Our Lazy White Christian Founders Needed Black Slaves To Do Their Work And Now We're Paying The Price
(too old to reply)
2021-07-27 12:09:56 UTC
Lazy cocksuckers didn't want to get their hands dirty so they imported
niggers from Africa to do it for free. Now, only President Trump stands
between a total nigger takeover and white freedom.

How Christian Slaveholders Used the Bible to Justify Slavery

During the period of American slavery, how did slaveholders manage to
balance their religious beliefs with the cruel facts of the “peculiar
institution“? As shown by the following passages — adapted from Noel Rae’s
new book The Great Stain, which uses firsthand accounts to tell the story
of slavery in America — for some of them that rationalization was right
there in the Bible.

Out of the more than three quarters of a million words in the Bible,
Christian slaveholders—and, if asked, most slaveholders would have defined
themselves as Christian—had two favorites texts, one from the beginning of
the Old Testament and the other from the end of the New Testament. In the
words of the King James Bible, which was the version then current, these
were, first, Genesis IX, 18–27:

“And the sons of Noah that went forth from the ark were Shem, Ham, and
Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan. These are the three sons of
Noah: and of them was the whole world overspread. And Noah began to be an
husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: and he drank of the wine, and was
drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of
Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren
without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their
shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father;
and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s nakedness.
And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto
him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto
his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan
shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the
tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. And Noah lived after the
flood three hundred and fifty years.”

Despite some problems with this story—What was so terrible about seeing
Noah drunk? Why curse Canaan rather than Ham? How long was the servitude
to last? Surely Ham would have been the same color as his brothers?—it
eventually became the foundational text for those who wanted to justify
slavery on Biblical grounds. In its boiled-down, popular version, known as
“The Curse of Ham,” Canaan was dropped from the story, Ham was made black,
and his descendants were made Africans.

The other favorite came from the Apostle Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians,
VI, 5-7: “Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to
the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto
Christ; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but as the servants of
Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will doing
service, as to the Lord, and not to men: knowing that whatsoever good
thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be
bond or free.” (Paul repeated himself, almost word for word, in the third
chapter of his Epistle to the Colossians.)

The rest of the Old Testament was often mined by pro-slavery polemicists
for examples proving that slavery was common among the Israelites. The New
Testament was largely ignored, except in the negative sense of pointing
out that nowhere did Jesus condemn slavery, although the story of
Philemon, the runaway who St. Paul returned to his master, was often
quoted. It was also generally accepted that the Latin word servus, usually
translated as servant, really meant slave.


Even apparent abuses, when looked at in the right light, worked out for
the best, in the words of Bishop William Meade of Virginia. Suppose, for
example, that you have been punished for something you did not do, “is it
not possible you may have done some other bad thing which was never
discovered and that Almighty God, who saw you doing it, would not let you
escape without punishment one time or another? And ought you not in such a
case to give glory to Him, and be thankful that He would rather punish you
in this life for your wickedness than destroy your souls for it in the
next life? But suppose that even this was not the case—a case hardly to be
imagined—and that you have by no means, known or unknown, deserved the
correction you suffered; there is this great comfort in it, that if you
bear it patiently, and leave your cause in the hands of God, He will
reward you for it in heaven, and the punishment you suffer unjustly here
shall turn to your exceeding great glory hereafter.”

Bishop Stephen Elliott, of Georgia, also knew how to look on the bright
side. Critics of slavery should “consider whether, by their interference
with this institution, they may not be checking and impeding a work which
is manifestly Providential. For nearly a hundred years the English and
American Churches have been striving to civilize and Christianize Western
Africa, and with what result? Around Sierra Leone, and in the neighborhood
of Cape Palmas, a few natives have been made Christians, and some nations
have been partially civilized; but what a small number in comparison with
the thousands, nay, I may say millions, who have learned the way to Heaven
and who have been made to know their Savior through the means of African
slavery! At this very moment there are from three to four millions of
Africans, educating for earth and for Heaven in the so vilified Southern
States—learning the very best lessons for a semi-barbarous people—lessons
of self-control, of obedience, of perseverance, of adaptation of means to
ends; learning, above all, where their weakness lies, and how they may
acquire strength for the battle of life. These considerations satisfy me
with their condition, and assure me that it is the best relation they can,
for the present, be made to occupy.”

Reviewing the work of the white churches, Frederick Douglass had this to
say: “Between the Christianity of this land and the Christianity of
Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference—so wide that to receive
the one as good, pure, and holy, is of necessity to reject the other as
bad, corrupt, and wicked. To be the friend of the one is of necessity to
be the enemy of the other. I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial
Christianity of Christ; I therefore hate the corrupt, slave-holding,
women-whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity
of this land. Indeed, I can see no reason but the most deceitful one for
calling the religion of this land Christianity…”
2021-07-27 22:02:25 UTC
Post by FirstPost
Lazy cocksuckers didn't want to get their hands dirty so they imported
niggers from Africa to do it for free. Now, only President Trump stands
between a total nigger takeover and white freedom.
Nym-shifting now, are we?
From: FirstPost <***@magik.beanz.net>
Subject: Our Lazy White Christian Founders Needed Black Slaves To Do Their
Work And Now We're Paying The Price
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:09:56 -0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <sdot2k$dtj$***@news.dns-netz.com>
User-Agent: Xnews/2006.08.05
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EDsT+sVvRBarf7UKIBNJrUYLgzU=
X-Abuse-Contact: "***@dns-netz.com"
Bytes: 8427
Lines: 108
Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com sac.politics:204505 alt.checkmate:643813
alt.conspiracy:1942776 alt.baldspot:671221 or.politics:1371426
soc.culture.indian:1903120 alt.conspiracy:1942777 alt.atheism:9258842
alt.global-warming:1140908 uk.politics.misc:3738498 soc.retirement:1762084
talk.politics.misc:5671789 talk.politics.guns:4325778 rec.arts.tv:3240947
alt.tv.pol-incorrect:224435 alt.politics:7150243