The flaws of NT-based morality

[seer]

It all rests with the interpretation. The NT has been selectively interpreted to reflect the values of society throughout its history...from slavery to racial discrimination, the submission of women and to discrimination against LGBT folk. But, sooner or later, the Church is dragged kicking and screaming into the acceptance of the changing social mores.

Really Tass?

Although many Enlightenment philosophers opposed slavery, it was Christian activists, attracted by strong religious elements, who initiated and organized an abolitionist movement. Throughout Europe and the United States, Christians, usually from 'un-institutional' Christian faith movements, not directly connected with traditional state churches, or "non-conformist" believers within established churches, were to be found at the forefront of the abolitionist movements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Abolitionism

[Mountain Man]

The NT has been selectively interpreted to reflect the values of society throughout its history...

I think you'll find that Christians are generally opposed to the practice of selective interpretation.

[Tassman]

Really Tass?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Abolitionism

Colonising Christians enthusiastically endorsed slavery for over two hundred years before the Abolitionist movement began. And justified it biblically! The Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the US, was formed in order to promote slavery and only renounced it officially a couple of decades ago.

I think you'll find that Christians are generally opposed to the practice of selective interpretation.

That's not been its history.

[seer]

Colonising Christians enthusiastically endorsed slavery for over two hundred years before the Abolitionist movement began. And justified it biblically! The Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the US, was formed in order to promote slavery and only renounced it officially a couple of decades ago.

That does not change the fact that it was Christians in the US and England who were in the forefront of the Abolition movement - not your Enlightenment thinkers - they did zip!

Although many Enlightenment philosophers opposed slavery, it was Christian activists, attracted by strong religious elements, who initiated and organized an abolitionist movement. Throughout Europe and the United States

[One Bad Pig]

That does not change the fact that it was Christians in the US and England who were in the forefront of the Abolition movement - not your Enlightenment thinkers - they did zip!

Although many Enlightenment philosophers opposed slavery, it was Christian activists, attracted by strong religious elements, who initiated and organized an abolitionist movement. Throughout Europe and the United States

Not to mention little details like "enthusiastically endorsed" being a gross mischaracterization and that he's painting with an extraordinarily broad brush to smear all Christians with it.

[Mountain Man]

That's not been its history.

I don't know of any Christian who would argue that selective interpretation is a correct and valid approach to understanding the Bible. In fact, I've seen the practice used more by skeptics than anyone else. It's the only way they can make any of their ridiculous arguments work. The Skeptic's Annotated Bible is a textbook example.

[Tassman]

I don't know of any Christian who would argue that selective interpretation is a correct and valid approach to understanding the Bible. .

[Tassman]

That does not change the fact that it was Christians in the US and England who were in the forefront of the Abolition movement -

not your Enlightenment thinkers - they did zip!

James Oglethorpe was one of many who articulated the Enlightenment case against slavery, He banned it in the Province of Georgia on humanitarian grounds.

[Kbertsche]

And who decides on the "true interpretation" of scientific data, or historical data, or literary data, or any other type of data?

[Tassman]

And who decides on the "true interpretation" of scientific data, or historical data, or literary data, or any other type of data?

[seer]

You assume that the majority of Christians back then were OK with slavery.

James Oglethorpe was one of many who articulated the Enlightenment case against slavery, He banned it in the Province of Georgia on humanitarian grounds.

Oh please, you find one exception! The fact is it was Christians who largely populated the abolition movement and brought slavery down. Many of the major movers were from my County, even from my Church (which is 275 years old). As a matter of fact my Church ordained the first black pastor (Lemuel Haynes) in the United States (1780s). https://www.crossway.org/articles/th...in-us-history/

[One Bad Pig]

From the Charter for Georgia:

CHRISTIANITY will be extended by the execution of this design; since, the good discipline established by the Society, will reform the manners of those miserable objects, who shall be by them subsisted; and the example of a whole Colony, who shall behave in a just, moral, and religious manner, will contribute greatly towards the conversion of the Indians, and taking off the prejudices received from the profligate lives of such who have scarce any thing of Christianity but the name.

[seer]

From the Charter for Georgia:

Yes, according to the Charter it is clear that he was in fact a Christian:

http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdo...cs/29-ogl.html

http://www.christianity.com/church/c...-11630215.html

[Adrift]

Oh please, you find one exception!

I don't get why Tassman chose Oglethorpe as his exception. Oglethorpe opposed slavery on Christian grounds as much as anything,

General Oglethorpe to Granville Sharp 1776

Sir,
With great pleasure I received the favour of yours of 27th September, and since, several excellent tracts of your composing, which I have read with much satisfaction, as they all point to the great end of life, - the honour of God and the love of our neighbour. You have, with great judgment, showed the threats of the Prophets against the slave-owners and slave-sellers. As I have not the happiness of being known to you, it is necessary to tell you I am the person you will find mentioned in Harris's Collections (the last edition is two fol.), and in Smollet's, in Rolt, and all the histories of that time.

My friends and I settled the colony of Georgia, and by charter were established trustees, to make laws, &c. We determined not to suffer slavery there; but the slave-merchants, and their adherents, occasioned us not only much trouble, but at last got the then government to favour them. We would not suffer slavery (which is against the Gospel as well as the fundamental law of England) to be authorised under our authority : we refused, as trustees, to make a law permitting such a horrid crime. The Government, finding the trustees resolved firmly not to concur with what they thought unjust, took away the charter by which no law could be passed without our consent.

Oglethorpe then discusses the origin of contemporary slavery mentioning that it likely originated under pagan Rome, and that it would likely have been stamped out by Christian emperors had idolatry not permeated Roman culture,

The Christian Emperors would have qualified the laws of slavery; but the Senate of Rome, in whom the old leaven of idolatry still prevailed, stopped such good designs. St. Austin, in 'De Civitate Dei,' mentions that idolatry was sunk into the marrow of the Romans; - That the destruction of Rome by the Goths seemed to be a necessary dispensation of Providence to root out idolatry. The Goths, and all the Northern nations, when converted to Christianity, abolished slavery.

Ironically, speaking of actual Enlightenment thinkers of the day like David Hume (who supported slavery) Oglethorpe mocks his racism,

You mention an argument urged by Hume, that the Africans were incapable of liberty, and that no man capable of government was ever produced by Africa. What a historian! He must never have heard of Shishak, the great Sesostris, of Hannibal, nor of Tir-haka king of Ethiopia, whose very name frightened the mighty Assyrian monarch (2 Kings xix. 9.) Is it possible he never should have seen Herodotus, where the mighty works of the pyramids, remaining to this day, are mentioned; and, in the ΘΑΛΕΙΑ, the answer of the king of Ethiopia to Cambyses? In Leo, the African's geographical description of Africa, he would have found that Africa had produced races of heroes.

The biographies I've read on Oglethorpe suggest that he was deeply religious, and that it was his faith along with his personal acquaintance with a slave that informed his stance on the subject.

[Kbertsche]

First, don't try to move your goal posts by introducing other religions! Your conversation was specific to CHRISTIANS; you claimed that CHRISTIAN groups have changed their view of slavery, and your previous comment in this immediate subthread was in response to MountainMan's claim that CHRISTIANS reject "selective interpretation" of the Bible.

Second, do you realize that Christianity also has experts in relevant fields (biblical languages, biblical history, theology) who dedicate their lives and careers to the correct interpretation of the biblical text?

Third, I agree with you that different denominations within Christianity hold mutually exclusive beliefs. But is this substantially different than the situation in science, history, literature, or any other field of study? Have you ever heard of controversies within science, with different factions holding mutually exclusive views? This is the case with EVERY new theory or idea! Usually these controversies are resolved over time, but it can take many decades, and there can still be hold-outs. Alvarez' dinosaur-meteor theory took a full decade to become generally accepted, and there are still some holdouts today who do not accept a causal connection.