Islam Stuff: For LCD2YOU

[Guest]

Why would I think it was Christianity, when Christianity had existed for so long and practiced it for so long?

Because those advocating the change said they were Christians, they said they were for the abolishment of slavery because they had to live their faith, and their justification for the abolition was found within their ideology of Christianity. If they, themselves, stated their justifications who are we to say that's not what persuaded them? They said Christianity was the driving force behind their desire to abolish slavery. Should you make a case that it was not?

[_Ren]

Yet, what was compelling enough to eventually sway the majority?

The same thing that prompted the Buddist leader in 9AD?

The idea that slavery was essentially sinful and a disgrace to God.

I think slavery is a disgrace and wrong. And I don't need a 'God' to know that. And it's not my 'atheism' that makes that clear to me either...

I don't care at all that people's idea of God helped them to reach the right conclusion. I'm just pointing out that other people's idea of God - in their minds - made slavery 'OK'. 'God', or 'religion' is not the common source to the right choice... That's my only point...

[Guest]

Yet, what was compelling enough to eventually sway the majority?

The same thing that prompted the Buddist leader in 9AD?

The idea that slavery was essentially sinful and a disgrace to God.

I think slavery is a disgrace and wrong. And I don't need a 'God' to know that. And it's not my 'atheism' that makes that clear to me either...

I don't care at all that people's idea of God helped them to reach the right conclusion. I'm just pointing out that other people's idea of God - in their minds - made slavery 'OK'. 'God', or 'religion' is not the common source to the right choice... That's my only point...

There is no doubt that good people exist within all religions and absent religion. There is no questioning that horrid people exist across the spectrum either. Would slavery have been abolished without Christianity in those nations that were predominantly Christian. We do not know. We can't know.

[_Ren]

Because those advocating the change said they were Christians, they said they were for the abolishment of slavery because they had to live their faith, and their justification for the abolition was found within their ideology of Christianity.

Their source can be Christianity. That's fine, and I'm not arguing that. I'm saying it's not the 'common source'.

[_Ren]

Would slavery have been abolished without Christianity in those nations that were predominantly Christian. We do not know. We can't know.

YES! And that's the real point isn't it ;)

[_Moniker]

Would slavery have been abolished without Christianity in those nations that were predominantly Christian. We do not know. We can't know.

YES! And that's the real point isn't it ;)

No, that's not the point. That's the point you'd like to make. ;)

We CAN attribute the abolition of slavery to Christianity. That is the point. We can't speculate on what we don't know. We can only look to history and what occurred and draw conclusions from it.

[_dartagnan]

What atheist based organizations existed at the time of slavery?!

Exactly. Apparently, the atheists didn't care to organize themselves and protest it. It must not have been a concern fo theirs. So why should we believe a country comprised only of atheists, would have lifted a finger to make a difference? They wouldn't have, for the same reason no other non-Christian group bothered to do it. The entire premise of human equality is Christian based. It isn't based in Islam, it wasn't based in any other philosophy of the day except Christianity. Therefore, it is of no surprise that Christians were responsible for the removal of slavery.

I deny for the reason that Christian nations existed for nearly 2000 yearswith slavery being practiced.

Do you understand the difference between Christendom and Christainity? Probably not, but those who do, will probably get the point. The fact is slavery was practiced in spite of Christainity, not because of it. The fact that slavery existed in Christian nations means nothing once we realize the Church expelled it whenever it had the power and authority to do so. The Roman Emperors were not taking orders from the Pope. If they were, then there never would have been slavery at all. Contrast this to its neighboring civilization, Islam, where slavery was deemed a divine right since it commanded in the Quran. In 14 centuries Islam has not managed to remove this virus. Why? Bernard Lewis says it best: "From a traditional Muslim point of view, to abolish slavery would hardly have been possible. To forbid what God permits is almost as great an offense as to permit was God forbids. Slavery was authorized and its regulation formed part of the sharia."

For you to say Christian nations had cases of slavery, therefore Christianity cannot be accredited for its eventual removal, is really a pathetically absurd argument that is based in nothing more than spite towards the faith.

Saying that Christianity was not 'solely responsible' for the overturn of slavery, nor even if I hold the opinion that it's claims aren't literally 'true' - doesn't mean that I don't assign any worthy value to it.

Then what is yoru rationale for denying my point as valid? What is your rationale for denying the fact that Christianity is responsible for removing slavery from our society? So far all you have done is make two attempts:
1) By saying the New Testament "condones slavery," which has since been shown to be an erroneous point.
2) By noting that slavery used to exist in some cases, in some Christian nations. This is an irrelevant point that doesn't change the fact that Christianity removed slavery.

Because no matter what was 'said' on either side of the issue, the 'Christians' as a whole were perfectly happy to practice slavery.

Why can't you just admit you have no clue what the hell you're talking about? You have no facts or figures, no numbers indicating what "Christians" engaged in slavery, in whatever "nations" you keep alluding to, etc. By contrast, I have data pertinent to this discussion because I can point to specific Christian authorities who had consistently tried to make slavery illegal covering the entire span of Christianity's existence. So if you want to make stupid claims like "Christians were happy" with slavery, then produce some dates and names. Not everyone living in Christendom was a Christian, and any who were engaged in slavery were certainly not being obedient to the demands of the Church. Slavery was state sanctioned, not Church sanctioned, making it legal while discouraged by religious authorities.

In the late 6th century, the Bishop of Seville, St. Isidore, said, "God has made no difference between the sould of the slave and that of the freeman." Now find me something equivalent to this by the Muslims or even atheists in that day. Slavery ended in medieval Europe because of the Christian Church and this is a proved fact. Later on it was ended by Christian abolitionists after it was started again the Spanish conquerers.

Saying that Christians were responsible for the removal of slavery in Western Civilization - eventually - would be about as meaningful as saying that 'Americans voted in George Bush'.

Likewise, saying Americans didn't vote for Bush would be just as idiotic a statement as saying Christians didn't abolish slavery. This is what you're saying, and it remains idiotic.

So what you want me to impressed by is that 'Christian nations' managed to work out that slavery was wrong before the atheists took over?

I'm simply pointing out the reluctance by atheists to admit anything good in religion, especially Christianity, even though everything they enjoy today can be attributed to religious principles they have long since taken advantage for granted. Without Christianity there would be no advancement in science, hence the explosion of atheism, because there would have been no freedoms to make these advancements.

I think slavery is a disgrace and wrong.

Of course you do, but you feel this way probably because you are a product of your Western environment, which in turn, is a product of Judeo-Christian values.

[_dartagnan]

We CAN attribute the abolition of slavery to Christianity. That is the point. We can't speculate on what we don't know. We can only look to history and what occurred and draw conclusions from it.

It totally boggles the mind.

A man jumps in a lake and saves a drowning woman. As she coughs up water on the shore an atheist and a theist run to the scene.

"Wow, you just saved her life!" says the theist. "Nonsense," says the atheist, "if he had not saved her someone else probably would have."

[_Ren]

We CAN attribute the abolition of slavery to Christianity.

You can't attribute it 'solely' to Christianity when:

a. Slavery had existed within Christian nations for 18 centuries previously...
b. People of other beliefs also managed to work it out, and FAR earlier. (Again, referring to the Buddhist example).

That evidence points towards a 'common' source of 'morality' that isn't Christian.

[_dartagnan]

You can't attribute it 'solely' to Christianity when:

I don't believe it. You're really this stupid!

Slavery had existed within Christian nations for 18 centuries previously..

American scientists have found a cure to abolish cancer once and for all. We should give them credit!!
"Nonsense" says the atheist, "don't you fools realize that cancer has existed in America for centuries? Besides, someone else probably would have found a cure anyway. Maybe. "

People of other beliefs also managed to work it out, and FAR earlier. (Again, referring to the Buddhist example).

"I worked hard to lose 200lbs. I am proud of myself!"
"Nonsense" says the atheist, "don't you know that people have been losing weight in China just the same? Why should you get credit for losing weight here when it has been done elsewhere?"

And for the record, Buddhism has not abolished slavery in China! His example of Wang Mang, a Confucian, is not entirely accurate since he abolished slave trading, but was not willing to abolish slavery as an institution.