View Full Version : Yearly Chris Columbus Bashing begins
JustRalph
10-11-2009, 11:44 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6753420#6753461
Columbus was most definitely an asshole of his time.
You seem to be living in the delusion that it was okay back then to torture and exterminate a people.
It was more prevalent. But it was in no way okay and I'm sure plenty of good natured people thought it was vile.
more at the link............
toetoe
10-12-2009, 11:46 AM
Too bad he wasn't born a savage Mesoamerican. Decapitation, rape and plunder, especially horrific forms of savage's inhumanity to fellow savage ? Why, it's all good, mate. You know --- dark skin, primitive mind, pagan ways; it all makes for a wonderfully "accurate" ( :lol: ) revision of history.
Okay, back to my cave. C'mon, woman. Don't make me whoop out the cudgel. Let's go.
OTM Al
10-12-2009, 02:07 PM
Not here to bash Mr. Columbus. His voyage was a dangerous one and the attempt should be recognized for what it was. What it was though isn't what we were told when we were young.
The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus was writen by Washington Irving in 1828. Irving was on his way to becoming a hugely popular writer. This book was I believe his first major success with something like 175 printings. He had been given access to Spanish arcives to write the story of Columbus and he produced an entertaining story which unfortunately had very little to do with fact and even more unfortunately was recognized as real history. Columbus was made into an American icon and those that went before him, and there were several, were left forgotten. The whole flat earth thing was a complete invention of Irving.
Of course this is not an isolated incident in American "history". Longfellow's Midnight Ride of Paul Revere was also highly embellished and taken as historic fact by a loving public, for example.
Show Me the Wire
10-12-2009, 02:51 PM
Yes, just think without Chris's outside influence the Mayans, Aztecs, etc could still be cutting out human hearts from the indigenous population. He sure msessed up a nidyllac paradise full of human dignity. :bang:
exactaplayer
10-12-2009, 03:12 PM
Went to the link provided in this thread and read some of the postings. I thought this one was funny.
55. Maybe we could come up with a Holiday for when Bush* "discovered" Iraq?
Show Me the Wire
10-12-2009, 03:26 PM
Yes, and we can combine it with the holiday celebrating the day Obama discovered Pakistan. Sounds good to me.
toetoe
10-12-2009, 03:35 PM
What it was though isn't what we were told when we were young.
How long until our children figure out our new King is not what they were told he was ?
Denny Green is not fooled:
"The Obamunists were what we thought they were." :D .
OTM Al
10-12-2009, 04:16 PM
Yes, just think without Chris's outside influence the Mayans, Aztecs, etc could still be cutting out human hearts from the indigenous population. He sure msessed up a nidyllac paradise full of human dignity. :bang:
Um...like I said, I'm not here to bash him, but it is a simple fact that his colonisation in the Caribbean wiped out entire cultures, an estimated 1-3 million, though I think that estimate is a little high, and he also introduced slavery into the new world. Not personally down with the human sacrifice thing, but be aware that this was practiced by most peoples on this planet at one time or another and it seems most got over it just fine on their own eventually.
Look, the guy was a product of his times and it is much easier to bash him in our current context looking back. Many things he did are considered repulsive today to many people and rightfully so. I would much rather think of today as an Italian heritage day and think about what good Italian immigrants have done in this country.
And I think we should always question things in our life, especially those we hold up as heros.
jballscalls
10-12-2009, 04:29 PM
why do people get upset about the Chris Columbus bashing?? the guy is 100's of years gone, as are his relatives, so they wont get offended by it LOL
because i was taught what a hero and brave adventurer the guy was as a child, i think i'll always hold him in high regard. but after reading people's history of america i definately was shocked at some of the things that occurred back then. But likesomeone said above, he was certainly just a product of the times.
Happy Columbus day all
toetoe
10-12-2009, 05:32 PM
why do people get upset about the Chris Columbus bashing?? the guy is 100's of years gone, as are his relatives, so they wont get offended by it LOL
Citing the same reasons, I wonder why the bashing to begin with ? Oh, that's right --- self-loathing white people currying favor with their darker-skinned savage "equals." :cool: .
Maybe the government should proclaim as holidays Independence Day and Veteran's Day ... period. Too many holidays already. And you know, leaving aside indigenous people's atrocities, with some research we could discover many of Martin King's peccadillos. A person with a life would have no desire to do so, of course.
cj's dad
10-12-2009, 05:55 PM
Yes, and we can combine it with the holiday celebrating the day Obama discovered Pakistan. Sounds good to me.
And the seven (7) states that were added last year :eek:
jballscalls
10-12-2009, 06:12 PM
Citing the same reasons, I wonder why the bashing to begin with ? Oh, that's right --- self-loathing white people currying favor with their darker-skinned savage "equals." :cool: .
.
i agree with your first statement, it does seem kind of dumb and pointless to bash something. I disagree with the second statement, the self loathing white people thing i dont think plays a part in this. i think people who object to columbus just think he was a bad dude, and they probably would think that regardless of skin color. remember, dont bring the race issue up ever, only liberal scumbags do that!
Show Me the Wire
10-12-2009, 06:46 PM
OTM Al:
I did not mean my post as a response to you specifically. It was a follow-up on toetoe's.
ezrabrooks
10-12-2009, 07:10 PM
Um...like I said, I'm not here to bash him, but it is a simple fact that his colonisation in the Caribbean wiped out entire cultures, an estimated 1-3 million, though I think that estimate is a little high, and he also introduced slavery into the new world. Not personally down with the human sacrifice thing, but be aware that this was practiced by most peoples on this planet at one time or another and it seems most got over it just fine on their own eventually.
Look, the guy was a product of his times and it is much easier to bash him in our current context looking back. Many things he did are considered repulsive today to many people and rightfully so. I would much rather think of today as an Italian heritage day and think about what good Italian immigrants have done in this country.
And I think we should always question things in our life, especially those we hold up as heros.
Al..I hope some Soprano types don't show up on your stoop. You know they take Columbus bashing pretty serious.
Ez
Valuist
10-12-2009, 08:12 PM
When is Leif Erickson day?
Those who are so gung ho to have Europe respect us neglect that fact that most of Europe - England, Spain, France, Holland, were the equivalent to Nazi Germany of their times, raping plundering and pillaging the whole third world.
Puts Bush in perspective. :D
delayjf
10-13-2009, 12:52 PM
that his colonisation in the Caribbean wiped out entire cultures, an estimated 1-3 million, though I think that estimate is a little high, and he also introduced slavery into the new world.
Seems a bit high to me as well, but what ever the number, wasn't it mostly due to disease and weren't there atrocities committed by both sides?
That's my recollection, Jeff. No immunity to European germs.
both sides????? :lol:
So, when we survey the "results" we would expect the "side" with the lower amount of "acts" to have "won"??/
Magical thinking is fine, just know when you are doing it.
Sure, the "new world" was carved out of the hides of the old.
That's always the way it shakes out.
TO hide from it is delusional.
That's my recollection, Jeff. No immunity to European germs.
Magical thinking on parade, pugs-cons seem to suffer an epidemic of their own these days it seem. :D
again, that's fine , how did the Euros aquire their immunity???
Could that have been practiced in the New World with some enlightened Christian(?) practices or could it have been seen as a "miracle from God".?
toetoe
10-15-2009, 12:51 PM
Magical thinking on parade, pugs-cons seem to suffer an epidemic of their own these days it seem. :D
again, that's fine , how did the Euros aquire their immunity???
Okay, you are king of the moral hill. Explain, though, how Indigenous Savages Day is preferable to the simple abolition of Italian Destroyer Day ? (Cue soulful recitation of the dictum "What goes around comes around.")
how did the Euros aquire their immunity???
....by having been exposed. Didn't you ever watch the Martina Chronicles?
Okay, you are king of the moral hill. Explain, though, how Indigenous Savages Day is preferable to the simple abolition of Italian Destroyer Day ? (Cue soulful recitation of the dictum "What goes around comes around.")
No, actually and this bit is kinda funny, you misread my posting due to your ingrained need to cast your postions in a postive only light ( i assume).
I made no moral argument over right or wrong- just asked a question and stated a few things to think about.
If you or Tommy don't care to go further than the end of your nose that's your choice.
One doesn't get immunity if all die out.
One creates the conditons for immunity to have a chance or one doesn't create those conditions.
If the one that doesn't create those condtions KNOWS the problem and the other doesn't is that a moral failing? Your call. Not mine. It is what it is.
que mickey mouse with a backup from bullwinkle(no flying squirrel needed- we got one already) rendtion - acaepella style of "this land is your land"
hazzardm
10-15-2009, 02:08 PM
When is Leif Erickson day?
Come and gone October 9th.
toetoe
10-15-2009, 06:17 PM
Magical thinking on parade, pugs-cons seem to suffer an epidemic of their own these days it seem. :D
The quote above does not claim moral/intellectual superiority for its poster ?
arizonarebel
10-15-2009, 09:49 PM
I am a long time lurker, but as a Native American I have to respond to this thread. Celebrating Columbus is something I would never do. He was a slavetrader and someone who attempted to wipe out the indigenous population on his second voyage to the "new" world. In our circle he is not highly regarded but that does not mean that we hate Italians. He was just plain and simple a bad person and it's hard for me to understand why we celebrate him. He discovered nothing. How do you discover something that is already inhabited by people. You don't. Some of the posts about this subject are just plain silly and don't add any value to the conversation. The poster who is guilty of this rhymes with dodo. As far as the disease thing, and as much as I disagree with him on most if not all issues, I think Tom gets it right when he says Europeans had an immunity. Europeans were exposed to many diseases related to farm animals (cattle, sheep, chickens) as they practically lived side by side. Immunity was a gradual thing. On the other hand, Natives never lived with the animals they ate (deer, elk, possums). So when Europeans arrived with their diseases, Natives had no natural defenses. Kind of on a tangent, but just had say something about the issue.
Greyfox
10-15-2009, 10:09 PM
When is Leif Erickson day?
Oh, no, no.
Having an Irish mother, I must put in a claim for St. Brendan's Day.
He was born in 484. Sometime after 512 A.D.
"He and his crew of monks prayed and fasted for forty days, and set off on a second voyage which lasted seven years and probably took them to Iceland, Greenland and even the American mainland."
More at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan
Show Me the Wire
10-15-2009, 11:31 PM
I am a long time lurker, but as a Native American I have to respond to this thread. Celebrating Columbus is something I would never do. He was a slavetrader and someone who attempted to wipe out the indigenous population on his second voyage to the "new" world. In our circle he is not highly regarded but that does not mean that we hate Italians. He was just plain and simple a bad person and it's hard for me to understand why we celebrate him. He discovered nothing. How do you discover something that is already inhabited by people. You don't. Some of the posts about this subject are just plain silly and don't add any value to the conversation. The poster who is guilty of this rhymes with dodo. As far as the disease thing, and as much as I disagree with him on most if not all issues, I think Tom gets it right when he says Europeans had an immunity. Europeans were exposed to many diseases related to farm animals (cattle, sheep, chickens) as they practically lived side by side. Immunity was a gradual thing. On the other hand, Natives never lived with the animals they ate (deer, elk, possums). So when Europeans arrived with their diseases, Natives had no natural defenses. Kind of on a tangent, but just had say something about the issue.
Did native American Indians make slaves from other natives they conquered?
Yes, and Africans sold their own into slavery. Still doing it. Libs have a hard time talking about ALL the truth. Only what fits their agendas.
Show Me the Wire
10-15-2009, 11:35 PM
Yes, and Africans sold their own into slavery. Still doing it. Libs have a hard time talking about ALL the truth. Only what fits their agendas.
The Natives probabaly wanted to keep the monopoly. Columbus was the monopoly buster.
arizonarebel
10-15-2009, 11:55 PM
some tribes did, most did not...look at the hundred or so cali tribes, most were peaceful and didn't own slaves...no tribe did it to the degree as the whiteman...read a real history book, not the ones the victors write...
JustRalph
10-16-2009, 06:16 AM
I don't get it.............there are no slaves left, no Indians who were over-run by Europeans, yet for some reason their descendent's take it personal? I could never understand that?
There is no reason in this country, no matter what your background/race etc......that you cannot be successful. Ole Chris Columbus has had zero effect on your life. Unless of course you long for the days of the noble savage? You know....the cannibalistic, wild raging tribal wars of years gone by......... :lol:
As a descendant of some lofty Tribe myself........I never understood it........
some tribes did, most did not...look at the hundred or so cali tribes, most were peaceful and didn't own slaves...no tribe did it to the degree as the whiteman...read a real history book, not the ones the victors write...
I read one.
SOME white people owned slaves, MOST did not.
The quote above does not claim moral/intellectual superiority for its poster ?
NO/that's rich , given some of your previous postings and off point.
You seek to smear the points by dragging in some kind of intellectual point to the moral debate that we had. head fake time.
As to the "magical thinking" , well one of your feloow travelers makes the point for me ...... see this qoute from Mr Magic himself.......
"Yes, and Africans sold their own into slavery. Still doing it. Libs have a hard time talking about ALL the truth. Only what fits their agendas"
So in regards to magical thinking at this point we have the old lib moral relativity arg being dragged into the deal by a neo-con magical thinker, if ever one existed on this earth.
I need not go further as I am sure you accept the connection.
I don't get it.............there are no slaves left, no Indians who were over-run by Europeans, yet for some reason their descendent's take it personal? I could never understand that?
There is no reason in this country, no matter what your background/race etc......that you cannot be successful. Ole Chris Columbus has had zero effect on your life. Unless of course you long for the days of the noble savage? You know....the cannibalistic, wild raging tribal wars of years gone by......... :lol:
As a descendant of some lofty Tribe myself........I never understood it........
and yet the descendents of our "best friend" over there take all manner of actions personal to this day. mmmmmmmmm mmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmm!!!
Yeah as to the kinds of wars, you got a point, we kill without ever facing the enemy if we choose.
Cannibalistic pales to what we practice if we wish to unleash our wild raging warriors.
Yep, you DON'T get it. YOU CAN'T get it.
Show Me the Wire
10-16-2009, 01:19 PM
some tribes did, most did not...look at the hundred or so cali tribes, most were peaceful and didn't own slaves...no tribe did it to the degree as the whiteman...read a real history book, not the ones the victors write...
If anyone reads history they would know the above statement is absurd and histrically incorrect. Slavery and civilization has its roots in northern Africa.
Egypt and Babylon slave trade far out paced the white man as you claim.
Civilaztion prior to the industrial age was built upon slave labor whether it was involuntary or voluntary. That is the history of the world, and slavery was practicied by the Incas, Mayans, etc long before Columbus saile toward America.
BTW welcome to off-topic.
If anyone reads history they would know the above statement is absurd and histrically incorrect. Slavery and civilization has its roots in northern Africa.
Egypt and Babylon slave trade far out paced the white man as you claim.
Civilaztion prior to the industrial age was built upon slave labor whether it was involuntary or voluntary. That is the history of the world, and slavery was practicied by the Incas, Mayans, etc long before Columbus saile toward America.
BTW welcome to off-topic.
Anyone of your moral tenor would not pick a fight on this level to distract or excuse the fact that given a new land here without the same entrenched history and the chance to abolish it from the start, that we in fact did not do any of that.
We , having the much easier and more enlightned path according to many , after all , we were not savages and knew better, still with those advantages supported that system and used it with glee.
We, having the "light and the word" took up the practice. The savages had they that same "light and word" that you so praise now?
Who is worse, he who doesn't know any better, or he who knows or said he does and ignores that knowledge to enhance his own wordly lot?
Show Me the Wire
10-16-2009, 01:29 PM
Anyone of your moral tenor would not pick a fight on this level to distract or excuse the fact that given a new land here without the same entrenched history and the chance to abolish it from the start, that we in fact did not do any of that.
We , having the much easier and more enlightned path according to many , after all , we were not savages and knew better, still with those advantages supported that system and used it with glee.
We, having the "light and the word" took up the practice. The savages had they that same "light and word" that you so praise now?
Who is worse, he who doesn't know any better, or he who knows or said he does and ignores that knowledge to enhance his own wordly lot?
Pure B.S. In fact the first settlers were voluntary slaves (voluntary servitude for a specific period of years) to the trading company they paid their passage.
Slavery in itself is not immoral, in any Holy Scripture.
Pure B.S. In fact the first settler's were voluntary slaves to the trading company they paid their passage.
Sorry, you can't wash it off with that.
You know its not about the "first settlers" AND certainly NOT ABOUT voluntary slaves.
My goodness, have you had a cup of something a little too strong today?
:confused:
A timid and cowardly post from you.
"Slavery in itself is not immoral, in any Holy Scripture"
You make a joke of your previous beliefs posted here.
:ThmbDown:
Show Me the Wire
10-16-2009, 01:36 PM
Can't wash off the fact that the country was settled due to slavery (voluntary type)? Why not because it blows away your faulty premise of not having the same entrenched history. It was that entrenched histiory that allowed the settlement of the country.
I do agree when the country had the opportunity to eliminate slavery, because of better machines, we did it.
Show Me the Wire
10-16-2009, 01:39 PM
Sorry, you can't wash it off with that.
You know its not about the "first settlers" AND certainly NOT ABOUT voluntary slaves.
My goodness, have you had a cup of something a little too strong today?
:confused:
A timid and cowardly post from you.
"Slavery in itself is not immoral, in any Holy Scripture"
You make a joke of your previous beliefs posted here.
:ThmbDown:
Be my guest prove me wrong. Give me the passages in the Koran, Bible, etc where slavery is defined as being moral wrong, in itself. :)
Can't wash off the fact that the country was settled due to slavery (voluntary type)? Why not because it blows away your faulty premise of not having the same entrenched history. It was that entrenched histiory that allowed the settlement of the country.
I do agree when the country had the opportunity to eliminate slavery, because of better machines, we did it.
Wrong, the two slavery are not alike and you know it.
Once again, the opportunity had nothing to do with the elimination.
The wage slaves you speak of were not the founders, they were the workers.
Who paid the wages to those slaves?
Those were the founders.
Did the voluntary , who paid their way out of slavery , not then adopt a forced slavery? SO, your claim, link please is that the savages over there had the same system.
The others you speak about, the savages, that was voluntary as well.
They had the same or a different culture?
After all to be a voluntary wage slave to nobody doesn't get you very far.
:lol:
You have wandered far afield jedi, come back lest you reach escape velocity.
Show Me the Wire
10-16-2009, 01:56 PM
Wrong, the two slavery are not alike and you know it.
Once again, the opportunity had nothing to do with the elimination.
The wage slaves you speak of were not the founders, they were the workers.
Who paid the wages to those slaves?
Those were the founders.
Did the voluntary , who paid their way out of slavery , not then adopt a forced slavery? SO, your claim, link please is that the savages over there had the same system.
The others you speak about, the savages, that was voluntary as well.
They had the same or a different culture?
After all to be a voluntary wage slave to nobody doesn't get you very far.
:lol:
You have wandered far afield jedi, come back lest you reach escape velocity.
So the country would have been settled without workers? That is the whole premise of slavery, you need workers to accomplish the goal.
From the beginning, of civilization, voluntary slavery and forced slavery had been practiced. In fact, in Jewish law you had to give your slaves freedom or at least the choice to go free after seven years of servitude.
BTW the workers were not just wage earners. They were bound to serve for a period of years. No at will termination of the vlountary srvitude by the "employee".
Still waiting for your mystical proof about sacred scriptures defining the act of owning slaves is morally wrong.
So the country would have been settled without workers? That is the whole premise of slavery, you need workers to accomplish the goal.
From the beginning, of civilization, voluntary slavery and forced slavery had been practiced. In fact, in Jewish law you had to give your slaves freedom or at least the choice to go free after seven years of servitude.
BTW the workers were not just wage earners. They were bound to serve for a period of years. No at will termination of the vlountary srvitude by the "employee".
Still waiting for your mystical proof about sacred scriptures defining the act of owning slaves is morally wrong.
tiresome indeed.
Work done for someone is wages to the worker. you don't need to get a script to get a wage. If they worked and bought their way out that was their wage. Bills or coins have nothing to do intrinisically with wages.
Wages of sin and all that.
As to the scripture part, if you need that from me, you are in bad shape.
The whole system of belief that you seem to type on here breaks down if you now support slavery on a scriptural basis.
It's too vast to even go into on here.
I will only say, that once again you fall into the "it was always done that way" and then slip into but that's ok even though we could have done it differently.
You negate choice as a factor now it seems.
Magical thinking on parade.
We practiced forced slavery over here becuase it favored us.
It is wrong now and it was wrong then.
People back then knew and said it to be wrong and yet it was still practiced.
Even you would admit(???) you get more from a free man advancing his own weatlh than a forced slave advancing someone elses.
I maintain the high ground was the better ground and would not have harmed the country but made it stronger both then and now.
Dispute that , but the other stuff, you are wrong very wrong.
Show Me the Wire
10-16-2009, 03:03 PM
As to the scripture part, if you need that from me, you are in bad shape.
The whole system of belief that you seem to type on here breaks down if you now support slavery on a scriptural basis.
Translation: No such scripture exists which states slavery itself is immoral.
My position acknowledging historical facts is not the same as embracing the facts as personal ideals.
The point you desire to twist is slavery is not and was not an unique institution to Europeans.
Slavery was practiced in America and around the whole world prior to Columbus. Columbus did not import slavery to the shores of America, as slavery was already practiced here by the native indians. What he did was made slaves out of the slave owners. You should appreciate the irony.
Work done for someone is wages to the worker. you don't need to get a script to get a wage. If they worked and bought their way out that was their wage. Bills or coins have nothing to do intrinisically with wages
But that was not the arrangement between the founders and the laborers.
I will only say, that once again you fall into the "it was always done that way" and then slip into but that's ok even though we could have done it differently.
Accepting histical fact as accurate is not agrrement as you try to say. Even for you this above argument you propose is absurd. I accept the facts regarding Hitler and his final solution and his quest to better the Aryian race. My acceptance of these historical facts does not make me an accomplice to or a proponent of his beliefs and his acts.
People back then knew and said it to be wrong and yet it was still practiced.
What people? Ancient Egytions, pre-Columbian indains?
Even you would admit(???) you get more from a free man advancing his own weatlh than a forced slave advancing someone elses.
Have I ever advocated for anything different? Let me remind you accepting accurate historical facts is not the equivilent of condoning the behavior.
We practiced forced slavery over here becuase it favored us.
Not us. It favored the entitiled in that specific time period.
I maintain the high ground was the better ground and would not have harmed the country but made it stronger both then and now.
You may be correct, but we will never know as past history is different and, at this time, we do not have the technology to change actual historical events..
tiresome indeed.
I agree.
Pure B.S. In fact the first settlers were voluntary slaves (voluntary servitude for a specific period of years) to the trading company they paid their passage.
Slavery in itself is not immoral, in any Holy Scripture.You are a contributor to the the Conservative Bible Project, aren't you? Thought so
Show Me the Wire
10-17-2009, 12:55 PM
You are a contributor to the the Conservative Bible Project, aren't you? Thought so
And the conservative Koran project too :lol: Why is it that progressives do not like historical facts and feel the need to revise everything to fit an elitist agenda?
I only shown light upon the incorrectness of P.C thought that white Europeans invented slavery and expanded slavery to places where slavery had not been previosly practiced.
If educating people through facts and reason is morally wrong in your book, than I am guilty as charged.
I also understand you do not appreciate being proven wrong about the O.T. critque regarding turning to the left.
Why is it that progressives do not like historical facts and feel the need to revise everything to fit an elitist agenda.
The truth negates the need for liberalism.
And therefore, liberals.
arizonarebel
10-17-2009, 02:37 PM
If anyone reads history they would know the above statement is absurd and histrically incorrect. Slavery and civilization has its roots in northern Africa.
Egypt and Babylon slave trade far out paced the white man as you claim.
Civilaztion prior to the industrial age was built upon slave labor whether it was involuntary or voluntary. That is the history of the world, and slavery was practicied by the Incas, Mayans, etc long before Columbus saile toward America.
BTW welcome to off-topic.
Was talking about slavery in this part of the world...i don't care where it started...it happened in the US primarily by European-Americans
Show Me the Wire
10-17-2009, 03:06 PM
Was talking about slavery in this part of the world...i don't care where it started...it happened in the US primarily by European-Americans
Slavery was practiced in the America's before Columbus. The native Indians pre-Columbian praticed slavery and human sacrifice. That is historical and archeological fact.
Bottom line the Europeans did not invent slavery or import the idea to the Americas. Your asserion it happened in the US primarily by European-Americans is blatantly false.
And the conservative Koran project too Why is it that progressives do not like historical facts and feel the need to revise everything to fit an elitist agenda?No, progressives do not like slavery, and religious types hiding behind 2000 year old cultural norms-pretending that since there is no outright condemnation of archaic customs and practices in the bible-this somehow justifies a barbaric moral code. It was wrong then. Now. And when Columbus did not seem to mind it.
BTW, there is no outright condemnation of the iron maiden and other torture devices used during the Inquisition at all in the bible. You contributors to Conservative Bible Project may want to "adjust" the bible to be officially neutral to those witch-hunting practices since it was mainstream church policy during the Inquisition to have infidels repent and disavow their heresies thru' physical persuasion.
Show Me the Wire
10-17-2009, 10:05 PM
hcap:
Slavery was practiced by every culture and no religious types, on this board, are advocating slavery ahould be practiced today. Progressive types like ACORN believe "white" slavery is okay and is acceptable today.
History is history.
Myself, I prefer to live in the present and learn from history, rather than, as you do, live in the past by distorting history and making strawman arguments.
Comparing iron maidens to slavery, you are a hoot.
Think about this slavery was a widespread practice throughout the time period the Torah, Bible and Koran were written. None of these scriptures condemned the practice.
The more you post the more you convince me you are a follower of Islam. You always attack Christianity for archaic acts, while you never condemn Islam for its own conversion by force policy used in centuries past and currently vis a vi the Taliban, etc.
You are by far as dense as your mentor boxcar. You both hide behind a veneer of biblical neutrality, claiming the bible on one hand is representative of the cultural morays and customs of its time, and on the other hand quick to pass moral judgments USING the same bible to support your talking points-usually conservative political pablum. Slavery is counter to spirit of most religions, the Catholic Church as it exists today, and most religious teachings that all share a common theme-compassion and empathy.
I fail too see how you can see this as neutral or in support of slavery.
"In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets"
"You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?
Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Show Me the Wire
10-18-2009, 04:07 PM
You are by far as dense as your mentor boxcar. You both hide behind a veneer of biblical neutrality, claiming the bible on one hand is representative of the cultural morays and customs of its time, and on the other hand quick to pass moral judgments USING the same bible to support your talking points-usually conservative political pablum. Slavery is counter to spirit of most religions, the Catholic Church as it exists today, and most religious teachings that all share a common theme-compassion and empathy.
I fail too see how you can see this as neutral or in support of slavery.
"In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets"
"You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?
Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
So what does the above diatribe mean? It has nothing to do with my posting. My posts were about the fallacy of blaming a specific individual for the causing slavery in the Americas.
Unfortunately for you I am comfortable with my identity and you stating Boxcar is my mentor does not bother me at all.
Unlike Boxcar I do not believe in Solo Scriptura. So much for the mentoring aspect. What Boxcar and I have in common is we believe in GOD as creator and in his son Jesus. Which differ significantly from your belief in Allah?
It is unwise to try and lecture me to living up to standards, when you fail spectacular at living up to your own standards. I have pointed out your failures many times and will continue to do so.
The difference is I use specific examples while you throw meaningless generalities around in a vacuum, like above, to supposedly prove something.
Once again your posting shows lack of tolerance. Tolerance is a quality you preach. A quality to which you never adhere.
I am not a big supporter of tolerance. Do your google search of "tolerance" in the Bible and you will see tolerance is usually is used in conjunction with you shall not tolerate a certain behavior. Basically, the only positive use is in references about GOD tolerating us.
Also, you have no problem judging people. You should take the beam out of your eye and learn to live in the present.
Show Me the Wire
10-18-2009, 04:20 PM
hcap:
I forgot. If slavery is inherently wrong, as you say, why is it still practiced currently in many Muslim countries?
jballscalls
10-11-2010, 11:10 AM
when did the Columbus hate start?? was it after Zinn's book came out or before then?
OTM Al
10-11-2010, 11:47 AM
when did the Columbus hate start?? was it after Zinn's book came out or before then?
That probably put it out in the spotlight. Given that basically everything we were taught about him when we were young was from Washington Irving's book, which was not exactly true.
Trijack
10-11-2010, 06:40 PM
I received this email this morning from my brother who is a Pastor of a church, it is letter to Bill O'Reilly about his interview with Bill Maher. Seems to tie into this thread about slaves & servants.
jack
From: vinepastor@msn.com
To: oreilly@foxnews.com
Subject: you implied to Bill Maher that the Bible approved of slavery and you stated the ark, flood and Noah was just a fictious story to teach us a moral truth
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 02:30:50 -0700
Please have your staff to research this information from the Bible and correct your interview with Bill Maher
I. 1st, James introduces himself as a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ. James 1:1 James a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ
A. The definition of the word servant used here is a slave
B. In the Old Testament one became a servant (slave) by one of 4 ways and maybe in battle
1. He was poor and could not provide for himself so he sold himself to work for some one for 6 years
Lev 25:39-40 if one of your brethren who dwells by you becomes poor, and sells himself to you, you shall not compel him to serve as a slave, but as a hired servant
Ex 21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
2. People in debt became servants to someone for 6 years for paying off their debt
2 Ki 4:1 My husband is dead, and you know that your servant feared the LORD. And the creditor is coming to take my two sons to be his slaves."
3. A thief who got caught and could not pay restitution to the one he stole from was sold to someone, for 6 years, who paid the restitution
Ex 22:3 He should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.
4. Voluntarily serves a master out of love
Ex 21:5-6 if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master. His master shall bring him unto the judges; and bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
5. Defeated in battle
2 Sa 8:2 he defeated Moab. He measured them off with a line. With two lines he measured off those to be put to death, and with one full line those to be kept alive. So the Moabites became David's servants
6. Could never kidnap (take by force against a persons will)
Ex 21:16 He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.
C. Other apostles called themselves slaves of Christ and instructed us to become slaves of God and Jesus for paying our debt, to free us from sin and free us from our old master, Satan
Ro 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ
2 Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ
Jude 1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ,
Ro 6:20 when you were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. Ro 6:22 2 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
Jesus referred to Noah, the flood and the ark as literal not a fictious story.
Mt 24:38 as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
Lk 17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
If your going to talk about the Bible then invite someone like me who has read it 115 times and studied it daily all my life of 67 years
thank you for listening
David G. Kincer vinepastor@msn.com
toetoe
10-12-2010, 04:34 PM
All I know is that after "Mrs. Doubtfire", even *I* can not defend my namesake. Sheesh. :rolleyes: ... :ThmbDown: .
Valuist
10-12-2010, 07:28 PM
When is Leif Ericsson Day? Why should Columbus be honored for being 15 years late?
toetoe
10-18-2010, 06:17 PM
I am a long time lurker, but as a Native American I have to respond to this thread.
The above is not just plain silly. The above does indeed add to the discussion. :rolleyes:
In fact, red man brilliant. Red man write with non-forked tongue, but where that tongue been ?
My message has been proven worthless, and I am indebted to my noble savage brother for the lesson in insightful debate. Arizonarebel is the Mesoamerican Harry Edwards. Yeah, baby. :jump: .
toetoe
10-18-2010, 06:20 PM
NO/that's rich , given some of your previous postings and off point.
You seek to smear the points by dragging in some kind of intellectual point to the moral debate that we had. head fake time.
As to the "magical thinking" , well one of your feloow travelers makes the point for me ...... see this qoute from Mr Magic himself.......
"Yes, and Africans sold their own into slavery. Still doing it. Libs have a hard time talking about ALL the truth. Only what fits their agendas"
So in regards to magical thinking at this point we have the old lib moral relativity arg being dragged into the deal by a neo-con magical thinker, if ever one existed on this earth.
I need not go further as I am sure you accept the connection.
Your job, Mr. Phelps, is to translate the passage above. As always, if you or any of your I.M. Force are captured or killed, the secretary will disavow any knowledge.
toetoe
10-18-2010, 06:23 PM
You are by far as dense as your mentor boxcar.
Oh, yeah; it's a dead heat ... by far. :lol: .
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.