Morally Wrong Behavior vs. What the Civil Government Should Prohibit

[seer]

False, slavery was dominant in the USA up until 1860s, and in Christianity. Slavery may have been ended in the British Isles, but it continued by the British in India elsewhere, and in the Caribbean. It was 'some' Christians and secular humanists that were abolishonists. There are considerable writings against slavery inspired by Enlightenment philosophers.

The year your faith began was in the middle of the Civil war which ended Slavery in the US, and it was ended in the British Empire. Your religion just jumped on the Bandwagon. And yes there were Enlightenment philosophers who were against slavery, but it was Christian activists that got it done. And AGAIN list the "secular humanists" who were involved in the abolition movement. I will be waiting.

No where in the Bible is stated that it was a sin to buy and sell slaves.

Yet it was sin to kidnap and that largely was what slavery was fueled by in the West. And I keep asking you - why is slavery immoral in the first place?

Indentured servitude was common among the Jews, but so was the buying. selling and owning of foreign slaves.

There is no difference between indentured servitude and slavery in the Old Testament.

No, because no where in the Bible, Torah, Tanakh nor the Quran does it specifically reject slavery.

That is funny because people like Hanna More, the Quakers, the Stowe family, etc...argued against slavery on biblical grounds:

early antislavery writers like James Ramsay and Granville Sharp repeatedly identified the theory of racial inferiority with Hume, Voltaire, and materialistic philosophy in general

[shunyadragon]

One of the primary reasons that the South seceded was that slavery wasn't dominant and was becoming less and less so.

Actually . . . false the invention of the cotton gin increased the need for slavery. By the testimony of the leaders of the Southern states keeping slavery in the South was the primary reason for the Civil War. Don;t try and rewrite history. Facts are facts.

[shunyadragon]

The year your faith began was in the middle of the Civil war which ended Slavery in the US, and it was ended in the British Empire. Your religion just jumped on the Bandwagon. And yes there were Enlightenment philosophers who were against slavery, but it was Christian activists that got it done. And AGAIN list the "secular humanists" who were involved in the abolition movement. I will be waiting.

I did and gave a reference, and you are avoiding the reference. Still waiting . . .

The Baha'i Faith actually began in 1844. No bandwagon here, because slavery actually did not end with the Civil War. Forced Penal Servitude remained up to the early 20th century, and slavery remained in other places in the world like India and the Caribbean.

Yet it was sin to kidnap and that largely was what slavery was fueled by in the West. And I keep asking you - why is slavery immoral in the first place?

No you have not been keep asking me. If slavery was never condemned in the Bible, and it was described as an accepted institution as buying, selling and owning slaves why are you asking the question in bold above.

There is no difference between indentured servitude and slavery in the Old Testament.

Your self imposed ignorance of the Bible is appalling. The Old Testament describes specifically Indentured servitude fo be Hebrews indentured to Hebrews, and Foreign slaves bought, sold and owned by Hebrews.

That is funny because people like Hanna More, the Quakers, the Stowe family, etc...argued against slavery on biblical grounds:

Not funny, because there is nothing in the Bible that forbids any kind of slavery.

[seer]

I did and gave a reference, and you are avoiding the reference. Still waiting . . .

The Baha'i Faith actually began in 1844. No bandwagon here, because slavery actually did not end with the Civil War. Forced Penal Servitude remained up to the early 20th century, and slavery remained in other places in the world like India and the Caribbean.

Shuny you did not list secular humanists who were involved in the abolition movement. Please reference the post. Or stop fibbing...

No you have not been keep asking me. If slavery was never condemned in the Bible, and it was described as an accepted institution as buying, selling and owning slaves why are you asking the question in bold above.

Then answer, why is slavery immoral?

Your self imposed ignorance of the Bible is appalling. The Old Testament describes specifically Indentured servitude fo be Hebrews indentured to Hebrews, and Foreign slaves bought, sold and owned by Hebrews.

Nonsense, Hebrews were sold to each other as slaves, the only difference if that they were offered freedom after seven years. You are an idiot.

If you buy a Hebrew slave, he must remain your slave for six years. But in the seventh year you must set him free, without cost to him. 3 If he was single at the time you bought him, he alone must be set free. But if he was married at the time, both he and his wife must be given their freedom. 4 If you give him a wife, and they have children, only the man himself must be set free; his wife and children remain the property of his owner.Exodus 21

Not funny, because there is nothing in the Bible that forbids any kind of slavery.

The point is Shuny that these Christian abolitionists used Bible principles to make their case.

[seer]

You didn't have social cohesion for the slaves - nor for those discriminated against during the Jim Crow era, nor disenfranchised women or closeted LGBT's or Jews or 'furreigners'. But I guess it was cohesive for the majority.

Yes it was cohesive for the majority, and why is that wrong?

[seer]

The Baha'i Faith actually began in 1844. No bandwagon here, because slavery actually did not end with the Civil War. Forced Penal Servitude remained up to the early 20th century, and slavery remained in other places in the world like India and the Caribbean.

So slavery was not formally abolished among Bahaʼis until 1873. Like I said you jumped on the bandwagon!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3...th_and_slavery

[shunyadragon]

So slavery was not formally abolished among Bahaʼis until 1873. Like I said you jumped on the bandwagon!

No, Bah'u'llah released his slaves form servitude long before that and established the principle against slavery. The Baha'i Faith did not jump on any bandwagon, because either the Bible nor the Quran ford slavery in any form, and Christian widely bought, sold and owned slave up until the the 19th century.

[Tassman]

Yes it was cohesive for the majority, and why is that wrong?

Bondage (e.g. slavery) or social discrimination is not conducive to the cohesion of society as a whole. Enlightenment thinkers argued that liberty was a natural human right for everyone in society.

[Tassman]

The point is Shuny that these Christian abolitionists used Bible principles to make their case.

for slave ownership, e.g. Ephesians 6:5-7 NIV: 5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. The bible "says" whatever people want it to say based upon the prevailing social values of the day. If you are going to claim that anti-slavery is a biblical principle you need to explain why slavery was commonplace in majority Christian countries for most of its history.

[rogue06]

No, Bah'u'llah released his slaves form servitude long before that and established the principle against slavery. The Baha'i Faith did not jump on any bandwagon, because either the Bible nor the Quran ford slavery in any form, and Christian widely bought, sold and owned slave up until the the 19th century.

[seer]

Bondage (e.g. slavery) or social discrimination is not conducive to the cohesion of society as a whole. Enlightenment thinkers argued that liberty was a natural human right for everyone in society.

But that is not true, China's whole population, save the political elite, are in de facto bondage. And their cohesion is fine. And where do you find liberty as a right in nature? This is just silly.

[seer]

No, Bah'u'llah released his slaves form servitude long before that and established the principle against slavery. The Baha'i Faith did not jump on any bandwagon, because either the Bible nor the Quran ford slavery in any form, and Christian widely bought, sold and owned slave up until the the 19th century.

Source: https://bahaiteachings.org/bahaullah-frees-the-slaves/

Professor Saiedi thinks this Tablet could well have beenlikelihood existsIf so, this tablet could be may be

© Copyright Original Source

[shunyadragon]

IT remains a fact that your ignoring the elephant in the room. There is absolutely no spiritual teaching in the Bible that forbids slavery, and therefore slavery was common in Christinaity throughout history up until the 18th century.

You are also neglecting the fact that Baha'u'llah release his slaves early and condemned slavery early. By example since he is a Revealer in the Word of God his actions are the Word of God. Guess what we have no evidence that Christ wrote anything down.

[shunyadragon]

Baha'u'llah's actions as a Manifestation of God are his laws and the fact that Baha'u'llah released his slaves early and condemned slavery early. By example since he is a Revealer in the Word of God his actions are the Word of God. Guess what we have no evidence that Christ wrote anything down.

[seer]

Baha'u'llah's actions as a Manifestation of God are his laws and the fact that Baha'u'llah released his slaves early and condemned slavery early. By example since he is a Revealer in the Word of God his actions are the Word of God. Guess what we have no evidence that Christ wrote anything down.

Except Christ is the single most influential spiritual leader in human history. Now who is more likely to have the hand of God on him - Baha'u'llah or Christ...