condemns slavery isn't the least bit accurate. Jesus' teachings were also undeniably used to make pro-slavery arguments as well, and even though I don't agree with them they wouldn't have been able to do that if he had ever outright said, "don't own people for any reason". Maybe he thought that "what you do to the least among you, you're doing to god" was explicit enough since obviously no one is going to say it'd be cool to whip god in the gold mines. Your argument seems to assume that Jesus actually was supernatural and that he knew the future and how Southern gentlemen would twist his words 1800 years later and therefore should have known to be more explicit, which is a weird thing to do. You're adding in all kinds of assumptions to avoid taking his words at face value. There's really no way to reconcile slavery with Jesus' teachings of charity and humanity and turning the other cheek and treating everyone like your family or like God. Obviously people are going to try because slavery is profitable, but those people are demonstrably wrong. E: And gently caress it, he explicitly said not to fight those who hurt you and to turn the other cheek but plenty of people still used the bible to justify warmongering. It's probably impossible to be so explicit that human beings won't rationalize your words away so they can feel good about doing what they want to do. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Feb 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:I am only putting in the effort this thread deserves. No because any historical developments attributed to Christianity could have happened without Christianity because *farts*
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The difference between having an impact on world history and Yeah that's bullshit, Jesus has had the same kind of influence on history that Confucius or Buddha had, civilizations were all changed by those men's teachings and for an atheist to deny it shows some rather poor understanding of history. Kaal posted:Bad posts are just bad posts, there are no excuses. Trying to play the "Christianity invented everything" card just displays your own lack of historical awareness. Roman pagans had a significant impact on Christianity, yes or no? QED Julius Ceasar banned slavery in America. Also lol noone is claiming Christianity invented everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Maybe he thought that "what you do to the least among you, you're doing to god" was explicit enough since obviously no one is going to say it'd be cool to whip god in the gold mines. Man, if the Old Testament is not considered valid, we should really get an editor to hit that book. Miltank posted:No because any historical developments attributed to Christianity could have happened without Christianity because *farts* "My religion is the only one who opposed slavery despite being used to justify it as well because *farts* They weren't true Christians" Crowsbeak posted:Yeah thats bullshit, Jesus has had the same kind of influence on history that Confucius or Buhduh had, civilizations were all changed by those men's teachings and for an athiest to deny it shows some rather poor understanding of history. Civilizations were changed by men who used his teachings to advocate their power plays and political intrigue. That isn't the same as saying that Jesus stood there and nodded while people used his words to promote their political ideals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The difference between having an impact on world history and Hitler did and we should. Ignoring the impact of Jesus as a figure is ignoring the impact of Christianity, as the two are entwined. Ignoring the impact of Hitler as a figure is ignoring the impact of Facism, as the two are entwined. I do not see how this is in any way contentious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Miltank posted:No because any historical developments attributed to Christianity could have happened without Christianity because they were motivated by golden rule-type considerations with no basis in Christian scripture whatsoever. Fixed for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Hitler did and we should. I almost think Commie has one of those simplistic views of history where everyone is only doing what they do for material gain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:There's really no way to reconcile slavery with Jesus' teachings of charity and humanity and turning the other cheek and treating everyone like your family or like God. Obviously people are going to try because slavery is profitable, but those people are demonstrably wrong. Well obviously lots of Christians managed it throughout history, and instead used Jesus to justify slavery instead. Too bad the son of God didn't manage to mention "Slavery is bad" anywhere. Real oversight on his part, to be sure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Hitler did and we should. Fair enough, you're right! But considering Western thought has been far more influenced by political aspirations dressed in the clothes of religion, shouldn't we actually focus on the direct impact of the individuals that utilized his teachings and not Jesus and his 2000+ year political agenda? Crowsbeak posted:I almost think Commie has one of those simplistic views of history where everyone is only doing what they do for material gain. Christianity was used to justify the Crusades, which was literally only for the purpose of material gain. Lot of religions have been used to do that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Most of the abolitionists in the United States tended to be Christians on the religious left. There were a ton of Quakers and Unitarians. Quakers were the first group to abolish slavery and they were the initial promoters of women's rights. The followers of William Lloyd Garrison, the leading abolitionist in the nation, were nonviolent and derived their principles mostly from the Sermon on the Mount and the idea that everyone was made in the image of God. That said many southerners did quote the Bible to justify slavery. The problem seems less "Christianity" and more how you interpret Christianity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Barlow posted:That said many southerners did quote the Bible to justify slavery. The problem seems less "Christianity" and more how you interpret Christianity. And that is all I was saying. Seriously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:22 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I almost think Commie has one of those simplistic views of history where everyone is only doing what they do for material gain. It is extremely obvious that he is a historical materialist which is like... really not a productive method.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 17:34
|
|