Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: HR 535 – Year of the Bible Resolution (billboard) [View all]humblebum
(5,881 posts)50. Then you should be talking to your own ancient ancestors who lived back then,
because strong chances are that they accepted slavery without question, too, as did all of our relatives. To apply today's standards to the times and events of 2000 years ago is foolish. Was slavery universally considered an evil back then? No, it was a normal state of existence in society. Black churches realize the fact and have every right to be offended by the PA Atheists.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
134 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I'm saying it's Republicans doing this but the target is not Republicans, but theists.
rug
Mar 2012
#14
But such cultural bias is maintained by many Christian sects to this day
muriel_volestrangler
Mar 2012
#23
Yes, the fact that slavery isn't condemned by the Bible is ridiculous, offensive, and shameful. n/t
laconicsax
Mar 2012
#42
No I didn't, but Aristotle did. And that demonstrates just how normal the social status
humblebum
Mar 2012
#49
This is the key hypocrisy of those who deny what is really in the 'Scriptures'...
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2012
#56
I have clearly stated my case, and really don't have clue what you are driving at.
humblebum
Mar 2012
#70
if that's your agruement then you eitehr miss the point, or it's a strawman
deacon_sephiroth
Mar 2012
#85
Well you are right "that slavery did exist exist." That's really all that needs to be said.
humblebum
Mar 2012
#88
Listen, I certainly don't have all of the answers, but according to the Bible
humblebum
Mar 2012
#94
Your opinion is your opinion, not mine. Out come the militant atheist views.
humblebum
Mar 2012
#103
Where did I say that it was all literally true? I am merely stating that one of the POV
humblebum
Mar 2012
#105
So when you denied that the Bible isn't literally true, what were you implying?
laconicsax
Mar 2012
#106
There you go again! You're contesting the claim that the Bible isn't literally true.
laconicsax
Mar 2012
#108
Then you should not be calling something historical fact, that isn't. Nowhere did
humblebum
Mar 2012
#109
So is it the word of God or the word of the dudes you said wrote it: Matthew, Mark, Luke et al.?
Arugula Latte
Mar 2012
#130
Then you should be talking to your own ancient ancestors who lived back then,
humblebum
Mar 2012
#50
And yet the 'faith community' takes other parts of Scripture and demands that we
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2012
#57
Partially you are correct, and much of it is also timeless. And that is why so many value it.
humblebum
Mar 2012
#74
I think you are confusing it with 'The Atheist's Handbook,' which has all those
humblebum
Mar 2012
#99
"the shameful thing is the actual practice of owning human beings as property."
humblebum
Mar 2012
#53
Then, you also know that Christianity was a driving force in the abolition movement.nt
humblebum
Mar 2012
#71
Actually, very few of the abolitionists, particularly in the United Kingdom and United States...
Humanist_Activist
Mar 2012
#80
I beg to differ. The Second Great Awakening spawned many new abolitionists -
humblebum
Mar 2012
#101
You do know that you just acknowledged that the Bible was written by men, right?
UnrepentantLiberal
Mar 2012
#48
Yes, Mathew, Mark, Luke, John, Moses, Paul, etc., were men. Very perceptive of you. nt
humblebum
Mar 2012
#75
OYG! You don't actually believe that the Gospels were written by their namesakes, do you?
laconicsax
Mar 2012
#87
Most likely they were. Too much duplicity and questionable, biased research by skeptics
humblebum
Mar 2012
#102
"Too much duplicity and questionable, biased research by skeptics and atheists."
cleanhippie
Mar 2012
#119
Used in conjunction to smear and demean all atheists, you expose your hatred.
cleanhippie
Mar 2012
#126
"Too much duplicity and questionable, biased research by skeptics and atheists."
cleanhippie
Mar 2012
#129
I hate to tell you, but much of your evidence against the Bible is drawn from"other ways of knowing"
humblebum
Mar 2012
#132
The OT and NT each contain many rules as to how slaves are to get sold or purchased
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2012
#59
Then why does it condemn many dietary practices that were normal parts of society at
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2012
#60
This lesson brought to you by the US govt and it's constitution (nt)
The Straight Story
Mar 2012
#46