This week saw the 200th anniversary of the passage of the law abolishing slavery in the British Empire, thanks to the efforts of William Wilberforce and others who refused to follow the parts of the Bible that condone slavery. Were these people forcing Christians to behave differently? Should they have been stopped from doing so? After all, what right had they to tell people to stop believing what they had always believed?
2007-03-24 05:05:59 · 6 answers · asked by ? 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
@ Prays toward Funky Town: Wrong argument. The New Testament depends on the Old Testament -- fulfilment of prophecy, remember? So if the OT is invalid then there's no Bible. Better try another tack.
2007-03-25 01:56:32 · update #1
groan@!!!!!!!!!!!
what the flip is that man above me talking about
the bible doesnt but the old testement does
logic alert
logic alert
why do these people talk in double speak
2007-03-24 05:13:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, I don't know if their aim was to impose a new morality because even though, at least in America, the abolitionists fought for the end of human bondage, many did not treat the slaves as social equals during and afterwards. They interpreted the bible differently than those who used it back up their position that to keep another human in bondage was a god given right. Most abolitionists were god fearing christians but their 'charity' in freeing the slaves did not extend to having them become full-fledged members of society so I can't really see how they were much more moral than the people holding them in bondage.
I think they started the path but it took another hundred years and the Civil Rights Movement to make people realize that everyone is equal no matter the color of their skin.
2007-03-24 14:35:09 · answer #2 · answered by genaddt 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just like many wars, religion was used to justify circumstances. The abolitionists recognized that, in a free society, laws are to defend the rights individuals, not oppress them. The laws allowing slavery do not follow this rule.
Obviously, this means that they found this legal principle more important than any divine law. Those who disagreed were permitted to, and did, argue.
Social laws and norms govern and regulate life on earth for people. The anti-abolitionists were free to believe that they lived in an unjust society, and still have the right raise and defend the case for slavery. Nobody attempted to restrict what they believed.
2007-03-24 12:17:42 · answer #3 · answered by jtrusnik 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bible does not condone slavery. In the OT it does, but Jesus died to fix that and give us salvation without the law.
Slavery is not religious. Those who were slavers and slave traders did it for economic, not religious reasons.
2007-03-24 12:11:26 · answer #4 · answered by great gig in the sky 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Isn't the OT part of the Bible? Why is it even included if it's not relevant?
2007-03-24 12:12:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You really need to read this:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2007/0202.asp
2007-03-25 02:11:12 · answer #6 · answered by Questioner 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋