Is Christianity Inherently Supportive Of Slavery And Misogyny?

[The Grand Nudger]

but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

-God, on the proper conduct of native genocide.

Some Atheists™ are concerned by and of the opinion that god in magic book commanded, endorsed, and regulated slavery - because he did.

Man, lowly fallen worm that he is, outlawed it.

To put a fine point on it, beyond pure fanfic argument, we know that they were a slaving society and that their appetite for slaves exceeded their ability to produce them in country both biblically, and extrabiblically. As in, archeaologically. Insomuch as contemporary christianity as a movement doesn't support slavery, it's in the disagreement of contemporary believers with the foundational myth of their own religion, their own god - and in their contemporary disagreement with the culture that produced that myth and absolutely were eager slavers. They've been secularized by an anti-slavery state and culture. If the contents of this thread were representative...and god knows they aren't, if that state or culture fell to theocracy 1/3rd of christians would go buy their very own slave, 1/3 would pretend not to see them doing it, and the remaining third would declare anyone who objected an asshole for mentioning it.

I don't think god is sending his best people.....

[tackattack]

[The Grand Nudger]

"Many other people did bad things too"..said the christian contemplating his good god, after having suddenly found the eyes in his own skull.

What would you like to discuss about misogyny? Are we going to have to jump through the performative hoop of you insisting that you've never seen it? Or can we just agree that magic book says some shit you don't agree with and don't wish to defend?

I hate the feeling of having to pull teeth for such a triviality.

[tackattack]

define misogyny in this context and I'll spare you the exegesis.

[The Grand Nudger]

You've spared me nothing, pretending that we don't speak the same language, and betraying the fact that you see and know exactly the problem. Why is it so hard, at least on this board, for a christian to say, rightly, that they wouldn't cosign everything the god of magic book has? A - that rejection is a fundamental part of christian belief... B... it's manifestly clear that you wouldn't.

That's why I take this sort of shit so poorly, lol.

[tackattack]

I apologize if I'm doing something to make you take the conversation poorly, it's not my intent. I just want a dialogue, and wanted to be clear. Since you won't answer the question I will. If the definition of misogyny is the ingrained contempt of all women. I do not believe the Bible supports that. If your definition of misogyny is suppressing the commonly accepted modern rights of women then I believe the Bible does support that.

[The Grand Nudger]

Your beliefs are irrelevant. The state of magic book as a static item is all that matters in a conversation about the contents of magic book. Your beliefs are wholly relevent...to your beliefs, otoh. It's on the strength of that improved belief with respect to the contents from which you draw belief that I expect more of you than those believers who wrote it.

The whole world does, even you do.

When you fail to do so, you poorly represent yourself and the contemporary state of your religion. For john or huggy, I figure it's just to troll the kaffir - but i can't pin down why you would wring your fellows though it. I am surprised by your participation in this thread. You might even say that those other two knuckleheads got my ire from you...wrongly, on account of how I already knew they were pieces of shit - but I can never bring myself to place you in their company. Was I wrong about that and about you? Did you not cringe just a little contemplating your fellow (alleged) christians responses? Your own? If you did, how can you explain the past few remarks of your own in this thread. WTF happened?

To my mind, you were (all three of you) set up with a t-ball kind of question - and rather than knock it out of the park, you set fire to the field and called everyone who noticed the fire an asshole or delusional. What....the fuck....is that...? Is that a requirement of christian belief or the christian god, as you experience it....?

Magic book certainly and inarguably supports the ingrained contempt of all women - but you don't believe in that..or, at least, I want to believe that you don't. If you're preparing to launch into some doomed argument counter to that, that contempt is not contempt, I'm obviously not here for it. The people who wrote that shit believed a bunch of shit that you don't. Thats been the true and unassailable answer since the word go - for all of you -. I'm over here searching for the single righteous man in sodom..ffs........

[Huggy Bear]

Do you know what a moral thought looks like?  We've got Huggy approving slavery, Tack pretending he doesn't have eyes to see, you calling anyone who mentions the nasty shit in your magic book a duplicitous asshole.

Honestly, fuck all of you.  You're all disgusting.

I love all the moral grandstanding while you reap the benefits of a country built by slavery, I'm a literal descendant of slaves from Mississippi, my father was sharecropper and picked cotton as a child, my last name 'McGowan' is a slave name... I'm a piece of shit? Why? Because I make a distinction between indentured servitude and chattel slavery? Even now you have white people claiming that white people were also slaves because of "indentured servitude" that some white Europeans experienced, as if it was anywhere at the level of inhumanity that the black slaves suffered.

Comparing indentured servitude with chattel slavery is a damn insult, so find somewhere to sit down, your moralizing shtick is getting old.

[vulcanlogician]

@John 6IX Breezy

@Neo-Scholastic

So, maybe my last post ignored Breezy's question... which was, "could approach 1 lead rationally to the Golden Rule trumping other misogynistic verses in the Bible?"  Assuming approach 1, the bottom up one... I think I could answer "yes." 

There IS a line of logic that can be drawn from the bottom up approach to the rejection of misogyny. 

But can I ask Neo and Breezy if they subscribe to this sort of reasoning? Do you guys think this is how the Bible OUGHT to be understood? Does the bottom up approach lead the two of you to reject the misogynistic verses (in your assessment)? I'm assuming the second greatest commandment "overrules" other commandments that conflict with it. Is that YOUR understanding?

[Deesse23]