CuteMadridista:


The bible was never against slavery though

let's talk about slavery here

https://www.nairaland.com/3508437/god-jesus-didnt-forbid-slavery

https://www.nairaland.com/4405316/thank-god-slavery


so we don't derail this thread too much pleasw

Then we should also see this thread
https://www.nairaland.com/3210816/bible-slavery-answering-ignorant-atheists

nice one

spartan117:

The fact that the name of the ship was Good ship jesus and the fact that it's captain John Hawkins was a religious zealot doesn't make him a Christian missionary my friend , he didn't come to Africa to propagate the gospel of christ he came to trade plain and simple. I spoke about such religious zealots in my previous post on this thread
Here is Wikipedia's definition of a Christian missionary for your enlightenment
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mission

Even your like agreed that missionaries were imperialist and oppressors. It says:

"The Portuguese sent missions into Africa. These are s[b]ome of the most well-known missions in history. While some of these missions were associated with imperialism and oppression[/b], others (notably Matteo Ricci's Jesuit mission to China) were relatively peaceful and focused on integration rather than cultural imperialism."


Christianity was spread through conquest. Most missionaries were imperialist that went about colonising people, enslaving them and stealing their resources. Examples are the conquistadors and the European imperialist that came to Africa.

spartan117:

Then we should also see this thread
https://www.nairaland.com/3210816/bible-slavery-answering-ignorant-atheists

I have and the dishonesty of that OP was exposed on that very thread

BTW if you think the bible forbids slavery why not open a new thread and let's trash it out? or do you want to talk about it in the link you gave? I'm game

dalaman:


Even your like agreed that missionaries were imperialist and oppressors. It says:

"The Portuguese sent missions into Africa. These are s[b]ome of the most well-known missions in history. While some of these missions were associated with imperialism and oppression[/b], others (notably Matteo Ricci's Jesuit mission to China) were relatively peaceful and focused on integration rather than cultural imperialism."


Christianity was spread through conquest. Most missionaries were imperialist that went about colonising people, enslaving them and stealing their resources. Examples are the conquistadors and the European imperialist that came to Africa.

According to Wikipedia conquistadors is the term used to refer to soldiers and explorers of the Spanish empire. They were not referred to as Christian missionaries. Why are you the only one calling them that?
I would highly recommend that you read this link again so that you are able to grasp the proper definition of a Christian missionary
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mission

Niflheim:
The only aspect of Christianity I respect is their right to eat grass!!! No need to pay a labourer to cut it!!!

What's this one saying now?
And his fellow funny dudes still gave him 2 likes. Na wa o.

CuteMadridista:


I have and the dishonesty of that OP was exposed on that very thread

BTW if you think the bible forbids slavery why not open a new thread and let's trash it out? or do you want to talk about it in the link you gave? I'm game

While I don't agree with you but I agree it should be discussed on a new thread without derailing this one. That's a matter for another day

spartan117:

While I don't agree with you but I agree it should be discussed on a new thread without derailing this one. That's a matter for another day

anytime you're ready holla my monicker and I'll attend if or when I'm online

spartan117:

The fact that the name of the ship was Good ship jesus and the fact that it's captain John Hawkins was a religious zealot doesn't make him a Christian missionary my friend , he didn't come to Africa to propagate the gospel of christ he came to trade plain and simple. I spoke about such religious zealots in my previous post on this thread
Here is Wikipedia's definition of a Christian missionary for your enlightenment
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mission

You basically just said the exact same things I wanted to say to the dude, only even better.

They will come up with silly bases, and start making misinformed arguments.

He probably thought you won't check to confirm the funny claim he made. Now that you've corrected him, he will never come to admit he was wrong about his claim.

God bless you real good bro.

Bright minds are so obvious to spot. Kudos.

CuteMadridista:


The bible was never against slavery though

let's talk about slavery here

https://www.nairaland.com/3508437/god-jesus-didnt-forbid-slavery

https://www.nairaland.com/4405316/thank-god-slavery


so we don't derail this thread too much pleasw

Slavery was basically the equivalent of modern day employment in those times. Would you expect the bible to condemn employment?

awesomeJ:


Slavery was basically the equivalent of modern day employment in those times. Would you expect the bible to condemn employment?

let's talk about it on another thread, are you game? me, you, Dalaman and spartan117

just the four of us

spartan117:

According to Wikipedia conquistadors is the term used to refer to soldiers and explorers of the Spanish empire. They were not referred to as Christian missionaries. Why are you the only one calling them that?
I would highly recommend that you read this link again so that you are able to grasp the proper definition of a Christian missionary
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mission

You"re obviously one of the brightest minds I've ever met on this forum. God will continually make his wisdom abound to you.
Instead of the dalaman guy to just admit his ignorance, he keeps making baseless arguments.

CuteMadridista:


anytime you're ready holla my monicker and I'll attend if or when I'm online

I'll be there too. Spartan, please make a mention.

awesomeJ:
I'll be there too. Spartan, please make a mention.

You can do the honours of opening the thread too

CuteMadridista:


let's talk about it on another thread, are you game? me, you, Dalaman and spartan117

just the four of us

Looking forward.

CuteMadridista:


You can do the honours of opening the thread too

Don't do much of thread opening, I've only ever had one-for Seun. But make a mention, I'll be there.

spartan117:

According to Wikipedia conquistadors is the term used to refer to soldiers and explorers of the Spanish empire. They were not referred to as Christian missionaries. Why are you the only one calling them that?
I would highly recommend that you read this link again so that you are able to grasp the proper definition of a Christian missionary
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mission

You clearly know nothing about the conquistadors.

I said even your Wikipedia link acknowledge that some missionaries were oppressors and imperialist.

"The Portuguese sent missions into Africa. These are some of the most well-known missions in history. While some of these missions were associated with imperialism and oppression, others (notably Matteo Ricci's Jesuit mission to China) were relatively peaceful and focused on integration rather than cultural imperialism."

You can not separate the missionaries from the imperialist because they were one and the same.

awesomeJ:

You"re obviously one of the brightest minds I've ever met on this forum. God will continually make his wisdom abound to you.
Instead of the dalaman guy to just admit his ignorance, he keeps making baseless arguments.

Which basless argument?

awesomeJ:

You basically just said the exact same things I wanted to say to the dude, only even better.

They will come up with silly bases, and start making misinformed arguments.

He probably thought you won't check to confirm the funny claim he made. Now that you've corrected him, he will never come to admit he was wrong about his claim.

God bless you real good bro.

Bright minds are so obvious to spot. Kudos.

God bless you too my friend

dalaman:


You clearly know nothing about the conquistadors.

I said even your Wikipedia link acknowledge that some missionaries were oppressors and imperialist.

"The Portuguese sent missions into Africa. These are some of the most well-known missions in history. While some of these missions were associated with imperialism and oppression, others (notably Matteo Ricci's Jesuit mission to China) were relatively peaceful and focused on integration rather than cultural imperialism."

You can not separate the missionaries from the imperialist because they were one and the same.

This one above for instance.
The statement is "Portuguese sent missions to Africa"

Your conclusion is "The missions were Christians on a christian missionary agenda"
Come on!

So when Nigeria sent Soldiers to Liberia, the fact that they were referred to as the Nigerian mission means in your own mind that they were christian missionaries?

Come on man!

awesomeJ:

This one above for instance.
The statement is "Portuguese sent missions to Africa"

Your conclusion is "The missions were Christians on a christian missionary agenda"
Come on!

So when Nigeria sent Soldiers to Liberia, the fact that they were referred to as the Nigerian mission means in your own mind that they were christian missionaries?

Come on man!

Mr man dont be dishonest. You sent a link about Christian missionaries and the link clearly talked about some of the missionaries that were sent by Portugal to Africa and acknowledged that some of them were oppressors and imperialist. It is well known and documented that many missionaries came to steal and exchange what they stole with the Christian culture. What ever it was they gave the people they made sure they took 10 times from them.

People like Bishop Desmond Tutu of south Africa have openly stated that many of the missionaries that came to Africa only came to steal resources. It was from one of his videos that I got to know about the slave ship called the Good ship Jesus that took slaves and left Africa that the captain was a Christian Zealot.

dalaman:


Mr man dont be dishonest. You sent a link about Christian missionaries and the link clearly talked about some of the missionaries that were sent by Portugal to Africa and acknowledged that some of them were oppressors and imperialist. It is well known and documented that many missionaries came to steal and exchange what they stole with the Christian culture. What ever it was they gave the people they made sure they took 10 times from them.

People like Bishop Desmond Tutu of south Africa have openly stated that many of the missionaries that came to Africa only came to steal resources. It was from one of his videos that I got to know about the slave ship called the Good ship Jesus that took slaves and left Africa that the captain was a Christian Zealot.

I didn't give any link. I just made comment on a statement you highlighted.

Surely, there could have been Christian missionaries with ulterior motives. But that doesn't imply in any way that Christianity is out to promote those silly motives. If it were, we Christians of today would have had to do the same silly stuff to meet up with the standards. But Alas, we're not even close to wanting them silly stuffs.

Niflheim:
The only aspect of Christianity I respect is their right to eat grass!!! No need to pay a labourer to cut it!!!

You will never stop making me LMAO

OtemAtum:
You will never stop making me LMAO

The guy is very funny and his threads? let's not even go there

Even when u try to respect their belief they must definitely push u to the wall to give it to them hard.

Religions that believe in personal God cannot help but see u as an enemy once u dont accept with their belief.

They would either call u a fool and blame it on the bible for actually insulting u. Or they would start condemining u to hell.

I had a neigbour who told me that i will suffer in life for not beliving in his bullsheet. he maintained that people will hate me and i will not find favour. The bad news was that he felt he didnt insult me.

I marked him and gave him hell throughout my stay there. I exposed the foolishness of his believe, his own hypocrisy and made sure he never talked about is faith around me througout my stay there.

I really do not have time for trash. Humans will step on u if u give them the opportunity.

These days.. i am not interested in respecting anyones belief. If u tell me trash i will scream it to ur ear that ur believe is trash and nonsensical.

I think i am the only guy i know who make religious people around me look stupid.

The real insult is when one who believes in a nonsensical believe by faith wants you to join him by all means in his stupidity.

frank317:
Even when u try to respect their belief they must definitely push u to the wall to give it to them hard.

Religions that believe in personal God cannot help but see u as an enemy once u dont accept with their belief.

They would either call u a fool and blame it on the bible for actually insulting u. Or they would start condemining u to hell.

I had a neigbour who told me that i will suffer in life for not beliving in his bullsheet. he maintained that people will hate me and i will not find favour. The bad news was that he felt he didnt insult me.

I marked him and gave him hell throughout my stay there. I exposed the foolishness of his believe, his own hypocrisy and made sure he never talked about is faith around me througout my stay there.

I really do not have time for trash. Humans will step on u if u give them the opportunity.

These days.. i am not interested in respecting anyones belief. If u tell me trash i will scream it to ur ear that ur believe is trash and nonsensical.

I think i am the only guy i know who make religious people around me look stupid.

The real insult is when one who believes in a nonsensical believe by faith wants you to join him by all means in his stupidity.

The believers do NOT RESPECT your right to disbelief so why should any one respect their right to believe when they don't offer the same to others?

Christians and Muslims are the worst when it comes to this they feel they are special and they alone know what they are doing. They will happily rub their beliefs on your faces while insulting and mocking you, but when you give them a tate of their own medicine na wahala. Bunch of shameless hypocrites.

awesomeJ:

This one above for instance.
The statement is "Portuguese sent missions to Africa"

Your conclusion is "The missions were Christians on a christian missionary agenda"
Come on!

So when Nigeria sent Soldiers to Liberia, the fact that they were referred to as the Nigerian mission means in your own mind that they were christian missionaries?

Come on man!

To be honest, if you don't mind me butting in, the mission of the Portuguese and the British, was, along with commerce, to spread religion too. They were much reliant on their God and the Church as it had much influence by providing the scribes, though, that is not to claim that their God told them to do what they did in the process. It is very well known that there were many ignorant individuals amongst them, and were wont to twist scripture for their own benefit and did so often. Any good book on colonialism states this point.

Christianity is targeted by critics of colonialism because the tenets of the religion were used to justify the actions of the colonists. For example, Toyin Falola asserts that there were some missionaries who believed that "the agenda of colonialism in Africa was similar to that of Christianity". Falola cites Jan H. Boer of the Sudan United Mission as saying, "Colonialism is a form of imperialism based on a divine mandate and designed to bring liberation - spiritual, cultural, economic and political - by sharing the blessings of the Christ-inspired civilization of the West with a people suffering under satanic oppression, ignorance and disease, effected by a combination of political, economic and religious forces that cooperate under a regime seeking the benefit of both ruler and ruled."
Wiki

Nigerian soldiers are not as religious as they were in the Holy Roman Empire of the Portuguese days so they cannot be compared exactly. They operated at a different time and place when religion was not as influential as it was in those days, for starts, and they never left Nigeria with a religious mandate while many of the colonisers did.

Do note that the Muslims were no better. They took slaves too in the name of Allah.

spartan117:

According to Wikipedia conquistadors is the term used to refer to soldiers and explorers of the Spanish empire. They were not referred to as Christian missionaries. Why are you the only one calling them that?
I would highly recommend that you read this link again so that you are able to grasp the proper definition of a Christian missionary
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mission

This is from the link you posted:


One of the main goals of the Christopher Columbus expedition financed by Queen Isabella of Spain was to spread Christianity. During the Age of Discovery, Spain and Portugal established many missions in their American and Asian colonies. The most active orders were the Jesuits, Augustinians, Franciscans and Dominicans. The Portuguese sent missions into Africa. These are some of the most well-known missions in history. While some of these missions were associated with imperialism and oppression, others (notably Matteo Ricci's Jesuit mission to China) were relatively peaceful and focused on integration rather than cultural imperialism.

In both Portugal and Spain, religion was an integral part of the state and evangelization was seen as having both secular and spiritual benefits. Wherever these powers attempted to expand their territories or influence, missionaries would soon follow. By the Treaty of Tordesillas, the two powers divided the world between them into exclusive spheres of influence, trade and colonization. The proselytization of Asia became linked to Portuguese colonial policy.
Wiki

frank317:
Even when u try to respect their belief they must definitely push u to the wall to give it to them hard.

Religions that believe in personal God cannot help but see u as an enemy once u dont accept with their belief.

They would either call u a fool and blame it on the bible for actually insulting u. Or they would start condemining u to hell.

I had a neigbour who told me that i will suffer in life for not beliving in his bullsheet. he maintained that people will hate me and i will not find favour. The bad news was that he felt he didnt insult me.

I marked him and gave him hell throughout my stay there. I exposed the foolishness of his believe, his own hypocrisy and made sure he never talked about is faith around me througout my stay there.

I really do not have time for trash. Humans will step on u if u give them the opportunity.

These days.. i am not interested in respecting anyones belief. If u tell me trash i will scream it to ur ear that ur believe is trash and nonsensical.

I think i am the only guy i know who make religious people around me look stupid.

The real insult is when one who believes in a nonsensical believe by faith wants you to join him by all means in his stupidity.

Hehehehehe

Good thread

dalaman:


The believers do NOT RESPECT your right to disbelief so why should any one respect their right to believe when they don't offer the same to others?

Christians and Muslims are the worst when it comes to this they feel they are special and they alone know what they are doing. They will happily rub their beliefs on your faces while insulting and mocking you, but when you give them a tate of their own medicine na wahala. Bunch of shameless hypocrites.

It won't be fair to generalize though. I think there are actually stupid people on both sides of the divide (my apologies for the strong words).
You will find stupid and unreasonable people among religious and irreligious people...

Tolerance/respect is not about agreeing with or approving of someone else’s beliefs. Tolerance/respect is simply agreeing not to oppress and kill each other for having different beliefs. if you do not tolerate and respect someone else belief you are likely to spread evil among mankind.