Avatar feed
Responses: 4
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
2
2
0
Ok... you KNEW I had to jump in here, right?

I'll try and keep my point concise: Christianity began 2,000 years ago in Judea... a Jewish province occupied by a pagan Mediterranean empire. There were not a whole lot of "white" people around, since at that time... most of them were comporting themselves in reindeer hide a whole lot further north. Christianity derives its name from the Christ... an ethnically Jewish man who was probably called Yeshua , or Yeshu... or something similar. Greek/Latin influence eventually gave us "Jesus Christ"... but historically, he was probably not Caucasian (nor African, Aztec, or female either). As a rabbi, he taught a revolutionary version of faith rooted in ancient Jewish tradition, but linked with the new message of forgiveness and freedom from the "law". It was a wondrously complex message expressed in very simple terms that even today... many Christians are struggling to understand.

Enter "religion".

It's arguable that the first Europeans who arrived here were Norse Christians only "recently" converted from paganism. If true... they didn't leave much impact on the natives. When the English arrived, they first sent mercenaries and traders... not clergymen. The Pilgrims came later, and largely because they'd been pushed out of other nations owing to their reformist, anti-Catholic, and anti-Anglican views. It's interesting then that it was THEIR take on Christianity that took the deepest root. By 1776, Colonial beliefs in New England were decidedly "Puritan", while the South... such as it was, was sparsely populated by a mixture of former Jacobite Catholics, Scots-Irish Protestants (Orangemen, basically), and Spanish/French Catholics. If you study the history of abolition in this country, you may find that it was from these northern "Quakers" and "Puritans" that much of the Christian support for emancipation would later evolve. I've often heard historians make the loose comparison between the "Roundheads" and the "Cavaliers" in 17th Century England... and the various cultural and religious views between the Northern and Southern states of the USA just prior to the Civil War. This honestly makes "sense', and explains a great deal.

Without a doubt, Southern ministers preached interpretations of Scripture that favored slavery... even while their Northern counterparts railed against with other Scriptures. If one sits down and reads these themselves... it begins to become clear that the former were taking things decidedly out of context. It would be like someone quoting Moby Dick to defend the annihilation of whales... when the author's true message concerned the vanity and hubris of mankind against nature.
(2)
Comment
(0)
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
4 y
Capt Gregory Prickett - Excellent counterarguments, but I'm neither trying to "prove" what I believe... or place slavery on some scale of moral "relativity". I apologize for the ambiguity. No-I simply don't see the sort of captivity and "slavery" described within the ancient Hebrew law as "immoral"... which in no way prevents me from seeing slavery as carried out elsewhere (both in contemporary and later periods) as intrinsically immoral. The cited Scriptures (not to mention other extant texts such as Hammurabi's Code) would seem to support this. I applaud your commitment to human virtue Gregory... but I personally see distinct and important differences that make any such comparison, "apples to oranges".

Now, it's interesting you brought up Islam, the Norse, etc. Frankly, a devout Muslim (or Jew for that matter) and I would probably agree on a lot. However, it's not the similarities... but the divergences that matter most. In much the same sense, I see many parallels with my own spiritual beliefs in other religious traditions... again; it's not the similarities, but the divergences. If a society perverts an ancient belief in rewards in the afterlife to support their chosen cultural norms... perhaps your get "Valhalla" vs. "Heaven". If you view one prophet as a "Messiah"... perhaps the Ascension happens differently, and with different players. In the same sense... perhaps if one tries hard enough, they can "justify" greed, atrocity, and cruelty under the guise of expediency. However, there's always only one truth.

My final word is this: the "truth" is that Africans were brought here as slaves not because it was a military necessity, an act of cultural "survival", or (as I believe was the case in Canaan) judgement from God. Rather, it was European avarice and arrogance. Those who may have tried to use faith to justify it obviously didn't read all the way to the end... as we routinely deprived those people of the very rights and protections guaranteed to others millennia prior. This also mocks and ignores virtually every teaching of Christ under the New Covenant... which is undoubtedly why numerous Christians of the period fought long and hard against the institution of slavery, and later... the residual racism that gave rise to it. None of that really matters now however; Christianity is not trying to 'defend' African slavery... but rather, it would seem the past is being used as (yet another) weapon against the present.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Capt Gregory Prickett
4 y
LCDR Joshua Gillespie - I'm sorry you feel that way. In my view, any system that allows one human being to own another is immoral. Let me ask you a simple question. Would you be willing for your daughter or niece be put into slavery, and be OK with her being sexually used by her owner, against her will? Because that's what it boils down to.

Second, I would ask you to look at history. Are you aware of why the Southern Baptist Convention was formed? Let me give you a hint, it split from the Northern Baptist Convention in 1845 over slavery. It did not denounce slavery until 1995. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormons, said that blacks were cursed by god and slavery was required for them. Seems that god cursed the blacks. You had the Presbyterian Church (split about 1838), and so on. You had plenty of Christians who were convinced that their Bible supported slavery in the Americas.
(0)
Reply
(0)
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
4 y
Capt Gregory Prickett - I desired my last post to be my "final word", but you've posed good questions that deserve answers.

I love my wife and child, so obviously I would rather die or be enslaved myself before seeing them put into a situation as you've described. However, as I've repeatedly pointed out as regards the ancient Hebrews and some of their contemporaries... such a fate was far from a forgone conclusion. In at least one case, it seems a Hebrew slave may have even become queen of Persia... though as far as I know, this account exists only within the Old Testament. In any event, we no longer live in the Bronze or even Middle Ages (thank God)... so fortunately, neither I or most people living in the West (regardless of race) need worry about it.

Regarding history; yes-I know these things well. What seems perfectly clear to me is that is erroneous to judge an entire belief system by the activities of individual sects acting largely against the very tenets of that same faith. I'm curious what Christ would have to say to Cotton Mather... or John Brown for that matter.

In conclusion, I genuinely respect where your heart is on this... I too deplore injustice and cruelty. However, I cannot connect the dots to draw the picture you're seeing. Thanks again for a challenging debate.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth
2
2
0
Thank you for the share sir.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Cj Grisham
0
0
0
Do the roots of black supremacy movement next.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Capt Gregory Prickett
4 y
1SG Cj Grisham - I'm saying that historically and currently, a population that consists of about 13.5% of the total is not in a position of power, and cannot enforce their will on the general population. Are there enclaves where they are in majority status and in power? Sure. Are there individuals in positions of power? Absolutely. But as a group, no.
(0)
Reply
(0)
1SG Cj Grisham
1SG Cj Grisham
4 y
Capt Gregory Prickett being in a position of power is not a requirement for being a "supremacist." It's the idea that your skin color makes you supreme over other skin colors. So, do black supremacy next.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Capt Gregory Prickett
4 y
1SG Cj Grisham - are you speaking of the Black Hebrew and the Moorish Nation nuts? If this is something that interests you, feel free to dig into it. I'm more concerned with reforming how police misconduct is handled, which is why I've done columns on it for over five years. If it's relevant to that, I may address it.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Capt Gregory Prickett
4 y
1SG Cj Grisham - BTW, how did 1L go? I'm sure that you have done well. Any chance that you will be coming back to Texas for 2L and 3L?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close