RE: Christianity's Valuable Contributions to Humanity: An Examination of Militant Atheism
June 22, 2023 at 4:14 pm
(This post was last modified: June 22, 2023 at 4:19 pm by Nishant Xavier.
Edit Reason: small changes.
)
To some earlier responses:
Is that so? Names of those deists, and historical records of their contributions toward Abolitionism, please?
Lincoln and Wilberforce weren't deists, neither were many prominent Christians active in Abolitionism.
Also, it's irrelevant if Marx or Engels or anyone else were Darwinist Atheists, Communist Atheists or anything else. They were Atheists, period.
[When you blame this or that Christian, do you see if they were Catholic or Evangelical Christians, or just Christians?]
For the purposes of this thread, we are interested in the Pro-Racism, Pro-Slavery positions etc of Atheists vs Christians.
On the whole, Christians were far more enlightened first and made more efforts toward Abolition than Atheists. That's the historical record, sorry.
Marx and Engels compared and contrasted with Lincoln and Wilberforce (with whom they were roughly contemporaneous) show that nicely.
Agnostics and Atheists had such Significant Influence in Revolutionary France that they Persecuted Christians. After their Reign of Terror (as mentioned in the OP, p. 3), they could easily have played a prominent role in abolishing/outlawing Slavery. So why didn't France take the lead role in that? Instead, the countries that did, America and Britain, were clearly Christian-majority countries at the time. It's also worth point out, again by the contemporaneous comparison, that Atheists had more Religious Freedom in the UK or US than Christians had for quite a while in France.
Did you read that New Advent Article I quoted? I can't give links, but you can find it online. Titled, "Christianity and Slavery": "In the Middle Ages slavery, properly so called, no longer existed in Christian countries; it had been replaced by serfdom, an intermediate condition in which a man enjoyed all his personal rights except the right to leave the land he cultivated and the right to freely dispose of his property."
There's a distinction between servitude and slavery. If someone is poor, and wants money, or is in debt, he can be a servant or serf. Not slavery.
Later on, as mentioned, when explorers found people of other races, they wrongly enslaved them. It should be noted the Popes often condemned the practice, going back to the 15th century. For e.g.: "Nevertheless, with the passage of time, it has happened that in some of the said islands, because of a lack of suitable governors and defenders to direct those who live there to a proper observance of the Faith in things spiritual and temporal, and to protect valiantly their property and goods, some Christians (we speak of this with sorrow), with fictitious reasoning and seizing and opportunity, have approached said islands by ship, and with armed forces taken captive and even carried off to lands overseas very many persons of both sexes, taking advantage of their simplicity ...
no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands, and made captives since the time of their capture, and who have been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free, and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of money." (Sicut Dudum, 1435)
Popular Support for Abolitionism would take quite some time to form. But here, in the 15th century, a Papal Bull clearly condemns enslavement of the innocent.
Ok, fair enough. But Atheists, as someone else also mentioned, have had quite significant influence starting around the last 200-250 years or so.
I am speaking of it being outlawed in virtually every developed country, which is a positive development for humanity as a whole, has helped millions experience freedom. Obviously, it should be abolished everywhere, but that may take more time. For the purposes of this thread, Christianity overall played a positive role in its Abolition in much of the developed world. Christian countries also put pressure on Islamic/Muslim countries, to abolish it in their lands, as the article I mentioned shows.
God Bless.
Fake Messiah Wrote:That is because deists abolished slavery.
Is that so? Names of those deists, and historical records of their contributions toward Abolitionism, please?
Lincoln and Wilberforce weren't deists, neither were many prominent Christians active in Abolitionism.
Also, it's irrelevant if Marx or Engels or anyone else were Darwinist Atheists, Communist Atheists or anything else. They were Atheists, period.
[When you blame this or that Christian, do you see if they were Catholic or Evangelical Christians, or just Christians?]
For the purposes of this thread, we are interested in the Pro-Racism, Pro-Slavery positions etc of Atheists vs Christians.
On the whole, Christians were far more enlightened first and made more efforts toward Abolition than Atheists. That's the historical record, sorry.
Marx and Engels compared and contrasted with Lincoln and Wilberforce (with whom they were roughly contemporaneous) show that nicely.
Helios Wrote:Why would a group that was barely a fraction of the human population of that time should be expected to be the ones to lead the charge of abolition?
Agnostics and Atheists had such Significant Influence in Revolutionary France that they Persecuted Christians. After their Reign of Terror (as mentioned in the OP, p. 3), they could easily have played a prominent role in abolishing/outlawing Slavery. So why didn't France take the lead role in that? Instead, the countries that did, America and Britain, were clearly Christian-majority countries at the time. It's also worth point out, again by the contemporaneous comparison, that Atheists had more Religious Freedom in the UK or US than Christians had for quite a while in France.
Quote:You could argue demographics of the times when slavery existed at least in it's pre-modern form bias that question
Did you read that New Advent Article I quoted? I can't give links, but you can find it online. Titled, "Christianity and Slavery": "In the Middle Ages slavery, properly so called, no longer existed in Christian countries; it had been replaced by serfdom, an intermediate condition in which a man enjoyed all his personal rights except the right to leave the land he cultivated and the right to freely dispose of his property."
There's a distinction between servitude and slavery. If someone is poor, and wants money, or is in debt, he can be a servant or serf. Not slavery.
Later on, as mentioned, when explorers found people of other races, they wrongly enslaved them. It should be noted the Popes often condemned the practice, going back to the 15th century. For e.g.: "Nevertheless, with the passage of time, it has happened that in some of the said islands, because of a lack of suitable governors and defenders to direct those who live there to a proper observance of the Faith in things spiritual and temporal, and to protect valiantly their property and goods, some Christians (we speak of this with sorrow), with fictitious reasoning and seizing and opportunity, have approached said islands by ship, and with armed forces taken captive and even carried off to lands overseas very many persons of both sexes, taking advantage of their simplicity ...
no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands, and made captives since the time of their capture, and who have been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free, and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of money." (Sicut Dudum, 1435)
Popular Support for Abolitionism would take quite some time to form. But here, in the 15th century, a Papal Bull clearly condemns enslavement of the innocent.
Quote:and that's the point expecting a tiny minority that has only recently reached any prominence in society to fix a problem the majority started and happily praticed for centuries is unrealistic and unfair.
Ok, fair enough. But Atheists, as someone else also mentioned, have had quite significant influence starting around the last 200-250 years or so.
Quote:Also do i need to point out that Slavery was never truly abolished. It still goes on all over the world. So the idea anyone ended slavery is simply false.
I am speaking of it being outlawed in virtually every developed country, which is a positive development for humanity as a whole, has helped millions experience freedom. Obviously, it should be abolished everywhere, but that may take more time. For the purposes of this thread, Christianity overall played a positive role in its Abolition in much of the developed world. Christian countries also put pressure on Islamic/Muslim countries, to abolish it in their lands, as the article I mentioned shows.
God Bless.
