Just a few of the things Christians have gotten terribly wrong

This is only 10 of them.
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/19943-ten-things-traditional-christians-got-terribly-wrong

First of all, let’s clarify that the article is about what the author calls CONSERVATIVE Christians, not Christians in general as the opening post suggests.
Secondly, let’s note that the woman is a feminist with a biased agenda and writes much that is purposefully misleading.
Thirdly, it’s important to recognize that anybody can call himself a Christian, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he follows what the Bible says or that he is honouring God with his actions.
Lastly, here is my list of the things this woman gets terribly wrong in her article.
First of all, the Bible does not promote or condone slavery. Slavery was common throughout the Ancient Near East. God never ordained it, but he knew people would practise it. Therefore, he set laws to protect slaves. It’s the same as our governments today setting down laws to protect us. A simple example is our traffic laws. Does the government condone speeding when it sets a speed limit? Of course not. But they know people will speed, so they establish laws.
Slavery in the Old Testament Bible is nothing like slavery in the American pre-civil war South. It was actually a form of indentured servant-hood. If you owed someone money but couldn’t pay it, you would enter into bond service. You would agree to work for that person until your debt was paid off. In other words, it was voluntary. Nobody was bought or sold.
And at the end of seven years, whether your debt was paid off or not, you would be released from your debt and the person you had been serving had to give you some property and livestock to start you off. There was no welfare back then. This was a way for people to keep from starving to death.
And please note that it was Christians who fought against slavery and brought an end to it in many locations around the world in recent centuries. They are still fighting against it in countries where it still exists.
Then there’s the Bible’s attitude toward women. It states clearly that there is no male or female in Christ (Gal. 3:28), meaning that he sees them as equal. If a church puts women in a subordinate position, that is because of Aristotelian philosophy (Aristotle referred to women as “botched” men) which crept into the church in the first and second centuries A.D.). Unfortunately, there are still some denominations to this day who support the double standard, but that’s not God’s fault and they get that information from the Bible only by misinterpreting it.
Check out how Jesus interacted with women. It was absolutely revolutionary for that day and age. He brought freedom to women. It is men who refused to allow it.
As for Prohibition, as a history student at a secular school, I can tell you that it had more to do with protecting women and children and nothing to do with anti-Catholic sentiment. Because the alcoholism of a man left his family in poverty and led to physical abuse of them, Christians battled to prevent it.
As for segregation, again, I quote Jesus who said there was no Jew nor Gentile in him, meaning that all ethnicities were equal in his sight. While there may have been people who called themselves Christian who were racist, they were NOT following Christ. Given that the definition of a Christian is a follower of Christ, I submit that these people, despite the label, were not Christian at all.
I’m afraid that’s all I have time for, but I hope that anybody who reads that article will recognize the tremendous bias in it and the fact that she is mistaken in many of her “facts”.

Slavery in the Old Testament Bible is nothing like slavery in the American pre-civil war South. It was actually a form of indentured servant-hood. If you owed someone money but couldn't pay it, you would enter into bond service. You would agree to work for that person until your debt was paid off. In other words, it was voluntary. Nobody was bought or sold.
I said stuff like this once, then I read the Bible for myself instead of trusting others to interpret it for me. Leviticus 21 20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. You should really read the whole chapter. If you can still compare God's laws for slavery to traffic tickets, then you need to examine your life. And besides, once you start taking power away from God, like saying people are going to take slaves and He can't stop them just regulate them, where do you stop? What else can't God stop? If he can't do that, why should I believe that he has a plan worth following? He can create heaven and earth and offer us salvation, but he can't ask a prophet to write a short treatise on why slavery is bad? Those is some seriously mysterious ways.

Paul the Apostle under the influence of the Spirit wrote the Epistle to Philemon which is a “treatise” on slavery for the new covenant dispensation we live in now.
Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery
“In the epistle, Paul writes that he is returning Onesimus, a fugitive slave, back to his master Philemon; however, Paul also entreats Philemon to regard Onesimus, who he says he views as a son, not as a slave but as a beloved brother in Christ. Philemon is requested to treat Onesimus as he would treat Paul.”
Discussing Old Testament Law is fine for showing how God worked then but it isn’t the way we are expected to treat the subject now some 3500 years from Levitical times.
Christ fulfilled the Law when He died on the cross. He left us with 2 NT commandments that if followed would ensure us of being within all His previous laws.
Also, Hi and welcome overcomer.

Guess I’m confused, Rodin46. What are the two additional new testament commandments?
Occam

Paul the Apostle under the influence of the Spirit wrote the Epistle to Philemon which is a "treatise" on slavery for the new covenant dispensation we live in now. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery "In the epistle, Paul writes that he is returning Onesimus, a fugitive slave, back to his master Philemon; however, Paul also entreats Philemon to regard Onesimus, who he says he views as a son, not as a slave but as a beloved brother in Christ. Philemon is requested to treat Onesimus as he would treat Paul." Discussing Old Testament Law is fine for showing how God worked then but it isn't the way we are expected to treat the subject now some 3500 years from Levitical times. Christ fulfilled the Law when He died on the cross. He left us with 2 NT commandments that if followed would ensure us of being within all His previous laws. Also, Hi and welcome overcomer.
Presumably, then, neither Jesus nor his heavenly father had a clue as to what drastic changes would occur during the following 2000 years. So sorry to see that they lacked omniscience--or did they just lack compassion? Jesus, himself, was quoted as saying, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Matthew 5:17 I'd like to know what those two NT commandments were and where he said they should supersede or replace the OT ones, especially considering that he said in no uncertain terms that he did not intend to abolish the old law.
Christ fulfilled the Law when He died on the cross. He left us with 2 NT commandments that if followed would ensure us of being within all His previous laws.
I don’t see how that helps your cause rodin. You still have the problem that none of the trinity ever gave a clear statement that slavery is bad. How hard could that have been? And just what Christians lived by the two laws that were given in the New Testament? Where are their writings? Where are their churches? Who is their leader? The vast majority of people who called themselves Christians continued to support slavery for another 1700 years. You have the rare dissenting voice throughout most of history. And when those dissenters finally become the majority, as with abolition, you turn around and claim that’s what Jesus meant all along. That only works for people who don’t read. So you are still left with a God that is so inept that he left scripture laying around that is easily misinterpreted. He let people rise to power in his name and perpetrate many unholy crimes against people of a different color and different culture. How do you explain that? Overcomer tried to tell us that slavery in the OT was indentured servitude, now you say that was fixed. Fixed how? By waiting another 1700 years? Do you also claim that America is a Christian nation? Because it’s founders were slave owners.
First of all, the Bible does not promote or condone slavery. Slavery was common throughout the Ancient Near East. God never ordained it, but he knew people would practise it. Therefore, he set laws to protect slaves. It’s the same as our governments today setting down laws to protect us. A simple example is our traffic laws. Does the government condone speeding when it sets a speed limit? Of course not. But they know people will speed, so they establish laws. Slavery in the Old Testament Bible is nothing like slavery in the American pre-civil war South. It was actually a form of indentured servant-hood. If you owed someone money but couldn’t pay it, you would enter into bond service. You would agree to work for that person until your debt was paid off. In other words, it was voluntary. Nobody was bought or sold. And at the end of seven years, whether your debt was paid off or not, you would be released from your debt and the person you had been serving had to give you some property and livestock to start you off. There was no welfare back then. This was a way for people to keep from starving to death. And please note that it was Christians who fought against slavery and brought an end to it in many locations around the world in recent centuries. They are still fighting against it in countries where it still exists. Then there’s the Bible’s attitude toward women. It states clearly that there is no male or female in Christ (Gal. 3:28), meaning that he sees them as equal. If a church puts women in a subordinate position, that is because of Aristotelian philosophy (Aristotle referred to women as “botched" men) which crept into the church in the first and second centuries A.D.). Unfortunately, there are still some denominations to this day who support the double standard, but that’s not God’s fault and they get that information from the Bible only by misinterpreting it. Check out how Jesus interacted with women. It was absolutely revolutionary for that day and age. He brought freedom to women. It is men who refused to allow it. As for Prohibition, as a history student at a secular school, I can tell you that it had more to do with protecting women and children and nothing to do with anti-Catholic sentiment. Because the alcoholism of a man left his family in poverty and led to physical abuse of them, Christians battled to prevent it. As for segregation, again, I quote Jesus who said there was no Jew nor Gentile in him, meaning that all ethnicities were equal in his sight. While there may have been people who called themselves Christian who were racist, they were NOT following Christ. Given that the definition of a Christian is a follower of Christ, I submit that these people, despite the label, were not Christian at all.
Interesting points but fallacious and biased nonetheless. First off, yes the Bible (via god) does not only condone slavery as a practice but it is used as a punishment to those who aren't one of his chosen, i.e. Joshua 9. Yes slavery is as old as civilization and used with frequency by the proto-Semites and continued through to the classical age (Romans and Greeks) who enslaved whole cultures by conquest. So did the Hebrews BTW using the same method. So what laws to protect slaves are you in reference to? How often and with what frequency they should be beaten? Depends on the book and time period. The Isrealites who existed in Jesus's time followed Roman law and slaves were considered personal chattel. You could do what you wanted to them just as you would an ox or a sheep. Even though Jesus preached egalitarianism (probably got him killed as a result) he did recognize the institution of slavery. Most of the rest is Pauline musing as xtianity began to catch on with the lower class and slaves. As to your reference to slavery in the Antebellum South, yes it was very similar. I assume your mention of "indentured servitude" I.e. 7 years,came from Exodus 21? Indentured service was used by English settlers in the 18th Century as a means to immigrate to with a land enticement. Most Biblical passages refer to slavery as an involuntary condition as in the African slave trade, but there were a few exceptions, e.g. debt payment but for the most part you were either born a slave or captured in war. And being a slave you could be sold or purchased as any possession. In fact there was a punishment for stealing slaves in Isreal and the Old South. And speaking of slavery in America, yes xtian sects DID fight to end slavery, the Quakers were the first in 1787; you're right about that but religious sects in the Southern slave holding States were just as adamant about the Bible sustaining enslavement and encouraged slaves to convert due to the "pie in the sky" element. "Work hard here and be rewarded in the next life". In other words Jesus wants you to be a good slave for your master so you'll be rewarded in heaven. Lots of bible verses to back up the slave owners. Also, referencing your contention concerning segregation, most Bible scholars agree that Jesus was addressing the Isrealites only and not the surrounding gentile communities; once again a Pauline twist to open the "Way" to non-Jews. BTW, no one at that time referred to themselves as Christian. That term was invented much later than the first Century. So ironically you're right about them not being Xtians. Lastly, the subordination of women can be found throughout the Bible from Genesis through the New Testament. Several anecdotes from the creation of Eve, Lot's daughters, misuse of concubines, the Mosiac code (women as property of their husbands and not to be coveted) and Paul's remonstrance of women in church are but a few examples. And as Lois pointed out, Jesus "supposedly" stated that he came to fulfill the law. The law meaning the strictures of the OT. Cap't Jack
First of all, let's clarify that the article is about what the author calls CONSERVATIVE Christians, not Christians in general as the opening post suggests. Secondly, let's note that the woman is a feminist with a biased agenda and writes much that is purposefully misleading.
translation: I don't agree with her. Perhaps you should have also quoted Timothy 2:12 or 2:11-15.
Thirdly, it's important to recognize that anybody can call himself a Christian, but that doesn't necessarily mean he follows what the Bible says or that he is honouring God with his actions.
Looks like you are suffering from a bad case of No True Scotsman
First of all, the Bible does not promote or condone slavery. Slavery was common throughout the Ancient Near East. God never ordained it, but he knew people would practise it. Therefore, he set laws to protect slaves. It's the same as our governments today setting down laws to protect us. A simple example is our traffic laws. Does the government condone speeding when it sets a speed limit? Of course not. But they know people will speed, so they establish laws. Slavery in the Old Testament Bible is nothing like slavery in the American pre-civil war South. It was actually a form of indentured servant-hood. If you owed someone money but couldn't pay it, you would enter into bond service. You would agree to work for that person until your debt was paid off. In other words, it was voluntary. Nobody was bought or sold. And at the end of seven years, whether your debt was paid off or not, you would be released from your debt and the person you had been serving had to give you some property and livestock to start you off. There was no welfare back then. This was a way for people to keep from starving to death. And please note that it was Christians who fought against slavery and brought an end to it in many locations around the world in recent centuries. They are still fighting against it in countries where it still exists.
Did you actually read what the bible has to say about slavery, or did you just eat the pablum someone spoonfed you, because your understanding of slavery in the bible is completely different from mine.
Then there's the Bible's attitude toward women. It states clearly that there is no male or female in Christ (Gal. 3:28), meaning that he sees them as equal. If a church puts women in a subordinate position, that is because of Aristotelian philosophy (Aristotle referred to women as "botched" men) which crept into the church in the first and second centuries A.D.). Unfortunately, there are still some denominations to this day who support the double standard, but that's not God's fault and they get that information from the Bible only by misinterpreting it.
Funny how there are at least 30,000 different Christian denominations, all convinced the other 29,999 have the wrong interpretation.
As for segregation, again, I quote Jesus who said there was no Jew nor Gentile in him, meaning that all ethnicities were equal in his sight. While there may have been people who called themselves Christian who were racist, they were NOT following Christ. Given that the definition of a Christian is a follower of Christ, I submit that these people, despite the label, were not Christian at all.
Except when he refused to help the woman from Canaan.