If people stopped calling those people Christians that would have been a good start too. Both religions are pretty clear that these acts are not allowed.
Cherry picking a single chapter about a promised land and deciding to ignore all the rest where it’s clearly state that acquiring it through this kind of corruption is forbidden is not exactly “following the religion”.
If people stopped calling those people Christians that would have been a good start too. Both religions are pretty clear that these acts are not allowed.
Cherry picking a single chapter about a promised land and deciding to ignore all the rest where it’s clearly state that acquiring it through this kind of corruption is forbidden is not exactly “following the religion”.
Sorry mate but all Abrahamic religions contain rules for how to deal with your slaves.
Slavery is absolutely condoned by the bible.
Your whole argument is No True Scotsman.
No True Scotsman is if there were no known rules or structures for Christianity. We know what a Christian is or isn’t.
… Christians owned slaves. There are rules for owning slaves in the bible.
What aren’t you getting about this?
Yes indeed they contain rules about slavery.
The problem is that they do the slavery but don’t give the slaves their rights.
If you look up the rights those slaves would actually have, you quickly realize what’s being followed and what isn’t.